DOCSLIB.ORG

Frog Call Survey 2002 - 2006

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Gray Treefrog Southern Leopard Spring Peeper Frog Call Survey 2002 - 2006 Wood Frog Green Frog Upland Chorus American Toad E. Spadefoot Northern Cricket Bullfrog Frog and Toad Species 9 species of frogs and 3 species of toads Eastern Spadefoot Toad (Scaphiopus holbrookii) American Toad (Bufo americanus) Fowler’s Toad (Bufo fowlerii) Bullfrog (Rana catesbeiana) Gray Treefrog (Hyla versicolor) Green Frog (Rana clamitans) Northern Cricket Frog (Acris crepitans) Northern Spring Peeper (Pseudacris crucifer) Pickerel Frog (Rana palustris) Southern Leopard Frog (Rana utricularia) Upland Chorus Frog (Pseudacris triseriata) Wood Frog (Rana sylvatica) Eastern Spadefoot Toad Habitat Type: Usually found in areas with sandy or loose soil Voice: Explosive grunt, low-pitched, and short in duration Have a single, sharp-edged, black spade on each hind foot. Spade enables the toad to burrow down into the sand/soil. American Toad Habitat Type: Ranges from suburban backyards to mountain wildernesses Need shallow water and/or areas with some moisture. Voice: Long musical trill Chest and forward part of abdomen usually spotted with dark pigment. One or two warts in each of the largest dark spots. Fowler’s Toad Habitat Type: chiefly sandy areas, around shores of lakes, or in river valleys. Voice: A short, unmusical bleat. Virtually unspotted belly. Three or more warts in each of the largest dark spots. Bullfrog Habitat Type: Prefers large bodies of water Voice: A vibrate, sonorous series of bass notes best stated as “jug ’o rum” No dorsolateral ridges Has less fully webbed toes, 4th toe extends past the webbing. Gray Treefrog Habitat Type: Small trees and shrubs near or in shallow standing bodied water Voice: Small musical trill, a resonant, flute-like trill, sounds similar to the call of the red- bellied woodpecker. Orange on concealed portions of legs. Green Frog Habitat Type: Shallow, fresh water. Voice: Like a loose banjo string and rather explosive, either a single note or repeated 3 or 4 times. Has dorsolateral ridges ending on body. Northern Cricket Frog Habitat Type: In or near permanent bodies of shallow water that provide cover in the form of vegetation. Voice: “gick-gick-gick”, like two pebbles being hit together slowly at first but picking up speed, continuing for 20-30 plus beats. 1st toe completely webbed and only 1.5 to 2 joints of the 4th toe are free. Northern Spring Peeper Habitat Type: Bushy second growth near small or semi-permanent ponds or swamps. Voice: High peeping whistle, a single clear note repeated at intervals. Dark cross on back. Pickerel Frog Habitat Type: Cool, clear water. Voice: Steady low pitched snore of 1 to 2 seconds duration. Square spots in two parallel rows down the back. Bright yellow or orange on concealed surfaces of hind legs. Southern Leopard Frog Habitat Type: All types of shallow freshwater habitats and slightly brackish marshes. Voice: Short chuckle like guttural trill, pulse rate usually fewer than 13 per second. Distinct light spot in center of tympanum. Dark dorsal spots highly variable. Upland Chorus Frog Habitat Type: Grassy lowlands, moist woodlands and river-bottom swamps. Voice: regularly repeated “crreek” or “prreep” Dark stripe from snout to groin passing through the eye. Dark triangle between eyes. Wood Frog Habitat Type: In or near moist wooded areas. Voice: A hoarse clacking sound that suggests the quack of a duck. Dark patch extending backward from the eye. Survey Sites 2002-2004 15 sites * indicate new sites 2005-2006 20 sites for 2005-2006 Blue Road* New Marsh Blue Heron Pond* Peeper Pond Cash Lake Powerline Swamp Chorus Frog Site* Range Pond Harding Spring Pond Red Road* Hobbs Pond Rogue Harbor Knowles 2 Salamander Pond Merganser Pond Sam’s Pond* Midway Branch Uhler 1 Millrace 2 Wood Duck Pond Chorus Frog Site Rogue Harbor Range Pond Map of Sites Red Road Blue Road Merganser Pond Blue Heron Pond Wood Duck Pond Midway Branch Millrace 2 Salamander Pond Uhler 1 New Marsh Knowles 2 Peeper Pond Hobbs Pond 1 Powerline Swamp Sam's Pond Cash Lake Harding Spring Pond Legend Permanency Permanent Semi-Permanent Temporary Buffer_of_proposed_2005_pts_v4 Blue text = Adds diversity value Rogue Harbor Range Pond Midway Branch Wood Duck Pond & Surrounding Areas New Marsh Merganser Pond & Surrounding Areas PRR Anuran Call Count Survey (Contacts: LE – 240-882-0925; Marilyn cell/desk – 240-882-0360/301-497-5949) Observer: Refuge Route: 1a Survey Date: Run Number: (first and last name) (include year) Point Data SAMSa HARDa CASHa UHL1a KNO2a Start Time Air Temperature (oF) Wind Scale Sky Code Was noise a factor? ( = yes) Did you take a timeout? (= yes) Species Heard: 3 min. 5 min. 3 min. 5 min. 3 min. 5 min. 3 min. 5 min. 3 min. 5 min. Eastern Spadefoot Toad American Toad Fowler’s Toad Northern Cricket Frog Gray Treefrog Northern Spring Peeper Upland Chorus Frog Bullfrog Green Frog Wood Frog Southern Leopard Frog Pickerel Frog Comments: Call Index Value: 1 = Calls can be counted, no overlapping. 2 = Calls can be distinguished, some overlapping. 3 = Full chorus, calls continuous and overlapping. Sky Code: 0 = Clear / few clouds. 1 = Partly cloudy / variable. 2 = Cloudy (broken) or overcast. 4 = Fog / Smoke 5 = Drizzle / light rain 7 = Snow *8 = Showers (do not conduct survey) Wind Scale: 0 = Smoke rises vertically. *4 =Small branches move, raises dust and loose paper. 1 = Light air movement, smoke drifts. *5 = Small trees in leaf begin to sway, crested wavelets. 2 = Wind felt on face, leaves rustle. *6 = Large branches in motion. 3 = Gentle breeze, leaves and small twigs in motion. * Unacceptable wind strengths for survey. SCDI Values Species diversity values based on calls. SCDI values were calculated by using the Simpson’s Diversity formula. Simpson’s Diversity formula requires the species abundance. Assumptions: Call Code 1 there was 1 individual Call Code 2 there was 4 individuals Call Code 3 there was 9 individuals Summary 2002 SCDI Site Comparison 2002 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 SCDI Value 0.05 0 MIL2a SALAa CASHa HARDa HOBBa KNO2a MERGa MIDWa NEWMa PEEPaPOWEa RANGaROGUa UHL1aWOODa Site Midway Branch had the worst SCDI value (0.249). Salamander Pond and Range Pond had the best SCDI values (0.138). Summary 2002 Cont. Number of Occassions Species Heard 2002 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Number of Occassions EST AT Bf FT GTf GF None NCF NSP PF SLF UCF WF Species Northern Spring Peeper heard the most (60). Northern Spring Peeper, Northern Cricket Frog, and the Gray Treefrog were heard at the most locations (15). Upland Chorus Frog was heard the least and at the fewest locations. (2). Summary 2003 SCDI Site Comparison 2003 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 SCDI Value 0.05 0 MIL2a CASHaHARDa KNO2a MIDWa PEEPa SALAa UHL1a HOBBa MERGa NEWMa POWEaRANGaROGUa WOODa Site Peeper Pond had the worst SCDI value (0.301). New Marsh had the best SCDI value (0.136). Summary 2003 Cont. Number of Occassions Species Heard 2003 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Number of Occassions of Number AT Bf FT GF PF EST GTf SLF WF None NCF NSP UCF Species Northern Cricket Frog heard the most (44). Northern Cricket Frog and Northern Spring Peeper were heard at the most locations (15). Upland Chorus Frog was not heard this year. One Wood Frog call was heard at one location. Summary 2004 SCDI Site Comparison 2004 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 SCDI Value 0.05 0 MIL2a SALAa CASHa HARDaHOBBa KNO2a MERGa MIDWa NEWMa PEEPaPOWEa RANGaROGUa UHL1aWOODa Site Midway Branch had the worst SCDI value (0.319). Knowles 2 had the best SCDI value (0.146). Summary 2004 Cont. Number of Occassions Species Heard 2004 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Number of Occassions of Number AT Bf FT GF PF EST GTf SLF WF None NCF NSP UCF Species Northern Spring Peeper heard the most (63). Northern Spring Peeper, Northern Cricket Frog, Green Frog, and Southern Leopard Frog were heard at the most locations (15). Upland Chorus Frog (3) and Wood Frog (4) heard the least. Summary 2005 (15 Sites) SCDI Site Comparison 2005 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 SCDI Value 0.05 0 MIL2a SALAa CASHa HARDaHOBBa KNO2a MERGa MIDWa NEWMa PEEPaPOWEa RANGaROGUa UHL1aWOODa Site Peeper Pond had the worst SCDI value (0.308). Range Pond had the best SCDI value (0.169). Summary 2005 (15 Sites) Cont. Number of Occassions Species Heard 2005 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Number of Occassions Occassions of Number AT Bf FT GF PF EST GTf SLF WF None NCF NSP UCF Species Northern Spring Peeper was heard the most (62). N. Spring Peeper, N. Cricket Frog, Gray Treefrog, and Green Frog heard at the most locations. American Toad (1), Upland Chorus Frog (3), and Wood Frog (3) heard the least. Summary 2006 (15 Sites) SCDI Site Comparison 2006 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 SCDI Value 0.05 0 MIL2a SALAa CASHa HARDaHOBBa KNO2a MERGa MIDWa NEWMa PEEPaPOWEa RANGaROGUa UHL1aWOODa Site Salamander Pond had the worst SCDI value (0.307). Uhler 1 had the best SCDI value (0.144). Summary 2006 (15 Sites) Cont. Number of Occassions Species Heard 2006 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Number of Occassions of Number AT Bf FT GF PF EST GTf SLF WF None NCF NSP UCF Species Northern Spring Peeper heard the most (66). N. Spring Peeper and Green Frog heard at the most locations (15). Upland Chorus Frog (3) and Wood Frog (7) heard the least.
Recommended publications
  • TERRITORY SIZE - What Is the Territory Size for the Species?

    TERRITORY SIZE - What Is the Territory Size for the Species?

    ANURA TERRITORY SIZE - What is the territory size for the species? Species Common Name Territory Size Bufonidae True Frogs Bufo a. americanus Eastern American Toad Unk (Oldham 1966) Bufo fowleri Fowler's Toad Unk (Stille 1952, Clarke 1974a, Breden 1988) Bufo quercicus Oak Toad Unk Bufo terrestris Southern Toad Unk Hylidae Treefrogs Acris c. crepitans Eastern Cricket Frog Unk Acris c. blanchardi Blanchard's Cricket Frog none (Pyburn 1958); 30 cm radius (Perrill & Shepherd 1989) Acris g. gryllus Coastal Plain Cricket Frog Unk Hyla andersonii Pine Barrens Treefrog Unk Hyla chrysoscelis Cope’s Gray Treefrog Unk Hyla cinerea Green Treefrog Unk Hyla femoralis Pine Woods Treefrog Unk Hyla gratiosa Barking Treefrog N Hyla squirella Squirrel Treefrog Unk Hyla versicolor Gray Treefrog Unk Pseudacris brachyphona Mountain Chorus Frog Unk Pseudacris brimleyi Brimley’s Chorus Frog Unk Pseudacris c. crucifer Northern Spring Peeper 1.2 - 5.4 m (Delzell 1958) Pseudacris feriarum Upland Chorus Frog Unk Pseudacris feriarum kalmi New Jersey Chorus Frog Unk Pseudacris ocularis Little Grass Frog Unk Pseudacris triseriata Western Chorus Frog 7.5 cm (Roble 1985) Pelobatidae Spadefoot Toads Scaphiopus holbrookii Eastern Spadefoot 10 sq m (Pearson 1955) Ranidae True Frogs Rana catesbeiana American Bullfrog 2.5m2 (8.6 ft diam.in pond) (Currie and Bellis 1969) Rana clamitans melanota Northern Green Frog 61 sq m (Martof 1956b) Rana palustris Pickerel Frog Unk Rana pipiens Northern Leopard Frog 5 - 10 m (Dole 1965) Rana septentrionalis Mink Frog Unk Rana sphenocephala Southern Leopard Frog Unk Rana sylvatica Wood Frog 64.5 sq m (Bellis 1965) Rana virgatipes Carpenter Frog 0.5 - 6.5 m Microhylidae Narrow-mouthed Frogs Gastrophryne carolinensis Eastern Narrow-mouthed Toad Unk Territory Size Codes: State in m2 or km2, Unk = unknown.
  • Western Chorus Frog (Pseudacris Triseriata), Great Lakes/ St

    Western Chorus Frog (Pseudacris Triseriata), Great Lakes/ St

    PROPOSED Species at Risk Act Recovery Strategy Series Recovery Strategy for the Western Chorus Frog (Pseudacris triseriata), Great Lakes/ St. Lawrence – Canadian Shield Population, in Canada Western Chorus Frog 2014 1 Recommended citation: Environment Canada. 2014. Recovery Strategy for the Western Chorus Frog (Pseudacris triseriata), Great Lakes / St. Lawrence – Canadian Shield Population, in Canada [Proposed], Species at Risk Act Recovery Strategy Series, Environment Canada, Ottawa, v + 46 pp For copies of the recovery strategy, or for additional information on species at risk, including COSEWIC Status Reports, residence descriptions, action plans and other related recovery documents, please visit the Species at Risk (SAR) Public Registry (www.sararegistry.gc.ca). Cover illustration: © Raymond Belhumeur Également disponible en français sous le titre « Programme de rétablissement de la rainette faux-grillon de l’Ouest (Pseudacris triseriata), population des Grands Lacs et Saint-Laurent et du Bouclier canadien, au Canada [Proposition] » © Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada represented by the Minister of the Environment, 2014. All rights reserved. ISBN Catalogue no. Content (excluding the illustrations) may be used without permission, with appropriate credit to the source. Recovery Strategy for the Western Chorus Frog 2014 (Great Lakes / St. Lawrence – Canadian Shield Population) PREFACE The federal, provincial, and territorial government signatories under the Accord for the Protection of Species at Risk (1996) agreed to establish complementary legislation and programs that provide for effective protection of species at risk throughout Canada. Under the Species at Risk Act (S.C. 2002, c.29) (SARA), the federal competent ministers are responsible for the preparation of recovery strategies for listed Extirpated, Endangered, and Threatened species and are required to report on progress within five years of the publication of the final document on the Species at Risk Public Registry.
  • 2009 Amphibian Surveys

    2009 Amphibian Surveys

    Amphibians in the City Presence, Influential Factors, and Recommendations in Portland, OR Katie Holzer City of Portland Bureau of Parks and Recreation Bureau of Environmental Services August 2009 Introduction Background We are currently in the midst of the largest extinction of species on Earth in 65 million years (Myers & Knoll 2001, Baillie et al. 2004). Although this crisis is affecting nearly all taxa, amphibians are being hit particularly strongly, as one in three amphibian species are threatened with extinction (Pounds et al. 2006). Amphibians comprise frogs, salamanders, and caecilians, but in the Pacific Northwest of the United States we have only frogs and salamanders. There are some unique amphibian characteristics that are likely contributing to their rapid decline: 1) Amphibians have moist, permeable skin that makes them sensitive to pollution and prone to drying out (Smith & Moran 1930). 2) Many amphibians require multiple specific habitats such as ponds for egg laying and forests for the summer dry months. These habitats must be individually suitable for amphibians as well as connected to each other for populations to be successful (Bowne & Bowers 2004). 3) Many amphibians exhibit strong site fidelity where they will attempt to return to the same area again and again, even if the area is degraded and/or new areas are constructed (Stumpel & Voet 1998). 4) Chytridiomycota is a fungus that is transmitted by water and is rapidly sweeping across the globe taking a large toll on amphibians (Retallick et al., 2004). The fungus infects the skin of amphibians and has recently arrived in the Pacific Northwest. All of these factors are contributing to the sharp decline of amphibian populations around the world.
  • Amphibian Identifier 20

    Amphibian Identifier 20

    21 MOLE SALAMANDERS Family Ambystomatidae Amphibian Identifier 20 Long-toed Salamander Tiger Salamander 19 Ambystoma macrodactylum Ambystoma mavortium • Yellow or olive-green stripe from head to tip HIND FOOT 18 • Dark spots and stripes often creating a net-like pattern; of tail; may be broken into a series of blotches may become relatively uniform in colour and spotted with age 1 • Fine white or bluish flecks on sides and legs • Broad and flat head, with small eyes 2 17 • Long fourth toe on each hind foot • Background colour: yellow-brown, grey, olive-green to black • Background colour: brownish-grey to black 3 • Total length: up to 25 cm 5 16 • Total length: up to 15 cm 4 Long-toed salamander 15 14 13 Tiger salamander 12 photo: John P. Clare photo: ACA, Kris Kendell 11 TRUE FROGS Family Ranidae 10 9 Northern Leopard Frog Wood Frog Columbia Spotted Frog Lithobates pipiens 8 Lithobates sylvaticus Rana luteiventris • White or cream-coloured ridges of skin (dorsolateral folds) • Dark eye mask extends from snout through eye, ending • Small irregular dark spots with light centers 7 along sides of back behind eardrum; contrasts sharply with whitish jaw stripe • Underside of hind legs and lower belly becomes • Large round or oval dark spots with light borders • Ridges of skin (dorsolateral folds) along sides of back orange-red or pinkish with age • Background colour: green to brown 6 • May have light stripe down middle of back • Ridges of skin (dorsolateral folds) or tan; rarely golden • Background colour: brown, pink-tan, olive-green, grey along sides of back • Body length: up to 13 cm 5 to almost black • Eyes positioned towards top of • Call: three or more snore-like sounds • Body length: up to 8 cm head and angled upwards followed by interspersed grunting and 4 • Call: series of short, raspy • Background colour: light to dark brown chuckling sounds duck-like quacking sounds • Body length: up to 10 cm 3 • Call: series of quick low-pitched click sounds 2 photo: ACA, Kris Kendell 1 photo: Twan Leenders photo: Richard D.
  • Density Dependence and Adult Survival Drive Dynamics in Two High Elevation Amphibian Populations

    Density Dependence and Adult Survival Drive Dynamics in Two High Elevation Amphibian Populations

    diversity Article Density Dependence and Adult Survival Drive Dynamics in Two High Elevation Amphibian Populations Amanda M. Kissel 1,*, Simone Tenan 2 and Erin Muths 3 1 Conservation Science Partners, 11050 Pioneer Trail, Suite 202, Truckee, CA 96161, USA 2 National Research Council, Institute of Marine Sciences (CNR-ISMAR), Arsenale, Tesa 104, Castello 2737/F, 30122 Venezia, Italy; [email protected] 3 U.S. Geological Survey, Fort Collins Science Center, 2150 Centre Ave. Bldg C, Fort Collins, CO 80526, USA; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 30 October 2020; Accepted: 11 December 2020; Published: 15 December 2020 Abstract: Amphibian conservation has progressed from the identification of declines to mitigation, but efforts are hampered by the lack of nuanced information about the effects of environmental characteristics and stressors on mechanistic processes of population regulation. Challenges include a paucity of long-term data and scant information about the relative roles of extrinsic (e.g., weather) and intrinsic (e.g., density dependence) factors. We used a Bayesian formulation of an open population capture-recapture model and >30 years of data to examine intrinsic and extrinsic factors regulating two adult boreal chorus frogs (Pseudacris maculata) populations. We modelled population growth rate and apparent survival directly, assessed their temporal variability, and derived estimates of recruitment. Populations were relatively stable (geometric mean population growth rate >1) and regulated by negative density dependence (i.e., higher population sizes reduced population growth rate). In the smaller population, density dependence also acted on adult survival. In the larger population, higher population growth was associated with warmer autumns.
  • Identifying Priority Ecoregions for Amphibian Conservation in the U.S. and Canada

    Identifying Priority Ecoregions for Amphibian Conservation in the U.S. and Canada

    Acknowledgements This assessment was conducted as part of a priority setting effort for Operation Frog Pond, a project of Tree Walkers International. Operation Frog Pond is designed to encourage private individuals and community groups to become involved in amphibian conservation around their homes and communities. Funding for this assessment was provided by The Lawrence Foundation, Northwest Frog Fest, and members of Tree Walkers International. This assessment would not be possible without data provided by The Global Amphibian Assessment, NatureServe, and the International Conservation Union. We are indebted to their foresight in compiling basic scientific information about species’ distributions, ecology, and conservation status; and making these data available to the public, so that we can provide informed stewardship for our natural resources. I would also like to extend a special thank you to Aaron Bloch for compiling conservation status data for amphibians in the United States and to Joe Milmoe and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program for supporting Operation Frog Pond. Photo Credits Photographs are credited to each photographer on the pages where they appear. All rights are reserved by individual photographers. All photos on the front and back cover are copyright Tim Paine. Suggested Citation Brock, B.L. 2007. Identifying priority ecoregions for amphibian conservation in the U.S. and Canada. Tree Walkers International Special Report. Tree Walkers International, USA. Text © 2007 by Brent L. Brock and Tree Walkers International Tree Walkers International, 3025 Woodchuck Road, Bozeman, MT 59715-1702 Layout and design: Elizabeth K. Brock Photographs: as noted, all rights reserved by individual photographers.
  • Anuran Families Morphological Characteristics

    Anuran Families Morphological Characteristics

    Identification of Tennessee Anurans Hyla versicolor Anuran Families Order Anura Bufonidae Scaphiopodidae Microhylidae 2 1 1 True Toads American Spadefoots Narrow-mouthed Toads Hylidae Ranidae 10 7 Tree Frogs True Frogs Morphological Characteristics Ranidae, Hylidae Bufonidae Glanular glands 1 Family American toad Bufonidae (Bufo americanus) Eggs: 1-2 strings (4,000-12,000 eggs) >10 m length Breeding Call • Long, musical trill (constant) Breeding Season • Early (March) Characteristics: SVL = 3” • Parotoid glands rarely touch cranial crest • 1-2 glanular glands “warts” per dark spot Family American toad Bufonidae (Bufo americanus) Distribution: EM http://www.apsu.edu/amatlas/ • Eastern United States • Statewide Family Fowler’s toad Bufonidae (Bufo fowleri) Eggs: 1-2 strings (5,000-10,000 eggs) <3 m length Breeding Call • Nasal "w-a-a-h" • Sheep bleating or baby crying Breeding Season • Mid (May) Characteristics: SVL = 2.5” • Parotoid glands touch cranial crest • >3 glanular glands “warts” per dark spot 2 Family Fowler’s toad Bufonidae (Bufo fowleri) Distribution: EM http://www.apsu.edu/amatlas/ • Eastern United States • Statewide Family Eastern spadefoot Scaphiopodidae (Scaphiopus holbrookii) Metatarsal tubercle Breeding Call • Nasal grunts: “wahh, wahh, wahh” • Young crow Breeding Season T-storms SVL = 2” • Late (June,July) Characteristics: (heavy rain) • Vertical Pupil • Glanular glands but parotoids not prominent Family Eastern spadefoot Xeric Adapted Scaphiopodidae (Scaphiopus holbrookii) Genera Distribution: EM-S http://www.apsu.edu/amatlas/
  • Big Cypress Amphibians

    Big Cypress Amphibians

    National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Big Cypress National Preserve Florida Amphibians of the Swamp... Watching wildlife the Amphibians are animals that live a portion of their responsible way... Big Cypress life in water. Some, like sirens, live their entire life in The thrill of watching a wild animal in its water. While the word “moist” may carry a negative natural surroundings is spectacular and connotation to some humans, most frogs and toads Amphibians rely on keeping their skin moist to survive. awe-inspiring, but please remember, you are the guest and they are at home. Drums in the Night Start a walk in the swamp at dusk and imagine While visiting Big Cypress National listening to a symphony orchestra commence a soft Preserve, or any other natural area, prelude with the timpani drums beating with every step. As the sunlight dims, the music crescendos remember: transitioning into the swamp’s own symphony of croaking. Seemingly on cue, males searching for a • Never feed wildlife. mate call out for females, veiled from predators in • View wildlife with respect. the darkness. Females hear the male serenades with • All wildlife is wild and unpredictable. their tympanum, the frog or toad’s outer ear located behind the eye. Amphibians use this tympanum, an Stay a safe distance from any wild animal ancient word in Greek meaning drum, because it —15 feet is recommended. resembles a piece of cloth stretched over a drum. • All plants and animals within National Park Service areas are protected, and it is illegal to collect any wildlife without special permits.
  • Mnemonics for Frog and Toad Calls of Tennessee (A Trigger to Aid Memory)

    Mnemonics for Frog and Toad Calls of Tennessee (A Trigger to Aid Memory)

    Mnemonics for Frog and Toad Calls of Tennessee (A Trigger To Aid Memory) Frogs and toads are most often monitored via the use of call count surveys. The following list was developed to assist students in memorizing frog and toad calls before conducting fieldwork. Some of the scientific names have been changed and are no longer valid! Species Voice or Mnemonic E. Spadefoot (Scaphiopus holbrookii) A low pitched, calf-like sound, short in duration and repeated Am. Toad (Bufo americanus) Long, loud musical trill (pleasant sound of spring) Fowler's Toad (Bufo woodhousii) A nasal w-a-a-a-h (sounds “fowl”) Gopher Frog (Rana capito) Deep, lazy snore – lower than river frog American Bullfrog (Rana catesbeiana) Vibrant, bass notes – “jug-o-rum” Green Frog (Rana clamitans) Like a loose banjo string - abrupt Pickerel Frog (Rana palustris) Steady, low-pitched nasally snore Wood Frog (Rana sylvatica) Hoarse clacking, similar to ducks feeding or quacking S. Leopard Frog (Rana utricularia) Short, chuckle (guttural in sound) N. Cricket Frog (Acris crepitans) Like two pebbles being clicked together S. Cricket Frog (Acris gryllus) Like a metal clicker in rapid succession Gray Treefrog chrysoscelis = dry, fast trill versicolor = musical, slower trill Green Treefrog (Hyla cinerea) Nasal queenk-queenk-queenk Barking Treefrog (Hyla gratiosa) Sounds like a pack of dogs, hence its name “barking” Spring Peeper (Pseudacris crucifer) High, piping whistle (up and down) – pip-PIP-pip-PIP Upland Chorus Frog (Pseudacris Fingernail being raked over the teeth of a comb (short and triseriata) abrupt, longer than Brimley’s) E. Narrowmouth Toad Lamb bleat (Gastrophryne carolinensis) .
  • Illinois Chorus Frog

    Illinois Chorus Frog

    Conservation Guidance for Illinois Chorus Frog Pseudacris illinoensis Smith, 1951 IL status: Threatened Species information Characteristics US status: The Illinois chorus frog (ICF) Under review is a small (1.4 to 1.75 in. and 0.2 oz.) tan to gray frog2. Its Global rank: body is stout and toad-like 1 Vulnerable with robust forearms. Its skin is granular rather than Trend: smooth. It has dark brown or Declining1 black lines on its back with a white belly. It has a Family: characteristic dark mask- Hylidae like stripe from snout to shoulder, a dark spot under 6 Habitat: each eye, and a V- or Y- Adult Illinois chorus frog. Photo by John Tucker shaped mark between the Sand prairie, sandy old eyes. The throat (vocal pouch) of the male ICF darkens during the breeding fields, ephemeral pools, season. ICF tadpoles can be distinguished from other tadpoles by their round ditches, flooded shape, large size, forward attachment point of the tail, and large tail height. depressions, marshes Once they develop two functioning limbs, they also develop other ICF markings including the dark “Y” between the eyes3. Similar species: Upland chorus frog, ICF are rarely seen because they spend most of their lives underground, Western chorus frog emerging only during the breeding season. The males’ breeding call is a series of high-pitched, rapid, birdlike whistles that can be heard as much as 1.3 mile Seasonal Cycle away4. Listen here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UaBUvAsHc00. Jan Feb Habitat Mar ICF is fossorial, spending around 85% of its life burrowed underground in Apr sparsely vegetated areas with sandy soil, near ephemeral (i.e.
  • Pacific Tree Sierran Chorus Frog: Pseudacris Sierra

    Pacific Tree Sierran Chorus Frog: Pseudacris Sierra

    Sierran Chorus Frog Page 1 Pacific Tree Sierran Chorus Frog: Pseudacris sierra Tree frogs are a whole family of frogs that live in trees. The least arboreal member of the group is our Pacific Tree Frog. People often ask, did our Pacific Tree Frog get renamed to the Pacific Chorus Frog? Tree frog is in the genus Hyla; chorus frog is in the genus Pseudacris. For awhile our Pacific Tree Frog was determined to be more genetically similar to chorus frogs. So its genus was changed from Hyla to Pseudacris. Then it changed back. Now it’s back to Pseudacris. Not only is it a chorus frog … it’s no longer a Pacific chorus frog. The latest news is that the frog has been split into three species: Pseudacris hypochondriaca - Baja California Treefrog, Pseudacris regilla - Northern Pacific Treefrog, and Pseudacris sierra - Sierran Treefrog. Technically, our frog is the Sierran tree frog. The great thing is that the frog itself doesn’t know or care. Identifying characteristics: . Enlarged bulbous toes allow the frog to cling to vertical surfaces. (If you find a small red- legged frog – it won’t have toe bulbs or an eye stripe.) . Color polymorphism: There are three main color traits: o Yellow-green o Brown (beige-brown) o Ability to change between yellow- green and brown . All tree frogs can change their brightness in response to temperature, humidity, and stress due to a hormone that regulates how much melanin is expressed. Almost all of them can . Dark stripe through eye. (Even though there get almost black. Their ability to change color are many color variations, this is our only frog is not instantaneous – and it can be observed.

  • Tadpoles of the United States and Canada

    REFERENCES Altig, R., R. W. McDiarmid, K. A. Nichols, P.C. Ustach. 1998. A Key to the Anuran Tadpoles of the United States and Canada. Con- TADPOLES temporary Herpetology Information Series 2:1-58. OF THE SOUTHEASTERN Ashton, R.E., Jr., and P.S. Ashton. 1988. Handbook of Reptiles and UNITED STATES COASTAL PLAIN Amphibians of Florida. Part III, The Amphibians. Windward Publishing, Miami, FL. Bartlett, R.D., and P.P. Bartlett. 1999. A Field Guide to Florida Rep- tiles and Amphibians. Gulf Publishing, Houston, TX. Carr, A.F, Jr. 1940. A Contribution to the Herpetology of Florida. Univ. of Florida Biological Science Series 3(1): 1-118. Conant, R., and J.T. Collins. 1998. A Field Guide to Reptiles and Am- phibians of Eastern and Central North America. Third Edition Expanded. Houghton Mifflin Company, New York, NY. Dodd, C.K., Jr. 2004. The Amphibians of Great Smoky Mountains National Park. Univ. of Tennessee Press, Knoxville, TN. McDiarmid, R.W, and R. Altig. 1999. Tadpoles: The Biology of Anu- ran Larvae. Univ. of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL. Nichols, R.J. 1937. Taxonomic Studies on the Mouth Parts of Larval Anura. Illinois Biological Monographs 15(4):1-73. Trauth, S.E., H.W. Robison and M. V. Plummer. 2004. The Amphibi- ans and Reptiles of Arkansas. Univ. of Arkansas Press, Fayette- ville, AR. Wright, A.H. 1929. Synopsis and Description of North American Tad- poles. Proceedings of the United States National Museum 74 (11): 1-70. Wright, A.H. 1932. Life Histories of the Frogs of Okefinokee Swamp, Georgia. Cornell Univ.