DOCSLIB.ORG

Novitates PUBLISHED by the AMERICAN MUSEUM of NATURAL HISTORY CENTRAL PARK WEST at 79TH STREET, NEW YORK, N.Y

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Novitates PUBLISHED by the AMERICAN MUSEUM of NATURAL HISTORY CENTRAL PARK WEST at 79TH STREET, NEW YORK, N.Y AMERICAN MUSEUM Novitates PUBLISHED BY THE AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY CENTRAL PARK WEST AT 79TH STREET, NEW YORK, N.Y. 10024 Number 2723, pp. 1-14, figs. 1-10 February 26, 1982 A New Montane Microhylid Frog from Papua New Guinea, and Comments on the Status of the Genus Aphantophryne RICHARD G. ZWEIFEL1 AND ALLEN ALLISON2 ABSTRACT Discovery of an undescribed, ground-dwelling these are ones common to many microhylid species of the largely scansorial genus Cophixalus species of similar ground-dwelling habits and do led to the re-evaluation of the monotypic genus not necessarily indicate closeness of relationship. Aphantophryne to see if this genus, presently Evaluation of previously unstudied features of the synonymized within Cophixalus, should be re- anatomy of C. pansus does not support revival of vived to accommodate its terrestrial type species, Aphantophryne either as a monotypic genus or to C. pansus, and the new form. The two species include the new species. The latter is described share some presumably derived features, but as Cophixalus sphagnicola, new species. INTRODUCTION In 1969 Zweifel collected four individuals tion of Allison's ecological studies by pro- of a small, ground-dwelling and apparently viding a name for the undescribed species; unnamed microhylid atop Mount Kaindi, and to investigate whether there is sufficient Morobe Province, Papua New Guinea. The justification for reviving the genus Aphan- habitus of these frogs was sufficiently like tophryne Fry " 1916" [1917] to accommodate that of montane Sphenophryne that he set both its type species (presently assigned to them aside for later consideration in the Cophixalus) and the new frog described course of a proposed revision of that genus. herein. Later, Allison conducted an extensive eco- logical study of this species. He submitted METHODS specimens to Mr. James Menzies, who de- Standard measurements were made and termined that the species has the skeletal utilized in generating ratios used to compare characteristics of the genus Cophixalus rath- proportions: body length, from snout to vent er than of Sphenophryne. The present paper (SV); length of tibia, from heel to outer side has two purposes: to facilitate the comple- of flexed knee (TL); distance from anterior I Curator, Department of Herpetology, American Museum of Natural History. 2 Assistant Director, Wau Ecology Institute, Wau, Papua New Guinea. Copyright © American Museum of Natural History 1982 ISSN 0003-0082. / Price $2.28 2 AMERICAN MUSEUM NOVITATES NO. 2723 edge (corner) of eye opening to center of ex- (1934). Zweifel recognized that this squat, ternal naris (EN); internarial distance, be- short-legged terrestrial frog with rounded toe tween centers of external nares (IN); head tips differed from typical Cophixalus, which width, at jaw articulation (HW); diameter of are scansorial frogs with expanded digital orbit, measured between anterior and pos- tips, but he preferred not to revive a mono- terior edges of eye opening (Eye). Measure- typic genus on these grounds alone, so he ments, expressed in millimeters, were made referred pansa to the genus Cophixalus and, with vernier calipers or ocular micrometer. hence, Aphantophryne to the synonymy of Statistics are given in the format: mean + Cophixalus, where it has remained. The dis- standard error of mean (range). covery of a new terrestrial, montane species somewhat resembling C. pansus calls for ACKNOWLEDGMENTS comparison between the two and with other This research utilized specimens deposited Cophixalus to determine if revival of Aphan- in the American Museum of Natural History, tophryne may be warranted. New York (AMNH), the Bernice P. Bishop Cophixalus was one of five genera of Museum, Honolulu (BPBM), and the Aus- sphenophrynine microhylids recognized by tralian Museum, Sydney (AM). We are Parker (1934), who diagnosed them on the grateful to Dr. Alan A. Ziegler (BPBM) and basis of characteristics of the pectoral girdle. Dr. Harold Cogger (AM) for their coopera- The five formed a graded series distinguished tion. Zweifel's participation in the R/V Alpha by the reduction and loss of ventral elements Helix Expedition in 1969, supported by the of the girdle: Sphenophryne (girdle com- National Science Foundation, contributed plete); Oreophryne (clavicle reduced); Mi- importantly to the study. Part of the research crobatrachus (clavicle supposedly lost); Co- was carried out while Zweifel was a Visiting phixalus (clavicle and procoracoid lost); Curator in the Australian Museum. Aphantophryne (clavicle, procoracoid and, supposedly, sternal plate lost). Several STATUS OF Aphantophryne changes in the generic level taxonomy have Fry ("1916" [1917]) described the genus taken place since Parker's revision. Zweifel and species Aphantophryne pansa on the (1956) referred Aphantophryne to the syn- basis of six specimens taken at an elevation onymy of Cophixalus, and later (1971) re- of 3719 m. (12,200 ft.) in the Owen Stanley defined the Sphenophryninae, transferring Mountains of British New Guinea (now Pa- the genus Genyophryne to it. Tyler (1978) pua New Guinea). The principal feature disposed of Microbatrachus as probably thought to be diagnostic of the new genus based on a juvenile Sphenophryne. Menzies was the lack of a sternal plate. Parker, in his and Tyler (1977) removed the genera Co- revision of the Microhylidae (1934), recog- piula and Choerophryne from the synonymy nized Aphantophryne as a monotypic genus, of Cophixalus. relying on Fry's description in the absence of specimens to examine. Loveridge (1948) FEATURES OF Cophixalus pansus referred Aphantophryne to the synonymy of PERTINENT TO GENERIC STATUS Asterophrys after examining (but not dis- GENERAL MORPHOLOGY: The features of secting) one of Fry's paratypes, and without morphology that impart to C. pansus an ap- reference to the nature of the pectoral girdle. pearance rather different from other Cophix- With relatively fresh material available, alus are ones common to ground-dwelling Zweifel (1956) determined that the type microhylids of several genera: short hind species does possess a sternal plate and oth- legs, narrow toe tips, broad head, small eyes. erwise has the skeletal characteristics of the Leg length of pansus is the shortest relative genus Cophixalus3 as diagnosed by Parker to body length of any Cophixalus. No other 3See Menzies, Tyler, and Zweifel (1980) for the use Cophixalus has digits with no trace of disc of this generic name. development and no trace of terminal 1982 ZWEIFEL AND ALLISON: MICROHYLID FROG 3 A B FIG. 1. Left hands of Cophixalus pansus (A) and C. sphagnicola (B) in palmar aspect. Scale lines marked in mm. grooves (fig. 1A). The terminal phalanges bear what we assume to be vestiges of the T- shaped extensions of scansorial species (fig. 2D). Relative head width and relative eye size are very nearly at the extremes for the genus in pansus. VOMERINE BONES: The shape of the vo- mers may be diagnostic of microhylid genera (Zweifel, 1972; Menzies and Tyler, 1977), but that of pansus does not differ signifi- A B cantly from that of more typical Cophixalus (fig. 3D). SACRAL VERTEBRA: The sacral vertebra of pansus has the diapophyses relatively little expanded. In this respect it differs slightly if at all from scansorial species of Cophixalus (fig. 4). PECTORAL GIRDLE: The sternal plate of pansus is weakly developed compared with A a other Cophixalus. Specimens of other C D species cleared and stained with Alizarin Red often show calcified tissue in the basal of the but no calcification is FIG. 2. Terminal phalanges of third fingers to part sternum, show relative development of T-shaped process- present in a specimen of pansus. In other es. A. Cophixalus verrucosus, a scansorial spe- respects the girdle is like other Cophixalus. cies. B. Copiula sp., a genus of ground-dwelling Fry's ("1916" [1917]) impression of the dis- species, formerly referred to Cophixalus. C. Co- tinctness of the pectoral musculature of pan- phixalus sphagnicola. D. C. pansus. Scale lines sus was accurate within the limited context marked in 0.25 mm. increments. 4 AMERICAN MUSEUM NOVITATES NO. 2723 A A C D :4 -.1 010 "'.j .j G .0 .1 B FIG. 3. Vomers of right side in ventral aspect. A. Cophixalus parkeri, a scansorial species. B. Copiula sp. C. Cophixalus sphagnicola. D. C. pansus. Stippled areas represent cartilage asso- ciated with vomers and sphenethmoids. Scale lines marked in 0.5 mm. increments. of material available to him, but he had no other Cophixalus for comparison. C THROAT MUSCULATURE: Variation in throat musculature is assuming significance FIG. 4. Sacral vertebrae in dorsal aspect. A. in assessing relationships among frogs (Ty- Cophixalus riparius, a scansorial species. B. C. ler, 1971, 1972, 1979; Emerson, 1976). The sphagnicola. C. C. pansus. Scale lines marked in superficial mandibular musculature of C. mm. pansus (fig. 5) is basically similar to that of other microhylids (Tyler, 1979, fig. 4:8; sus than in several other Cophixalus dis- Emerson, 1976, fig. 5): well-developed inter- sected. In these latter species the muscle hyoideus, intermandibularis (with a single may be represented only by fibers distally supplementary slip) and submentalis (inter- along the mandible, hidden by the interman- mandibularis anterior) muscles. dibularis. If the intermandibularis is loos- In pansus there is a fairly sturdy muscle ened medially and reflected, the muscle in (imand d., in fig. 5) lying dorsal to the inter- question reflects with it and may not be rec- mandibularis, between the main body of the ognized. intermandibularis and the lateral geniohyoi- What presumably is the homologous mus- deus. It originates on the mandible and in- cle is well developed in Copiula, reaching serts along with the intermandibularis in the essentially to the median raphe, but is com- region of the median raphe; part of the mus- pletely hidden by the intermandibularis. cle is visible without reflecting the interman- Emerson (1976, fig. 4) illustrates and notes dibularis or its accessory slip.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Catalogue of the Amphibians of Venezuela: Illustrated and Annotated Species List, Distribution, and Conservation 1,2César L
    Mannophryne vulcano, Male carrying tadpoles. El Ávila (Parque Nacional Guairarepano), Distrito Federal. Photo: Jose Vieira. We want to dedicate this work to some outstanding individuals who encouraged us, directly or indirectly, and are no longer with us. They were colleagues and close friends, and their friendship will remain for years to come. César Molina Rodríguez (1960–2015) Erik Arrieta Márquez (1978–2008) Jose Ayarzagüena Sanz (1952–2011) Saúl Gutiérrez Eljuri (1960–2012) Juan Rivero (1923–2014) Luis Scott (1948–2011) Marco Natera Mumaw (1972–2010) Official journal website: Amphibian & Reptile Conservation amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 13(1) [Special Section]: 1–198 (e180). Catalogue of the amphibians of Venezuela: Illustrated and annotated species list, distribution, and conservation 1,2César L. Barrio-Amorós, 3,4Fernando J. M. Rojas-Runjaic, and 5J. Celsa Señaris 1Fundación AndígenA, Apartado Postal 210, Mérida, VENEZUELA 2Current address: Doc Frog Expeditions, Uvita de Osa, COSTA RICA 3Fundación La Salle de Ciencias Naturales, Museo de Historia Natural La Salle, Apartado Postal 1930, Caracas 1010-A, VENEZUELA 4Current address: Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Río Grande do Sul (PUCRS), Laboratório de Sistemática de Vertebrados, Av. Ipiranga 6681, Porto Alegre, RS 90619–900, BRAZIL 5Instituto Venezolano de Investigaciones Científicas, Altos de Pipe, apartado 20632, Caracas 1020, VENEZUELA Abstract.—Presented is an annotated checklist of the amphibians of Venezuela, current as of December 2018. The last comprehensive list (Barrio-Amorós 2009c) included a total of 333 species, while the current catalogue lists 387 species (370 anurans, 10 caecilians, and seven salamanders), including 28 species not yet described or properly identified. Fifty species and four genera are added to the previous list, 25 species are deleted, and 47 experienced nomenclatural changes.
    [Show full text]
  • Fauna of Australia 2A
    FAUNA of AUSTRALIA 9. FAMILY MICROHYLIDAE Thomas C. Burton 1 9. FAMILY MICROHYLIDAE Pl 1.3. Cophixalus ornatus (Microhylidae): usually found in leaf litter, this tiny frog is endemic to the wet tropics of northern Queensland. [H. Cogger] 2 9. FAMILY MICROHYLIDAE DEFINITION AND GENERAL DESCRIPTION The Microhylidae is a family of firmisternal frogs, which have broad sacral diapophyses, one or more transverse folds on the surface of the roof of the mouth, and a unique slip to the abdominal musculature, the m. rectus abdominis pars anteroflecta (Burton 1980). All but one of the Australian microhylids are small (snout to vent length less than 35 mm), and all have procoelous vertebrae, are toothless and smooth-bodied, with transverse grooves on the tips of their variously expanded digits. The terminal phalanges of fingers and toes of all Australian microhylids are T-shaped or Y-shaped (Pl. 1.3) with transverse grooves. The Microhylidae consists of eight subfamilies, of which two, the Asterophryinae and Genyophryninae, occur in the Australopapuan region. Only the Genyophryninae occurs in Australia, represented by Cophixalus (11 species) and Sphenophryne (five species). Two newly discovered species of Cophixalus await description (Tyler 1989a). As both genera are also represented in New Guinea, information available from New Guinean species is included in this chapter to remedy deficiencies in knowledge of the Australian fauna. HISTORY OF DISCOVERY The Australian microhylids generally are small, cryptic and tropical, and so it was not until 100 years after European settlement that the first species, Cophixalus ornatus, was collected, in 1888 (Fry 1912). As the microhylids are much more prominent and diverse in New Guinea than in Australia, Australian specimens have been referred to New Guinean species from the time of the early descriptions by Fry (1915), whilst revisions by Parker (1934) and Loveridge (1935) minimised the extent of endemism in Australia.
    [Show full text]
  • The Impact of Anchored Phylogenomics and Taxon Sampling on Phylogenetic Inference in Narrow-Mouthed Frogs (Anura, Microhylidae)
    Cladistics Cladistics (2015) 1–28 10.1111/cla.12118 The impact of anchored phylogenomics and taxon sampling on phylogenetic inference in narrow-mouthed frogs (Anura, Microhylidae) Pedro L.V. Pelosoa,b,*, Darrel R. Frosta, Stephen J. Richardsc, Miguel T. Rodriguesd, Stephen Donnellane, Masafumi Matsuif, Cristopher J. Raxworthya, S.D. Bijug, Emily Moriarty Lemmonh, Alan R. Lemmoni and Ward C. Wheelerj aDivision of Vertebrate Zoology (Herpetology), American Museum of Natural History, Central Park West at 79th Street, New York, NY 10024, USA; bRichard Gilder Graduate School, American Museum of Natural History, Central Park West at 79th Street, New York, NY 10024, USA; cHerpetology Department, South Australian Museum, North Terrace, Adelaide, SA 5000, Australia; dDepartamento de Zoologia, Instituto de Biociencias,^ Universidade de Sao~ Paulo, Rua do Matao,~ Trav. 14, n 321, Cidade Universitaria, Caixa Postal 11461, CEP 05422-970, Sao~ Paulo, Sao~ Paulo, Brazil; eCentre for Evolutionary Biology and Biodiversity, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia; fGraduate School of Human and Environmental Studies, Kyoto University, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8501, Japan; gSystematics Lab, Department of Environmental Studies, University of Delhi, Delhi 110 007, India; hDepartment of Biological Science, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL 32306, USA; iDepartment of Scientific Computing, Florida State University, Dirac Science Library, Tallahassee, FL 32306-4120, USA; jDivision of Invertebrate Zoology, American Museum of Natural History, Central Park West at 79th Street, New York, NY 10024, USA Accepted 4 February 2015 Abstract Despite considerable progress in unravelling the phylogenetic relationships of microhylid frogs, relationships among subfami- lies remain largely unstable and many genera are not demonstrably monophyletic.
    [Show full text]
  • Polyploidy and Sex Chromosome Evolution in Amphibians
    Chapter 18 Polyploidization and Sex Chromosome Evolution in Amphibians Ben J. Evans, R. Alexander Pyron and John J. Wiens Abstract Genome duplication, including polyploid speciation and spontaneous polyploidy in diploid species, occurs more frequently in amphibians than mammals. One possible explanation is that some amphibians, unlike almost all mammals, have young sex chromosomes that carry a similar suite of genes (apart from the genetic trigger for sex determination). These species potentially can experience genome duplication without disrupting dosage stoichiometry between interacting proteins encoded by genes on the sex chromosomes and autosomalPROOF chromosomes. To explore this possibility, we performed a permutation aimed at testing whether amphibian species that experienced polyploid speciation or spontaneous polyploidy have younger sex chromosomes than other amphibians. While the most conservative permutation was not significant, the frog genera Xenopus and Leiopelma provide anecdotal support for a negative correlation between the age of sex chromosomes and a species’ propensity to undergo genome duplication. This study also points to more frequent turnover of sex chromosomes than previously proposed, and suggests a lack of statistical support for male versus female heterogamy in the most recent common ancestors of frogs, salamanders, and amphibians in general. Future advances in genomics undoubtedly will further illuminate the relationship between amphibian sex chromosome degeneration and genome duplication. B. J. Evans (CORRECTED&) Department of Biology, McMaster University, Life Sciences Building Room 328, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, ON L8S 4K1, Canada e-mail: [email protected] R. Alexander Pyron Department of Biological Sciences, The George Washington University, 2023 G St. NW, Washington, DC 20052, USA J.
    [Show full text]
  • Conservation of Herpetofauna in Bantimurung Bulusaraung National Park, South Sulawesi, Indonesia
    CONSERVATION OF HERPETOFAUNA IN BANTIMURUNG BULUSARAUNG NATIONAL PARK, SOUTH SULAWESI, INDONESIA Final Report 2008 By: M. Irfansyah Lubis, Wempy Endarwin, Septiantina D. Riendriasari, Suwardiansah, Adininggar U. Ul-Hasanah, Feri Irawan, Hadijah Aziz K., and Akmal Malawi Departemen Konservasi Sumberdaya Hutan Fakultas Kehutanan Institut Pertanian Bogor Bogor Indonesia 16000 Tel : +62 – 251 – 621 947 Fax: +62 – 251 – 621 947 Email: [email protected] (team leader) Conservation of Herpetofauna in Bantimurung Bulusaraung National Park, South Sulawesi, Indonesia Executive Summary Sulawesi is an island with complex geological and geographical history, thus resulting in a complex array in biodiversity. Bantimurung Bulusaraung National Park (BabulNP) was gazetted in 2004 to protect the region’s biodiversity and karst ecosystem. However, the park’s herpetofauna is almost unknown. This project consists of three programs: herpetofauna survey in BabulNP, herpetofauna conservation education to local schools, and herpetofauna training for locals and was conducted from July to September 2007. Based on the survey conducted in six sites in the park, we recorded 12 amphibian and 25 reptile species. Five of those species (Bufo celebensis, Rana celebensis, Rhacophorus monticola, Sphenomorphus tropidonotus, and Calamaria muelleri) are endemic to Sulawesi. Two species of the genus Oreophryne are still unidentified. We visited six schools around the park for our herpetofauna conservation education program. The Herpetofauna Observation Training was held over four days with 17 participants from BabulNP staff, local NGOs, school teachers, and Hasanuddin University students. i Conservation of Herpetofauna in Bantimurung Bulusaraung National Park, South Sulawesi, Indonesia Acknowledgements This project would not have been possible without the contribution of many persons. We would like to express our gratitude to BP Conservation Leadership Programme for providing funding.
    [Show full text]
  • View Preprint
    A peer-reviewed version of this preprint was published in PeerJ on 30 March 2017. View the peer-reviewed version (peerj.com/articles/3077), which is the preferred citable publication unless you specifically need to cite this preprint. Oliver PM, Iannella A, Richards SJ, Lee MSY. 2017. Mountain colonisation, miniaturisation and ecological evolution in a radiation of direct-developing New Guinea Frogs (Choerophryne, Microhylidae) PeerJ 5:e3077 https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.3077 Mountain colonisation, miniaturisation and ecological evolution in a radiation of direct developing New Guinea Frogs (Choerophryne, Microhylidae) Paul M Oliver Corresp., 1 , Amy Iannella 2 , Stephen J Richards 3 , Michael S.Y Lee 3, 4 1 Division of Ecology and Evolution, Research School of Biology & Centre for Biodiversity Analysis, Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia 2 School of Biological Sciences, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia 3 South Australian Museum, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia 4 School of Biological Sciences, Flinders University, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia Corresponding Author: Paul M Oliver Email address: [email protected] Aims. Mountain ranges in the tropics are characterised by high levels of localised endemism, often-aberrant evolutionary trajectories, and some of the world’s most diverse regional biotas. Here we investigate the evolution of montane endemism, ecology and body size in a clade of direct-developing frogs (Choerophryne, Microhylidae) from New Guinea. Methods. Phylogenetic relationships were estimated from a mitochondrial molecular dataset using Bayesian and maximum likelihood approaches. Ancestral state reconstruction was used to infer the evolution of elevational distribution, ecology (indexed by male calling height), and body size, and phylogenetically corrected regression was employed to examine the relationships between these three traits.
    [Show full text]
  • Two New Frog Species from the Foja Mountains in Northwestern New Guinea (Amphibia, Anura, Microhylidae)
    68 (2): 109 –122 © Senckenberg Gesellschaft für Naturforschung, 2018. 28.5.2018 Two new frog species from the Foja Mountains in north­ western New Guinea (Amphibia, Anura, Micro hylidae) Rainer Günther 1, Stephen Richards 2 & Burhan Tjaturadi 3 1 Museum für Naturkunde, Invalidenstr. 43, 10115 Berlin, Germany; [email protected] — 2 Herpetology Department, South Australian Museum, North Terrace, Adelaide, South Australia 5000, Australia; [email protected] — 3 Conservation Inter- national – Papua Program. Current address: Center for Environmental Studies, Sanata Dharma University (CESSDU), Yogyakarta, Indonesia; [email protected] Accepted January 18, 2018. Published online at www.senckenberg.de/vertebrate-zoology on May 28, 2018. Editor in charge: Raffael Ernst Abstract Two new microhylid frogs in the genera Choerophryne and Oreophryne are described from the Foja Mountains in Papua Province of Indonesia. Both are small species (males 15.9 – 18.5 mm snout-urostyle length [SUL] and 21.3 – 22.9 mm SUL respectively) that call from elevated positions on foliage in primary lower montane rainforest. The new Choerophryne species can be distinguished from all congeners by, among other characters, a unique advertisement call consisting of an unpulsed (or very finely pulsed) peeping note last- ing 0.29 – 0.37 seconds. The new Oreophryne species belongs to a group that has a cartilaginous connection between the procoracoid and scapula and rattling advertisement calls. Its advertisement call is a loud rattle lasting 1.2 – 1.5 s with a note repetition rate of 11.3 – 11.7 notes per second. Kurzfassung Es werden zwei neue Engmaulfrösche der Gattungen Choerophryne und Oreophryne aus den Foja-Bergen in der Papua Provinz von Indonesien beschrieben.
    [Show full text]
  • About the Book the Format Acknowledgments
    About the Book For more than ten years I have been working on a book on bryophyte ecology and was joined by Heinjo During, who has been very helpful in critiquing multiple versions of the chapters. But as the book progressed, the field of bryophyte ecology progressed faster. No chapter ever seemed to stay finished, hence the decision to publish online. Furthermore, rather than being a textbook, it is evolving into an encyclopedia that would be at least three volumes. Having reached the age when I could retire whenever I wanted to, I no longer needed be so concerned with the publish or perish paradigm. In keeping with the sharing nature of bryologists, and the need to educate the non-bryologists about the nature and role of bryophytes in the ecosystem, it seemed my personal goals could best be accomplished by publishing online. This has several advantages for me. I can choose the format I want, I can include lots of color images, and I can post chapters or parts of chapters as I complete them and update later if I find it important. Throughout the book I have posed questions. I have even attempt to offer hypotheses for many of these. It is my hope that these questions and hypotheses will inspire students of all ages to attempt to answer these. Some are simple and could even be done by elementary school children. Others are suitable for undergraduate projects. And some will take lifelong work or a large team of researchers around the world. Have fun with them! The Format The decision to publish Bryophyte Ecology as an ebook occurred after I had a publisher, and I am sure I have not thought of all the complexities of publishing as I complete things, rather than in the order of the planned organization.
    [Show full text]
  • ARAZPA Amphibian Action Plan
    Appendix 1 to Murray, K., Skerratt, L., Marantelli, G., Berger, L., Hunter, D., Mahony, M. and Hines, H. 2011. Guidelines for minimising disease risks associated with captive breeding, raising and restocking programs for Australian frogs. A report for the Australian Government Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities. ARAZPA Amphibian Action Plan Compiled by: Graeme Gillespie, Director Wildlife Conservation and Science, Zoos Victoria; Russel Traher, Amphibian TAG Convenor, Curator Healesville Sanctuary Chris Banks, Wildlife Conservation and Science, Zoos Victoria. February 2007 1 1. Background Amphibian species across the world have declined at an alarming rate in recent decades. According to the IUCN at least 122 species have gone extinct since 1980 and nearly one third of the world’s near 6,000 amphibian species are classified as threatened with extinction, placing the entire class at the core of the current biodiversity crisis (IUCN, 2006). Australasia too has experienced significant declines; several Australian species are considered extinct and nearly 25% of the remainder are threatened with extinction, while all four species native to New Zealand are threatened. Conventional causes of biodiversity loss, habitat destruction and invasive species, are playing a major role in these declines. However, emergent disease and climate change are strongly implicated in many declines and extinctions. These factors are now acting globally, rapidly and, most disturbingly, in protected and near pristine areas. Whilst habitat conservation and mitigation of threats in situ are essential, for many taxa the requirement for some sort of ex situ intervention is mounting. In response to this crisis there have been a series of meetings organised by the IUCN (World Conservation Union), WAZA (World Association of Zoos & Aquariums) and CBSG (Conservation Breeding Specialist Group, of the IUCN Species Survival Commission) around the world to discuss how the zoo community can and should respond.
    [Show full text]
  • Catalogue of Protozoan Parasites Recorded in Australia Peter J. O
    1 CATALOGUE OF PROTOZOAN PARASITES RECORDED IN AUSTRALIA PETER J. O’DONOGHUE & ROBERT D. ADLARD O’Donoghue, P.J. & Adlard, R.D. 2000 02 29: Catalogue of protozoan parasites recorded in Australia. Memoirs of the Queensland Museum 45(1):1-164. Brisbane. ISSN 0079-8835. Published reports of protozoan species from Australian animals have been compiled into a host- parasite checklist, a parasite-host checklist and a cross-referenced bibliography. Protozoa listed include parasites, commensals and symbionts but free-living species have been excluded. Over 590 protozoan species are listed including amoebae, flagellates, ciliates and ‘sporozoa’ (the latter comprising apicomplexans, microsporans, myxozoans, haplosporidians and paramyxeans). Organisms are recorded in association with some 520 hosts including mammals, marsupials, birds, reptiles, amphibians, fish and invertebrates. Information has been abstracted from over 1,270 scientific publications predating 1999 and all records include taxonomic authorities, synonyms, common names, sites of infection within hosts and geographic locations. Protozoa, parasite checklist, host checklist, bibliography, Australia. Peter J. O’Donoghue, Department of Microbiology and Parasitology, The University of Queensland, St Lucia 4072, Australia; Robert D. Adlard, Protozoa Section, Queensland Museum, PO Box 3300, South Brisbane 4101, Australia; 31 January 2000. CONTENTS the literature for reports relevant to contemporary studies. Such problems could be avoided if all previous HOST-PARASITE CHECKLIST 5 records were consolidated into a single database. Most Mammals 5 researchers currently avail themselves of various Reptiles 21 electronic database and abstracting services but none Amphibians 26 include literature published earlier than 1985 and not all Birds 34 journal titles are covered in their databases. Fish 44 Invertebrates 54 Several catalogues of parasites in Australian PARASITE-HOST CHECKLIST 63 hosts have previously been published.
    [Show full text]
  • Rampant Tooth Loss Across 200 Million Years of Frog Evolution
    bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.02.04.429809; this version posted February 6, 2021. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under aCC-BY 4.0 International license. 1 Rampant tooth loss across 200 million years of frog evolution 2 3 4 Daniel J. Paluh1,2, Karina Riddell1, Catherine M. Early1,3, Maggie M. Hantak1, Gregory F.M. 5 Jongsma1,2, Rachel M. Keeffe1,2, Fernanda Magalhães Silva1,4, Stuart V. Nielsen1, María Camila 6 Vallejo-Pareja1,2, Edward L. Stanley1, David C. Blackburn1 7 8 1Department of Natural History, Florida Museum of Natural History, University of Florida, 9 Gainesville, Florida USA 32611 10 2Department of Biology, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida USA 32611 11 3Biology Department, Science Museum of Minnesota, Saint Paul, Minnesota USA 55102 12 4Programa de Pós Graduação em Zoologia, Universidade Federal do Pará/Museu Paraense 13 Emilio Goeldi, Belém, Pará Brazil 14 15 *Corresponding author: Daniel J. Paluh, [email protected], +1 814-602-3764 16 17 Key words: Anura; teeth; edentulism; toothlessness; trait lability; comparative methods 1 bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.02.04.429809; this version posted February 6, 2021. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under aCC-BY 4.0 International license.
    [Show full text]
  • 3Systematics and Diversity of Extant Amphibians
    Systematics and Diversity of 3 Extant Amphibians he three extant lissamphibian lineages (hereafter amples of classic systematics papers. We present widely referred to by the more common term amphibians) used common names of groups in addition to scientifi c Tare descendants of a common ancestor that lived names, noting also that herpetologists colloquially refer during (or soon after) the Late Carboniferous. Since the to most clades by their scientifi c name (e.g., ranids, am- three lineages diverged, each has evolved unique fea- bystomatids, typhlonectids). tures that defi ne the group; however, salamanders, frogs, A total of 7,303 species of amphibians are recognized and caecelians also share many traits that are evidence and new species—primarily tropical frogs and salaman- of their common ancestry. Two of the most defi nitive of ders—continue to be described. Frogs are far more di- these traits are: verse than salamanders and caecelians combined; more than 6,400 (~88%) of extant amphibian species are frogs, 1. Nearly all amphibians have complex life histories. almost 25% of which have been described in the past Most species undergo metamorphosis from an 15 years. Salamanders comprise more than 660 species, aquatic larva to a terrestrial adult, and even spe- and there are 200 species of caecilians. Amphibian diver- cies that lay terrestrial eggs require moist nest sity is not evenly distributed within families. For example, sites to prevent desiccation. Thus, regardless of more than 65% of extant salamanders are in the family the habitat of the adult, all species of amphibians Plethodontidae, and more than 50% of all frogs are in just are fundamentally tied to water.
    [Show full text]