DOCSLIB.ORG

Habitat Requirements and Habitat Use of the Red-Crowned Toadlet Pseudophryne Australis and the Giant Burrowing Frog Heleioporus Australiacus in the Sydney Basin

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Habitat Requirements and Habitat Use of the Red-Crowned Toadlet Pseudophryne Australis and the Giant Burrowing Frog Heleioporus Australiacus in the Sydney Basin HABITAT REQUIREMENTS AND HABITAT USE OF THE RED-CROWNED TOADLET PSEUDOPHRYNE AUSTRALIS AND THE GIANT BURROWING FROG HELEIOPORUS AUSTRALIACUS IN THE SYDNEY BASIN Andrew G. Stauber BSc (Hons) Thesis submitted for the degree ofDoctor ofPhilosophy Department ofEnvironmental Sciences University ofTechnology, Sydney 2006 CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORSHIP / ORIGINALITY I certify that the work in this thesis has not previously been submitted for a degree nor has it been submitted as part of'requirements for a degree except as fully acknowledged within the text. I also certify that the thesis has been written by me. Any help that I have received in my research work and the preparation ofthe thesis itself has been acknowledged. In addition, I certify that all information sources and literature used are indicated in the thesis. Andrew Stauber June 2006 COPYRIGHT NOTICE This work is copyright. Information presented in this document may be reproduced, in part only, for study, training purposes or the management of animal or plant species, subject to the inclusion of acknowledgement of the source and provided that no commercial useage or sale ofthe material occurs. ABSTRACT Habitat requirements and habitat use for Pseudophryne australis and Heleioporus australiacus were investigated to aid management ofthese threatened frogs around Sydney, Australia. Much of the work focussed on roads, commonly encountered features in the habitat ofboth species. The habitat requirements based on locality records of both frogs in the Sydney Basin were investigated at four spatial scales. Both species are habitat specialists. They showed a strong geological association with Hawkesbury Sandstone and occupy upper topographic areas with ephemeral watercourses ofgentle gradients. Both frogs occur predominantly in areas of higher precipitation and milder temperature regimes compared to averages representative of the· region. Leaf litter is an important feature of P. australis breeding sites, whereas H australiacus generally associate with crayfish burrows. Both species are dependent on natural vegetation with a complex structure. H australiacus have a relatively long larval period (3 - 12 months) and breed in ephemeral pools, exposing their tadpoles to the risk of dying due to early pond drying. In the laboratory, tadpoles responded to decreasing water levels by shortening their larval periods and metamorphosing earlier than siblings held at constant water level. Despite this plastic response, a number of pools in the field failed to produce metamorphs due to early drying, an observation also made on P. australis. Regular monitoring of breeding sites revealed increased reproductive success away from roads for both species probably because of relatively longer hydroperiods. Spatial distributions and associations with habitat features, and movement patterns of both frogs were further investigated using mark-recapture methods. Both species showed strong site fidelity. P. australis formed small aggregations and predominantly selected leaf litter piles despite their relatively low availability. Leaflitter piles in creeks moved over time and the animals moved with these piles. In contrast, H australiacus individuals formed no aggregations and showed no preference for any available structural vegetation type. Locations of individuals were independent of relative distances to creeks and artificial drains, but males appeared to be more common near culverts. However, individuals were randomly distributed in space and nearest-neighbour distances were high relative to individual movement distances, suggesting minimal overlap between relatively large home ranges. Radio-telemetry demonstrated that some H australiacus individuals burrow in the road environment. There they would be at risk ofbeing dug up and possibly injured during road works. The results are discussed in relation to the spatial requirements of both species and the protection of utilised habitat features. Management options are suggested to mitigate the impacts of road works. Differences in spatial dynamics of both frogs with overlapping habitats highlighted in this study require species-specific management approaches. I I L- 2 .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Amphibian Abundance and Detection Trends During a Large Flood in a Semi-Arid Floodplain Wetland
    Herpetological Conservation and Biology 11:408–425. Submitted: 26 January 2016; Accepted: 2 September 2016; Published: 16 December 2016. Amphibian Abundance and Detection Trends During a Large Flood in a Semi-Arid Floodplain Wetland Joanne F. Ocock1,4, Richard T. Kingsford1, Trent D. Penman2, and Jodi J.L. Rowley1,3 1Centre for Ecosystem Science, School of Biological, Earth and Environmental Sciences, UNSW Australia, Sydney, New South Wales, 2052, Australia 2Centre for Environmental Risk Management of Bushfires, Institute of Conservation Biology and Environmental Management, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, New South Wales 2522, Australia 3Australian Museum Research Institute, Australian Museum, 6 College St, Sydney, New South Wales 2010, Australia 4Corresponding author, email: [email protected] Abstract.—Amphibian abundance and occupancy are often reduced in regulated river systems near dams, but com- paratively little is known about how they are affected on floodplain wetlands downstream or the effects of actively managed flows. We assessed frog diversity in the Macquarie Marshes, a semi-arid floodplain wetland of conserva- tion significance, identifying environmental variables that might explain abundances and detection of species. We collected relative abundance data of 15 amphibian species at 30 sites over four months, coinciding with a large natural flood. We observed an average of 39.9 ± (SE) 4.3 (range, 0-246) individuals per site survey, over 47 survey nights. Three non-burrowing, ground-dwelling species were most abundant at temporarily flooded sites with low- growing aquatic vegetation (e.g., Limnodynastes tasmaniensis, Limnodynastes fletcheri, Crinia parinsignifera). Most arboreal species (e.g., Litoria caerulea) were more abundant in wooded habitat, regardless of water permanency.
    [Show full text]
  • Threat Abatement Plan
    gus resulting in ch fun ytridio trid myc chy osis ith w s n ia ib h p m a f o n o i t THREAT ABATEMENTc PLAN e f n I THREAT ABATEMENT PLAN INFECTION OF AMPHIBIANS WITH CHYTRID FUNGUS RESULTING IN CHYTRIDIOMYCOSIS Department of the Environment and Heritage © Commonwealth of Australia 2006 ISBN 0 642 55029 8 Published 2006 This work is copyright. Apart from any use as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, no part may be reproduced by any process without prior written permission from the Commonwealth, available from the Department of the Environment and Heritage. Requests and inquiries concerning reproduction and rights should be addressed to: Assistant Secretary Natural Resource Management Policy Branch Department of the Environment and Heritage PO Box 787 CANBERRA ACT 2601 This publication is available on the Internet at: www.deh.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/publications/tap/chytrid/ For additional hard copies, please contact the Department of the Environment and Heritage, Community Information Unit on 1800 803 772. Front cover photo: Litoria genimaculata (Green-eyed tree frog) Sequential page photo: Taudactylus eungellensis (Eungella day frog) Banner photo on chapter pages: Close up of the skin of Litoria genimaculata (Green-eyed tree frog) ii Foreword ‘Infection of amphibians with chytrid fungus resulting Under the EPBC Act the Australian Government in chytridiomycosis’ was listed in July 2002 as a key implements the plan in Commonwealth areas and seeks threatening process under the Environment Protection the cooperation of the states and territories where the and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act). disease impacts within their jurisdictions.
    [Show full text]
  • Expert Witness Report
    Expert Witness Report Report prepared on instructions of: Bleyer Lawyers, Level 1, 550 Lonsdale Street, Melbourne, Vic 3000 Australia Prepared by: Graeme Gillespie B.Sc. Ph.D. 55 Union Street, Northcote, Vic 3070, Australia Curriculum Vitae Attached (Appendix I) I have read the Expert Witness Code of Conduct and agree to be bound by it. Graeme Gillespie 23 February 2010 Qualifications and Experience Please see my curriculum vitae (Appendix I) for my general qualifications and experience. My Ph.D. in zoology focussed specifically on the conservation biology and ecology of frog species in south-eastern Australia. I have 23 years of field and scientific experience studying amphibians and their conservation and management in south- eastern Australia. I have published 24 refereed scientific papers and 38 technical reports on amphibian ecology, conservation and management. I am recognised throughout Australia as an authority on the frog fauna of Victoria, specifically with respect to conservation issues, and I am regularly asked to provide advice on such matters to individuals, government conservation and land management agencies, and non-government organisations. With regard to the Giant Burrowing Frog, I encountered this species on several occasions between 1986 and 1992 while undertaking and supervising pre-logging biodiversity surveys in East Gippsland, Victoria. These records are documented in the Victorian Wildlife Atlas. During this period, I gained knowledge of the species’ habitat associations, breeding biology, some aspects of its behaviour and an appreciation of its conservation status in Victoria (see Opie et al. 1990; Westaway et al.1990; Lobert et al. 1991). Because of my research into amphibian conservation and management, I am highly familiar with the existing literature on the impact of various forest management activities on amphibians and the implications of these activities for amphibian conservation.
    [Show full text]
  • Spatial Ecology of the Giant Burrowing Frog (Heleioporus Australiacus): Implications for Conservation Prescriptions
    University of Wollongong Research Online Faculty of Science - Papers (Archive) Faculty of Science, Medicine and Health January 2008 Spatial ecology of the giant burrowing frog (Heleioporus australiacus): implications for conservation prescriptions Trent D. Penman University of Wollongong, [email protected] F Lemckert M J Mahony Follow this and additional works at: https://ro.uow.edu.au/scipapers Part of the Life Sciences Commons, Physical Sciences and Mathematics Commons, and the Social and Behavioral Sciences Commons Recommended Citation Penman, Trent D.; Lemckert, F; and Mahony, M J: Spatial ecology of the giant burrowing frog (Heleioporus australiacus): implications for conservation prescriptions 2008, 179-186. https://ro.uow.edu.au/scipapers/724 Research Online is the open access institutional repository for the University of Wollongong. For further information contact the UOW Library: [email protected] Spatial ecology of the giant burrowing frog (Heleioporus australiacus): implications for conservation prescriptions Abstract Management of threatened anurans requires an understanding of a species’ behaviour and habitat requirements in both the breeding and non-breeding environments. The giant burrowing frog (Heleioporus australiacus) is a threatened species in south-eastern Australia. Little is known about its habitat requirements, creating difficulties in vde eloping management strategies for the species.Weradio-tracked 33 individual H. australiacus in order to determine their habitat use and behaviour. Data from 33 frogs followed for between 5 and 599 days show that individuals spend little time near (<15 >m) their breeding sites (mean 4.7 days for males and 6.3 days for females annually). Most time is spent in distinct non- breeding activity areas 20–250m from the breeding sites.
    [Show full text]
  • National Recovery Plan for the Stuttering Frog Mixophyes Balbus
    National Recovery Plan for the Stuttering Frog Mixophyes balbus David Hunter and Graeme Gillespie Prepared by David Hunter and Graeme Gillespie (Department of Sustainability and Environment, Victoria). Published by the Victorian Government Department of Sustainability and Environment (DSE) Melbourne, October 2011. © State of Victoria Department of Sustainability and Environment 2010 This publication is copyright. No part may be reproduced by any process except in accordance with the provisions of the Copyright Act 1968. Authorised by the Victorian Government, 8 Nicholson Street, East Melbourne. ISBN 978-1-74242-369-2 (online) This is a Recovery Plan prepared under the Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999, with the assistance of funding provided by the Australian Government. This Recovery Plan has been developed with the involvement and cooperation of a range of stakeholders, but individual stakeholders have not necessarily committed to undertaking specific actions. The attainment of objectives and the provision of funds may be subject to budgetary and other constraints affecting the parties involved. Proposed actions may be subject to modification over the life of the plan due to changes in knowledge. Disclaimer: This publication may be of assistance to you but the State of Victoria and its employees do not guarantee that the publication is without flaw of any kind or is wholly appropriate for your particular purposes and therefore disclaims all liability for any error, loss or other consequence that may arise from you relying on any information in this publication. An electronic version of this document is available on the Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts website www.environment.gov.au For more information contact the DSE Customer Service Centre 136 186 Citation: Hunter, D.
    [Show full text]
  • 2219573-REP-Marine Assessment Report AR
    Appendix L – Marine Assessment GHD | Report for Hunter Water Corporation - Belmont Drought Response Desalination Plant, 2219573 Hunter Water Corporation Belmont Drought Response Desalination Plant Marine Environment Assessment Amendment Report July 2020 Table of contents 1. Introduction..................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Background .......................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Purpose and structure of this report .................................................................................... 2 2. Project changes ............................................................................................................................. 4 2.1 Overview .............................................................................................................................. 4 2.2 Key features of the amended Project .................................................................................. 4 3. Methodology ................................................................................................................................... 7 3.1 Review of relevant legislation .............................................................................................. 7 3.2 Review of databases and searches ..................................................................................... 7 3.3 Review of previous marine ecology reports ........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Two Hundred and Ten Years Looking for the Giant Burrowing Frog
    Two hundred and ten years looking for the Giant Burrowing Frog 1 2 Trent Penman , Francis Lemckert and Michael Mahony' 'School of Environmental and Life Sciences, University of Newcastle, N.S.W 2308,Australia 2Biodiversity Systems, Research and Development Division, Forests NSW P.O Box I 00 Beecroft, N.S.W 2119 Australia. Email for corresponding author: [email protected] The giant burrowing frog Heleioporusaustraliacus (Shaw) is a large, morphologically distinctive, but Downloaded fromhttp://meridian.allenpress.com/australian-zoologist/article-pdf/32/4/597/1471522/az_2004_005.pdf by gueston26September2021 cryptic frog found in south eastern Australia. This paper reviews the literature pertaining to the Giant Burrowing Frog. It is a forest dependent species found on the coast and adjacent ranges of south-eastern Australia, with five congeners in south-west Western Australia. The species is listed as vulnerable in NSW and Victoria and under Commonwealth legislation, although there is no obvious cause for a decline nor is it clear how much decline has occurred. Proposed threats to the species survival include forestry operations, habitat destruction, introduced species, pollutants, increased UV and disease.A large gap exists in the species distributional records and H. australiacusmay represent two distinct species, although the evidence for this remains inconclusive. Standard detection methods for frogs do not apply well to the Giant Burrowing Frog and alternative methods are required to provide a more detailed understanding of its ecology and distribution. Key words: review, conservation, Heleioporus, management, amphibian Introduction Despite being one of the first frogs described from The review brings together all known records from various Australia, there has been very little research into museum specimens, the published literature and previous the ecology of the Giant Burrowing Frog Heleioporus collations of habitat requirements.
    [Show full text]
  • SIS Manly Vale Public School Review – Prepared by Renata Bali
    SIS Manly Vale Public School Review – Prepared by Renata Bali This review has been prepared by Dr Renata Bali from Ecosense Consulting Pty. Ltd. I was asked by EDO NSW, on behalf of the Save Manly Dam Catchment Committee, to conduct a brief ecological review of the following report: Species Impact Statement Manly Vale Public School (Kleinfelder 2016), including documents attached in Appendix 7. I previously undertook a detailed ecological assessment of the Preliminary Species Impact Statement (SIS) prepared by Kleinfelder (2015) and relevant documentation (Bali 2015 provided as Attachment 1). As part of the present review, I also considered the following: OEH Referral response to Preliminary SIS dated 30 September 2015; and Proposal for a Biobank Site at Galston Park Bushland prepared by Hornsby Shire Council (November 2016). I note that, as a result of a reconfiguration of the school buildings, the amount of vegetation to be cleared has decreased (3.65 ha vs 4.37 ha). Similarly the amount of vegetation to be managed as an Asset Protection Zone (APZ) has decreased (3.34 ha vs 4.01 ha). More extensive survey work was undertaken by Kleinfelder within the subject site and the surrounding APZ in 2015-6. In the case of flora, this included the analysis of 2 additional 20 X 20 m quadrats and 8 hours targeted search for threatened species. In the case of fauna, this included an additional 7 hours of amphibian survey, 442 remote camera nights and ~1000 arboreal trap nights (discrepancy between Table 7 in the SIS and Table 1 in Appendix 7(2).
    [Show full text]
  • Giant Burrowing Frog-(Heleioporus
    #61 This Action Statement was first published in 1994 and remains current. This Giant Burrowing Frog version has been prepared for web publication. It Heleioporus australiacus retains the original text of the action statement, although contact information, the distribution map and the illustration may have been updated. © The State of Victoria, Department of Sustainability and Environment, 2003 Published by the Department of Sustainability and Environment, Victoria. Giant Burrowing Frog (Heleioporus australiacus) Distribution in Victoria (DSE 2002) 8 Nicholson Street, (Illustration by John Las Gourgues) East Melbourne, Victoria 3002 Australia Description and Distribution coastal slopes of the Great Dividing Range The Giant Burrowing Frog (Heleioporus below 1000 m altitude, between Gosford in This publication may be of New South Wales and Walhalla in central assistance to you but the australiacus Shaw & Nodder 1795) is a large, Gippsland. No records are known between State of Victoria and its robust species with a maximum body employees do not guarantee length of 100 mm. Body colour is chocolate Jervis Bay and Eden, indicating that the that the publication is brown above and white beneath with species may be composed of two disjunct without flaw of any kind or scattered yellow spots, usually capping populations. Gillespie (1990) gives a detailed is wholly appropriate for warts, on the flanks and around the cloaca. coverage of Victorian records since 1982. your particular purposes The back and sides are covered with small All Victorian records of the species have and therefore disclaims all warts each with a small black spine. The been from eucalypt forest of various types.
    [Show full text]
  • Flora and Fauna Assessment
    Figure 1 - Map of region showing the four selected survey sites. Figure 2 – Habitat areas within study area for Rosenberg’s Goanna Cygnet Surveys & Consultancy ABN 15925 463 459 2 Acron Road, Phone & fax: (02) 9449 4606 St Ives, NSW 2075 Mobile: 0413 042 355 Australia. Email: [email protected] 16th March 2017 To: Corey Mead, Travers bushfire & ecology, 38A The Avenue, Mt Penang Parklands, Central Coast Highway, Kariong, NSW 2250. Dear Corey, Belrose Planning proposal: Rosenberg’s Goanna assessment. In 2012 I carried out a survey of areas adjacent to the proposed subdivision on behalf of Travers bushfire & ecology to assess if the population of Rosenberg’s Goannas at the site would be significantly impacted. My conclusions at that time were that: The proposed residential site was not critical to the survival of the population. There is adequate habitat surrounding the proposed residential site to support a viable population. The proposal would not restrict movement or connectivity for the local population. There was no significant impact. Since that time you have advised me that following a recent bushfire review there are increased impacts from APZ’s resulting in an additional loss of .82ha of the important habitat area. Having had an opportunity to inspect the addition to the APZ with you this morning, I am of the opinion that this does not change my original assessment and conclusions. Regards, Gerry Swan, Principal Cygnet Surveys & Consultancy. Threatened Frog Specialist Report A6 Appendix 6 - Giant Burrowing Frog and Red
    [Show full text]
  • Giant Burrowing Frog)
    Consultation Document on Listing Eligibility and Conservation Actions Heleioporus australiacus (Giant Burrowing Frog) Heleioporus australiacus (Image: D. Hunter, NSW Department of Planning, Industry and Environment) You are invited to provide your views and supporting reasons related to: 1) the eligibility of Heleioporus australiacus (Giant Burrowing Frog) for inclusion on the EPBC Act threatened species list in the Endangered category; and 2) the necessary conservation actions for the above species. Evidence provided by experts, stakeholders and the general public are welcome. Responses can be provided by any interested person. Anyone may nominate a native species, ecological community or threatening process for listing under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) or for a transfer of an item already on the list to a new listing category. The Threatened Species Scientific Committee (the Committee) undertakes the assessment of species to determine eligibility for inclusion in the list of threatened species and provides its recommendation to the Australian Government Minister for the Environment. Responses are to be provided in writing either by email to: [email protected] or by mail to: Heleioporus australiacus (Giant Burrowing Frog) consultation document Page 1 of 33 The Director Marine and Freshwater Species Conservation Section Biodiversity Conservation Division Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment PO Box 858 Canberra ACT 2601 Responses are required to be submitted
    [Show full text]
  • Population Genetics and Distribution of Two Sympatric
    POPULATION GENETICS AND DISTRIBUTION OF TWO SYMPATRIC FROG SPECIES IN PENINSULAR MALAYSIA, Fejevarya cancrivora (Gravenhorst, 1829) AND Fejevarya limnocharis (Boie, 1834) AMIRAH HURZAID UNIVERSITI SAINS MALAYSIA 2013 POPULATION GENETICS AND DISTRIBUTION OF TWO SYMPATRIC FROG SPECIES IN PENINSULAR MALAYSIA, Fejevarya cancrivora (Gravenhorst, 1829) AND Fejevarya limnocharis (Boie, 1834) By AMIRAH HURZAID Thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Masters of Science November 2013 This piece of work is a token of dedication to my beloved mom, Khairun Mahmood. A special dedication… My late father Allahyarham Hurzaid Hj. Mohamad Isa Who passed away on 18th February 2001. -1st April 2013- ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ‘On no soul doth Allah Place a burden greater than it can bear’ [Al Baqarah: 286] Alhamdulillah, all praises and thanks to Allah the Almighty for His consent and blessing this study is finally completed. First and foremost, I would especially like to express my heartfelt thanks and appreciation to both my supervisor and co supervisor, Prof. Ibrahim Jaafar and Prof. Siti Azizah Mohd Nor who have always being supportive, encouraging and understanding of my difficulties in completing this thesis. I would also give my gratitude to Universiti Sains Malaysia for funding this project under grant no.: USM- RU- PRGS 1001/PJJAUH/834059 and Ministry of Higher Education, Malaysia and USM for the USM Academic Staff Training Scheme (ASTS) scholarship award. A special thanks goes to Ana, Zaza, Syaida, Syaibah, Daniel, Wan, Semah, Dilla, Amer, En. Shara, Pija, En. Shahfiz, Ika and Amet for their vital encouragement, understanding and assistance. Without them, this research would not be completed successfully.
    [Show full text]