DOCSLIB.ORG

Additional Records on the Distribution, Morphology and Morphometry of Gegeneophis Nadkarnii Bhatta and Prashanth (Gymnophiona: Caeciliidae)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Additional Records on the Distribution, Morphology and Morphometry of Gegeneophis Nadkarnii Bhatta and Prashanth (Gymnophiona: Caeciliidae) Biosystematica ISSN: 0973-7871(online) Additional Records on the Distribution, Morphology and Morphometry of Gegeneophis nadkarnii Bhatta and Prashanth (Gymnophiona: Caeciliidae) GOPALAKRISHNA BHATTA1, K.P. DINESH2, P. PRASHANTH3 AND NIRMAL, U. KULKARNI4 1. Department of Zoology, M. G. M. College, Udupi-576 102, Karnataka, India 2. Zoological Survey of India, Western Ghats Field Research Station, Annie Hall Road, Calicut- 673 002, Kerala, India 3. Agumbe Rainforest Research Station, Agumbe -577 411, Karnataka, India 4. Hiru Naik Bldg, Dhuler Mapusa, 403507, Goa, India corresponding author: [email protected] In India the family Caeciliidae is represented by two Humbarli village, near Koyna, Satara District, endemic genera Gegeneophis Peters and Indotyphlus Maharashtra collected on 19th June 2003. Very recently Taylor. The genus Gegeneophis is represented by 9 Bhatta et al., (2007) discovered G. goaensis from Keri species and the genus Indotyphlus by 2 species (Frost, Village, Sattari Taluk, Goa based on 3 specimens collected 2007). Out of these eleven species, six new descriptions during 2004. were added to this family only in the last five years with During our field explorations on 25.7.2006, we could the advent of intensive explorations and studies in the collect 4 specimens of G. nadkarnii from different Western Ghats. Ravichandran et al., (2003) reported G. localities (Table - 1) of the border districts of Maharastra seshachari based on a single immature adult specimen and Karnataka states. These specimens were sharing collected by P.W. Soman on 12th August 1967 from the habitat with G. goaensis and another unidentified Dorle Village, Ratnagiri District, Maharastra. Giri et al., species of Gegeneophis and Ichthyophis sps. Their (2003) reported G. danieli based on a single mature identity (Figure 1) fits the description of Bhatta and female specimen collected by Varad Giri, Sameer Prashanth (2004): a medium sized Gegeneophis having Kehimkar, Isham Agarwal and Vithoba Hegde, in June many secondary annuli (around 80 annuli) on anterior 2002 from Sindhudurg District, Maharastra. Bhatta and part of the body with the anterior most primary annuli Prashanth (2004) reported G. nadkarnii based on two appearing incomplete mid-dorsally. Few morphological mature male specimens collected during September 2001 and morphometrical variations which were recorded from Bondla Wildlife Sanctuary, Goa. In 2004 Bhatta during the observation are mentioned below (Table – and Srinivasa, reported G. madhavaorum based on two 2). The habitat where the G. nadkarnii were found was mature male specimens collected during August, 2001 moist deciduous forest patches interspersed with from Doddinaguli locality, Mudur Village, Kundapura agricultural lands and homestead areas. Taluk, Udupi District, Karnataka adjacent to the Mookambika Wildlife Sanctuary. Giri, et al., (2004) The specimens were measuring from 172 mm to reported Indotyphlus maharashtraensis based on 292 mm; circumference at mid body varying between twelve specimens collected near Dhanagarwada, 18 mm and 30 mm. Teeth count were found to be © Prof. T.C. Narenderan Trust for Animal Taxonomy Biosystematica, 2007, 1(1): 71-74 http://www.tcntrust.org/journal.php 71 72 GOPALAKRISHNA BHATTA, K.P. DINESH, P. PRASHANTH AND NIRMAL, U. KULKARNI to have a good population of G. nadkarnii, from the conservation point of view few specimens were collected for the documentation purpose. In future a baseline data for this species is required for a great many types of studies including, abundance and biodiversity which is currently of special concern for caecilians. Caecilians are occasionally encountered in the field due to their burrowing, secretive and nocturnal habit. This has made the researchers to think that caecilians are quite rare, despite being fairly common in certain habitats (Maurice and Burton 1988) and the diversity of caecilians remains poorly explored (Nussbaum and Wilkinson, 1989). The present investigation supports the remarks of Bhatta (1997) and Pillai and Ravichandran (1999) that for the proper assessment of the status of Figure 1. Gegeneophis nadkarnii in life from Wildernest locality. (ZSI/WGFRS/ V/A/638). the occurrence and abundance of caecilians an extensive systematic survey is necessary. The present report also variable compared to the original description of G. substantiates the observation of Bhatta, (1997, 1998), nadkarnii, premaxillary-maxillary teeth were varying Pillai and Ravichandran (1999), Oommen et al, (2000), from 21 to 29; vomeropalatine teeth between 22 and 23; Measey et al, (2003), Bhatta and Srinivasa (2004), Gower dentary teeth 20 and 21 and splenial teeth from 2 to 4. and Wilkinson (2005), Bhatta et al., (2007) that caecilians Total number of primary annuli was found to be ranging can be common in plantations that have maintained from 107 to 112 and secondary annuli ranging from 77 moisture and shade. In the light of very few quantitative to 84. Sex was determined by opening a slit into body estimates of caecilian abundances in India (Bhatta, 1997, cavity in search of gonads. Oommen et al., 2000), it is concluded that not all members of the Gegeneophis are rare, although more During the field study many sightings of G. field studies are needed to readdress the caecilians nadkarnii were made in the surroundings of type subterranean blind spot. locality. By their clear cut morphological characters all these individuals could be identified on the spot and even Earlier to 2000, most of the caecilian species from the young ones with traces of gill slits and tail fins could India were known from the southern part of Western be identified. Although the collection localities were found Ghats. The research work of Giri et al (2003), TABLE 1. Collection localities for G. nadkarnii Sl No Registration No. Collection locality Dist. from type Latitude Longitude Altitude locality (km) (N) (E) (a msl) 1 ZSI/CLT/V/A/573 (holotype) Bondla 0 15o 25.9’ 74o 6.5’ 168 2 BNHS 4234 (paratype) 3 ZSI/WGFRS/V/A/638 Wildernest 20 15o 38.9’ 74o 7.1’ 600 4 BNHS/4641 Virdi Village, Dodamarg Taluk, Sindhudurg Dist. Maharastra State 5 ZSI/WGFRS/V/A/639 Chorla- Chavatyar. 22 15o 39.6’ 74o 8.7’ 732 6 BNHS/4642 Chorla Village, Khanapur Taluk, Belgaum Dist. Karnataka State Biosystematica, 2007, 1(1) Additional Records of Gegeneophis nadkarnii Bhatta and Prashanth 73 TABLE 2. Some morphometric (in mm) and meristic data for G. nadkarnii. Measurements were made to the nearest 0.1 mm with dial calipers, except for length and circumference, which were measured with a ruler and a piece of thread. Values in the last column: mean ± standard deviation (range). ZSI/ BNHS/ ZSI/ BNHS/ Total of 4 WGFRS/ 4641 WGFRS/ 4642 specimens V/A/638 Wildernest V/A/639 Chorla Wildernest Chorla Chavatyar Chavatyar Sex Mature Mature Mature Mature female male female male Total length 290 280 245 172 246.8 ± 53.4 (172 – 290) Head length 7.0 7.0 6.2 4.6 6.2 ± 1.1 (4.6 – 7.0) Head width at jaw angle 5.2 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.8 ± 0.5 (4.0 – 5.2) Circumference at mid-body 30 24 22 18 23.5 ± 5.0 (18.0 – 30.0) Width of the body at 1st annular groove 6.2 5.8 5.6 4.4 5.5 ± 0.8 (4.4 – 6.2) Width of the body at broadest region 8.2 9.0 7.0 5.4 7.4 ± 1.6 (5.4 – 9.0) Width of the body at the level of vent 4.0 3.2 3.0 2.0 3.1 ± 0.8 (2.0 – 4.0) Length divided by width 35.3 31.1 35.0 31.8 33.3 ± 2.2 (31.1 – 35.3) Length of the snout projecting beyond mouth 1.6 1.2 1.2 1.0 1.3 ± 0.3 (1.0 – 1.6) Distance between jaw angle and top of head 1.8 1.2 1.8 1.0 1.5 ± 0.4 (1.0 – 1.8) Distance between jaw angle and ventral 1.9 1.8 2.0 1.4 1.8 ± 0.3 (1.4 – 2.0) surface of lower jaw Distance between jaw angle and tip of lower jaw 6.3 6.0 5.2 4.2 5.4 ± 0.9 (4.2 – 6.3) Distance between nostrils 2.0 2.0 1.6 1.2 1.7 ± 0.4 (1.2 -2.0) Distance between nostril and snout tip 1.2 1.0 0.6 0.8 0.9 ± 0.3 (0.6 – 1.2) Distance between tentacles 4.2 3.8 3.6 3.0 3.7 ± 0.5 (3.0 – 4.2) Distance between tentacle and snout tip 3.0 2.8 3.0 2.4 2.8 ± 0.3 (2.4 – 3.0) Distance between tentacle and jaw angle 4.0 3.8 4.0 3.0 3.7 ± 0.5 (3.0 – 4.0) Distance between tentacle and nostril 2.0 1.8 1.8 1.6 1.8 ± 0.2 (1.6 – 2.0) Distance between tentacle and margin of upper lip 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 ± 0.0 (0.6 – 0.7) Distance between tentacle and top of head 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.8 0.8 ± 0.2 (0.6 – 1.0) Width at 1st nuchal groove 6.2 5.6 5.2 4.2 5.3 ± 0.8 (4.2 – 6.2) Width at 2nd nuchal groove 6.8 6.0 5.4 4.6 5.7 ± 0.9 (4.6 – 6.8) Length of 1st nuchal collar (laterally) 2.4 2.0 2.0 1.8 2.1 ± 0.3 (1.8 – 2.4) Length of 2nd nuchal collar (laterally) 4.2 3.8 3.2 2.2 3.4 ± 0.9 (2.2 – 4.2) Distance between snout tip and 1st nuchal groove 9.0 9.0 7.2 6.2 7.9 ± 1.4 (6.2 – 9.0) Distance between snout tip and 2nd nuchal groove 11.0 11.0 10.0 7.6 9.9 ± 1.6 (7.6 – 11.0) Distance between snout tip and 3rd nuchal groove 13.6 13.2 13.0 10.0 12.5 ± 1.7 (10.0 – 13.6) Total number of primary annuli 112 110 110 107 109.8 ± 2.1 (107 – 112) Total number of secondary annuli 81 84 77 78 80.0 ± 3.2 (77 – 84) Anterior most primary annulus with 32 27 34 30 30.8 ± 3.0 (27 – 34) secondary groove Number of complete secondary annuli in 12 12 12 13 12.3 ± 0.5 (12 -13) front of vent Width of disc surrounding vent 1.8 1.8 1.6 1.2 1.6 ± 0.3 (1.2 – 1.8) Length of disc surrounding vent 2.0 2.0 1.8 1.0 1.7 ± 0.5 (1.0 – 2.0) Width of vent 2.0 1.8 1.4 1.2 1.6 ± 0.4 (1.2 – 2.0) Number of denticles surrounding the vent 9 10 12 9 10.0 ± 1.4 (9.0 - 12) Number of premaxillary-maxillary teeth 13-1-12 15-1-13 12-1-13 11-0-10 25.5 ± 3.3 (21 – 29) Number of vomeropalatine teeth 10-1-11 11-0-11 11-0-11 11-1-11 22.2 ± 1.3 (22 – 23) Number of dentary teeth 10-0-10 11-0-10 10-0-10 10-0-10 20.3 ± 0.5 (20 – 21) Number of splenial teeth 2-2 1-1 2-2 2-2 3.5 ± 1.0 (2 – 4) Biosystematica, 2007, 1(1) 74 GOPALAKRISHNA BHATTA, K.P.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Gymnophiona: Caeciliidae) from the Techniques, and Recent Predictions Western Ghats of Goa and Karnataka (Dinesh Et Al
    JoTT NOTE 2(8): 1105-1108 New site records of Gegeneophis upsurge in the description of new goaensis and G. mhadeiensis species in Gegeneophis may be due to optimization of surveying (Gymnophiona: Caeciliidae) from the techniques, and recent predictions Western Ghats of Goa and Karnataka (Dinesh et al. 2009) indicate future discovery of new species from this genus. 1 2 Gopalakrishna Bhatta , K.P. Dinesh , Gegeneophis goaensis was described by Bhatta et 3 4 P. Prashanth , Nirmal U. Kulkarni & al. (2007a) from Keri Village, Sattari Taluk, North Goa 5 C. Radhakrishnan District, Goa based on a set of three specimens collected in September 2006 and July 2008. G. mhadeiensis 1 Department of Biology, BASE Educational Service Pvt. Ltd., was described in 2007 from Chorla Village, Khanapur Basavanagudi, Bengaluru, Karnataka 560004, India 2,5 Zoological Survey of India, Western Ghat Regional Centre, Taluk, Belgaum District, Karnataka from a set of three Eranhipalam, Kozhikode, Kerala 673006, India specimens collected during 2006 (Bhatta et al. 2007b). 3 Agumbe Rainforest Research Station, Agumbe, Karnataka During our recent explorations for these secretive animals 577411, India 4 in the bordering districts of Maharashtra (Sindhudurg), Hiru Naik Building, Dhuler Mapusa, Goa 403507, India Email: 2 [email protected] (corresponding author) Goa (North Goa) and Karnataka (Belgaum), we collected an individual of G. goaensis (Image 1) below the soil heap surrounding a banana plantation in Chorla In India the order Gymnophiona Müller is represented Village (Karnataka) on 05 August 2009 (Table 1). All by 26 species under four genera in two families (Dinesh the morphological and morphometric details were in et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Quantitative Surveying of Endogeic Limbless Vertebrates— a Case Study of Gegeneophis Ramaswamii (Amphibia: Gymnophiona: Caeciliidae) in Southern India G.J
    Applied Soil Ecology 23 (2003) 43–53 Quantitative surveying of endogeic limbless vertebrates— a case study of Gegeneophis ramaswamii (Amphibia: Gymnophiona: Caeciliidae) in southern India G.J. Measey a,∗, D.J. Gower a, O.V. Oommen b, M. Wilkinson a a Department of Zoology, The Natural History Museum, London SW7 5BD, UK b Department of Zoology, University of Kerala, Kariavattom, Thiruvananthapuram, India Received 10 September 2002; received in revised form 16 December 2002; accepted 17 December 2002 Abstract Many subterranean, limbless reptiles and amphibians are predators of invertebrate soil ecosystem engineers. The potential importance of these predators in soil ecology partly rests on whether they occur in high densities, but their abundance has rarely been measured, and there are no standard methods. The mostly tropical and fossorial caecilians (Amphibia: Gymnophiona) are often considered rare, but there are very few quantitative data, and some species, including Gegeneophis ramaswamii,have been reported as abundant in some situations. Using simple and repeatable survey methods with randomised 1 m2 quadrats, surveys of G. ramaswamii were conducted at five localities in southern India. Densities of 0–1.87 m−2 per survey were measured, with means of 0.51 and 0.63 m−2 at the beginning and middle of monsoon, respectively. These densities were far greater than for sympatric caecilians (ichthyophiids; uraeotyphlids) and fossorial snakes (typhlopids; colubrids). While ecological data remain very scant, establishing quantitative methods to assess the abundance of endogeic limbless vertebrates is an important step toward greater understanding of subterranean predator–prey relations, and of monitoring populations of these poorly known organisms.
    [Show full text]
  • Feeding in Amphibians: Evolutionary Transformations and Phenotypic Diversity As Drivers of Feeding System Diversity
    Chapter 12 Feeding in Amphibians: Evolutionary Transformations and Phenotypic Diversity as Drivers of Feeding System Diversity Anthony Herrel, James C. O’Reilly, Anne-Claire Fabre, Carla Bardua, Aurélien Lowie, Renaud Boistel and Stanislav N. Gorb Abstract Amphibians are different from most other tetrapods because they have a biphasic life cycle, with larval forms showing a dramatically different cranial anatomy and feeding strategy compared to adults. Amphibians with their exceptional diversity in habitats, lifestyles and reproductive modes are also excellent models for studying the evolutionary divergence in feeding systems. In the present chapter, we review the literature on amphibian feeding anatomy and function published since 2000. We also present some novel unpublished data on caecilian feeding biome- chanics. This review shows that over the past two decades important new insights in our understanding of amphibian feeding anatomy and function have been made possible, thanks to a better understanding of the phylogenetic relationships between taxa, analyses of development and the use of biomechanical modelling. In terms of functional analyses, important advances involve the temperature-dependent nature of tongue projection mechanisms and the plasticity exhibited by animals when switch- A. Herrel (B) Département Adaptations du Vivant, Muséum national d’Histoire naturelle, UMR 7179 C.N.R.S/M.N.H.N, 55 rue Buffon, 75005, Paris Cedex 05, France e-mail: [email protected] J. C. O’Reilly Department of Biomedical Sciences, Ohio University, Cleveland Campus, Cleveland, Ohio 334C, USA A.-C. Fabre · C. Bardua Life Sciences Department, The Natural History Museum, Cromwell Road, London SW7 5BD, UK A. Lowie Department of Biology Evolutionary, Morphology of Vertebrates, Ghent University, K.L.
    [Show full text]
  • On the Taxonomic Status of Gegeneophis Nadkarnii Bhatta & Prashanth, 2004 (Amphibia: Gymnophiona: Indotyphlidae)
    Zootaxa 3609 (2): 204–212 ISSN 1175-5326 (print edition) www.mapress.com/zootaxa/ Article ZOOTAXA Copyright © 2013 Magnolia Press ISSN 1175-5334 (online edition) http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.3609.2.6 http://zoobank.org/urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:71A73D52-1A39-4322-A4AA-DC9EFA2E3800 On the taxonomic status of Gegeneophis nadkarnii Bhatta & Prashanth, 2004 (Amphibia: Gymnophiona: Indotyphlidae) DAVID J. GOWER1,4, VARAD GIRI2, VARUN R. TORSEKAR2,3, KSHAMATA GAIKWAD2 & MARK WILKINSON1 1Department of Life Sciences, The Natural History Museum, London SW7 5BD, UK 2Bombay Natural History Society, Hornbill House, Dr Sálim Ali Chowk, S. B. S. Road, Mumbai 400 023, India 3Centre for Ecological Sciences, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore 560 012, India 4Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected] Abstract Examination of type material and new collections from Goa, southern Maharashtra and northern Karnataka, leads to the conclusion that Gegeneophis nadkarnii Bhatta & Prashanth, 2004 is a subjective junior synonym of Gegeneophis danieli Giri, Wilkinson & Gower, 2003. The purported differences between these species are very minor and attributable to nor- mal individual variation, except for some features of the dentition that are peculiar to the exceptionally abnormal paratype of G. nadkarnii. This taxonomic revision extends the known geographic range of G. danieli and suggests it could be trans- ferred from Data Deficient to Least Concern status in the IUCN Red List. Key words: caecilian, conservation, Gegeneophis danieli, India, synonymy, taxonomy, Western Ghats Introduction There are 11 nominal species of the Indian indotyphlid caecilian (Gymnophiona) Gegeneophis Peters, 1880 (e.g., www.amphibiaweb.org), with nine species described since 1999 as part of a surge in the discovery and formal recognition of caecilian diversity in the Western Ghats biodiversity hotspot (Gower et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Malathesh Gegeneophis
    PAPER ZOOS' PRINT JOURNAL 17(3): 723-728 A REDESCRIPTION OF GEGENEOPHIS CARNOSUS (BEDDOME, 1870) (AMPHIBIA: GYMNOPHIONA) G.M. Malathesh, K.R. Gundappa, S. Ravichandra Reddy and Katre Shakuntala Department of Zoology, Bangalore University, Jnana Bharathi, Bangalore, Karnataka 560056, India. Abstract Eight specimens of the lesser known Gegeneophis carnosus (Beddome) sighted and collected during June- September 1996 from the General Cariappa Biodiversity Park at Madikeri, Karnataka State, India are redescribed with details of their morphology, rnorphometry and comparative taxonomic analysis. The species appears to be an altitudinal one, restricted in its distribution to the wet semi-evergreen forest range of the Western Ghat belt of Kerala and Karnataka and inhabits a unique cryptic subterranean habitat. Keywords Amphibia, Gegeneophis carnosus, redescription, Biodiversity Park, Madikeri Introduction and the pH ranged from 5.5. to 6.0. Specimens of medium-sized Gegeneophis carnosus was first discovered at Peria Peak in earthworms (Pheretima sp.) and on one occasion, an unidentified Wyanad, Malabar, (Beddome, 1870) and subsequently recorded species of an adult caecilian (Ichthyophis sp.) were also at the foot of Ponmudi Hill ranges, Kallar, Kerala (Ferguson, encountered in the same habitat. Extensive soil excavations by 1904; Inger et al., 1984), by the side of small water courses on wild boar were a frequent sight during the search for this the hillside in Tenmalai, Travancore (Seshachar, 1942), at caecilian. Soon after collection, the specimens were transferred Kotagehar, in the Kodagu region of Karnataka, (Ramaswami, to polyethylene containers along with small amount of soil. Upon 1943; Seshachar & Ramaswami, 1943), at Bonnakad Estate, Kerala return to the laboratory, the animals were anaesthetized and and at Palode, near Thiruvananthapuram (Pillai & Ravichandran, preserved in 70% alcohol and each tagged with a separate 1999).
    [Show full text]
  • Comparative Morphology of Caecilian Sperm (Amphibia: Gymnophiona)
    JOURNAL OF MORPHOLOGY 221:261-276 (1994) Com parative Morphology of Caecilian Sperm (Amp h i bi a: Gym nop h ion a) MAFWALEE H. WAKE Department of Integrative Biology and Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, University of California, Berkeley, California 94720 ABSTRACT The morphology of mature sperm from the testes of 22 genera and 29 species representing all five families of caecilians (Amphibia: Gymnoph- iona) was examined at the light microscope level in order to: (1)determine the effectiveness of silver-staining techniques on long-preserved, rare material, (2) assess the comparative morphology of sperm quantitatively, (3) compare pat- terns of caecilian sperm morphology with that of other amphibians, and (4) determine if sperm morphology presents any characters useful for systematic analysis. Although patterns of sperm morphology are quite consistent intrage- nerically and intrafamilially, there are inconsistencies as well. Two major types of sperm occur among caecilians: those with very long heads and pointed acrosomes, and those with shorter, wider heads and blunt acrosomes. Several taxa have sperm with undulating membranes on the flagella, but limitations of the technique likely prevented full determination of tail morphology among all taxa. Cluster analysis is more appropriate for these data than is phylogenetic analysis. cc: 1994 Wiley-Liss, Inc. Examination of sperm for purposes of describ- ('70), in a general discussion of aspects of ing comparative sperm morphology within sperm morphology, and especially Fouquette and across lineages
    [Show full text]
  • The Diversity and Evolution of Amphibia: What Are They and Where Did They Come From?
    The diversity and evolution of Amphibia: What are they and where did they come from? Lecture goal To familiarize students with characteristics of the Class Amphibia, the diversity of extant amphibians, and the fossil record of amphibians. Reading assignments: Wells: pp. 1-15, 41-58, 65-74, 77-80 Supplemental readings on amphibian taxa: Wells: pp. 16-41, 59-65, 75-77 Lecture roadmap Characteristics of amphibians Extant amphibian orders Characteristics of amphibian orders and diversity Amphibian fossil record and evolution 1 What are amphibians? These foul and loathsome animals are abhorrent because of their cold body, pale color, cartilaginous skeleton, filthy skin, fierce aspect, calculating eye, offensive smell, harsh voice, squalid habitation, and terrible venom; and so their Creator has not exerted his powers to make many of them. Carl von Linne (Linnaeus) Systema Naturae (1758) What are amphibians? Ectothermic tetrapods that have a biphasic life cycle consisting of anamniotic eggs (often aquatic) and a terrestrial adult stage. Kingdom: Animalia Phylum: Chordata Subphylum: Vertebrata Class: Amphibia (amphibios: “double life”) Subclass: Lissamphibia Orders: •Anura (frogs) •Caudata (salamanders) •Gymnophiona (caecilians) Amphibia characteristics 1) Cutaneous respiration Oxygen and CO2 Transfer Family Plethodontidae Plethodon dorsalis Gills (larvae, few adult salamanders), 2 Lungs (adults) 2) Skin glands Mucous glands Granular glands 2 Amphibia characteristics 3) Modifications of middle and inner ear Middle ear consists of 2 elements
    [Show full text]
  • Reprodukce Ropuchy Zelené V Urbanizovaném Prostředí Města Olomouce
    Univerzita Palackého v Olomouci Přírodovědecká fakulta Katedra ekologie a životního prostředí Reprodukce ropuchy zelené v urbanizovaném prostředí města Olomouce Iveta Adamcová Bakalářská práce předložená na Katedře ekologie a životního prostředí Přírodovědecké fakulty Univerzity Palackého v Olomouci jako součást požadavků na získání titulu Bc. v oboru Ekologie a ochrana životního prostředí Vedoucí práce: Mgr. Zdeněk Mačát Konzultant: Mgr. Jan Losík, Ph.D. Olomouc 2015 © Iveta Adamcová, 2015 Bibliografická identifikace Adamcová I. (2015): Reprodukce ropuchy zelené v urbanizovaném prostředí města Olomouce. Bakalářská práce, Katedra ekologie a životního prostředí, Přírodovědecká fakulta, Univerzita Palackého v Olomouci, 36pp, v češtině. Abstrakt Ropucha zelená (Bufotes viridis) je ohroženým druhem obojživelníka v celém areálu výskytu. V období rozmnožování a vývoje larev je nejzranitelnější. Bakalářská práce zabývající se tímto druhem má několik cílů. První je přehledová studie dosavadních poznatků o biologii a ekologii ropuchy zelené, jako přípravy pro pozdější terénní práci. Dále zmapování rozmnožovacích míst tohoto druhu v intravilánu města Olomouce, jak v podobě revize publikovaných údajů, tak terénním šetřením. Rovněž na základě provedených odchytů stanovit odhad velikosti a míru přežívání populace ropuchy zelené (Bufotes viridis) na vybraných rozmnožovacích lokalitách. K analýze dat byla použita metoda zpětných odchytů (Capture – recapture) s použitím techniky identifikace podle přirozených skvrn (pattern maps). V centru města byly nalezeny 4 rozmnožovací lokality. Odhad velikosti populace a míru přežívání bylo možné provést jen na lokalitě Stupkova nádrž. Klíčová slova: Bufotes viridis, Capture – recapture, míra přežívání, ropucha zelená, rozmnožování, velikost populace, výskyt druhu Bibliographical identification Adamcová I. (2015): Breeding of the European green toad (Bufotes viridis) in urban environment of Olomouc. Bachelor thesis, Department of Ecology and Environmental Sciences, Faculty of Science, Palacky University of Olomouc, 36pp., in Czech.
    [Show full text]
  • Herpetological Review
    Herpetological Review Volume 39, Number 2 — June 2008 SSAR Officers (2008) HERPETOLOGICAL REVIEW President The Quarterly News-Journal of the Society for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles ROY MCDIARMID USGS Patuxent Wildlife Research Center Editor National Museum of Natural History ROBERT W. HANSEN Washington, DC 20560, USA 16333 Deer Path Lane Clovis, California 93619-9735, USA President-elect [email protected] BRIAN CROTHER Department of Biological Sciences Southeastern Louisiana University Associate Editors Hammond, Louisiana 70402, USA ROBERT E. ESPINOZA CHRISTOPHER A. PHILLIPS DEANNA H. OLSON California State University, Northridge Illinois Natural History Survey USDA Forestry Science Lab Secretary MARION R. PREEST ROBERT N. REED MICHAEL S. GRACE R. BRENT THOMAS Joint Science Department USGS Fort Collins Science Center Florida Institute of Technology Emporia State University The Claremont Colleges Claremont, California 91711, USA EMILY N. TAYLOR GUNTHER KÖHLER MEREDITH J. MAHONEY California Polytechnic State University Forschungsinstitut und Illinois State Museum Naturmuseum Senckenberg Treasurer KIRSTEN E. NICHOLSON Section Editors Department of Biology, Brooks 217 Central Michigan University Book Reviews Current Research Current Research Mt. Pleasant, Michigan 48859, USA AARON M. BAUER JOSHUA M. HALE BEN LOWE e-mail: [email protected] Department of Biology Department of Sciences Department of Biology Villanova University MuseumVictoria, GPO Box 666 San Diego State University Publications Secretary Villanova, Pennsylvania 19085, USA Melbourne, Victoria 3001, Australia San Diego, California 92182, USA BRECK BARTHOLOMEW [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] P.O. Box 58517 Geographic Distribution Geographic Distribution Geographic Distribution Salt Lake City, Utah 84158, USA ALAN M. RICHMOND INDRANEIL DAS JERRY D.
    [Show full text]
  • A Subterranean Generalist Predator: Diet of the Soil-Dwelling Caecilian Gegeneophis Ramaswamii (Amphibia; Gymnophiona; Caeciliidae) in Southern India
    C. R. Biologies 327 (2004) 65–76 Ecology / Écologie A subterranean generalist predator: diet of the soil-dwelling caecilian Gegeneophis ramaswamii (Amphibia; Gymnophiona; Caeciliidae) in southern India G. John Measey a,∗,1, David J. Gower a, Oommen V. Oommen b, Mark Wilkinson a a Department of Zoology, The Natural History Museum, Cromwell Road, London, SW7 5BD, UK b Department of Zoology, University of Kerala, Kariavattom, Thiruvananthapuram, India Received 2 September 2003; accepted 4 November 2003 Presented by Jean Rosa Abstract Biologists have paid relatively little attention to subterranean predators, especially their ecology. Although diets of some subterranean lower vertebrates suggest specialisation, there remains a lack of quantitative data. The diet of the caecilian amphibian Gegeneophis ramaswamii was investigated through analyses of gut contents of 67 specimens collected in randomised surveys at three localities in Kerala, southern India, in early and mid-monsoon. Although termites were the most frequently ingested items in the mid-monsoon, the specialist predator hypothesis was rejected because of differences in diet found in early monsoon samples, when earthworms contributed the greatest mass. That guts of some G. ramaswamii contained many individuals of only a single dietary taxon was interpreted as feeding on patchily distributed prey rather than specialisation. No ontogenetic differences in diet were apparent, but more sampling is required to investigate this further. Subadults largely feed on fewer items of the same prey as adults, though there is an indication that subadult diet is less diverse. The data do not support differences between male and female diet. High densities of G. ramaswamii, and perhaps of other terrestrial caecilians and subterranean lower vertebrates feeding on soil-ecosystem engineers (termites, earthworms and ants), might substantially impact soil ecology.
    [Show full text]
  • Standard Symbolic Codes for Institutional Resource Collections in Herpetology and Ichthyology Version 6.5 Compiled by Mark Henry Sabaj, 16 August 2016
    Standard Symbolic Codes for Institutional Resource Collections in Herpetology and Ichthyology Version 6.5 Compiled by Mark Henry Sabaj, 16 August 2016 Citation: Sabaj M.H. 2016. Standard symbolic codes for institutional resource collections in herpetology and ichthyology: an Online Reference. Version 6.5 (16 August 2016). Electronically accessible at http://www.asih.org/, American Society of Ichthyologists and Herpetologists, Washington, DC. Primary sources (all cross-checked): Leviton et al. 1985, Leviton & Gibbs 1988, http://www.asih.org/codons.pdf (originating with John Bruner), Poss & Collette 1995 and Fricke & Eschmeyer 2010 (on-line v. 15 Jan) Additional on-line resources for Biological Collections (cross-check: token) ZEFOD: information system to botanical and zoological http://zefod.genres.de/ research collections in Germany http://www.fishwise.co.za/ Fishwise: Universal Fish Catalog http://species.wikimedia.org/wiki/Holotype Wikispecies, Holotype, directory List of natural history museums, From Wikipedia, the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_natural_history_museums free encyclopedia http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/IEB/ToolBox/C_DOC/lxr/source/data/institution_codes.txt National Center for Biotechnology Information List of museum abbreviations compiled by Darrel R. http://research.amnh.org/vz/herpetology/amphibia/?action=page&page=museum_abbreviations Frost. 2010. Amphibian Species of the World: an Online Reference. BCI: Biological Collections Index (to be key component http://www.biodiversitycollectionsindex.org/static/index.html
    [Show full text]
  • (Gymnophiona: Caeciliidae) in Bolivia
    Short Communication SALAMANDRA 41 1/2 91-94 Rheinbach, 20 May 2005 ISSN 0036-3375 Short Communication Observations on the reproductive ecology of Siphonops paulensis BOETTGER, 1892 (Gymnophiona: Caeciliidae) in Bolivia INKA M ONTERO, STEFFEN R EICHLE & ALEXANDER KUPFER Abstract. Caecilian amphibians show a remarkable diversity of reproductive modes. Due to their secretive lifestyle, basic information on the natural life history of many species is lacking. Here we present the first detailed observations of a clutch of the oviparous caecilian Siphonops paulensis. The clutch, guarded by a female, contained four eggs (mean diameter 7.68 ± 0.32 mm). Two unpigmented hatchlings were recorded after 17 days. The available data on the reproductive biology of South-American Siphonops is discussed. Key words. caecilians; oviparity; reproduction. Caecilians are tropical, limbless, primarily other amphibians (e. g. WAKE 1977). Here, we subterranean amphibians (e. g. DUNN 1942, present data on reproductive parameters for TAYLOR 1968, HIMSTEDT 1996). They show a the oviparous caecilian Siphonops paulensis high diversity of reproductive modes associ- BOETTGER, 1892 from a field site in Bolivia. ated with parental care (WAKE 1977, WILKIN- Siphonops paulensis is a widely distrib- SON & NUSSBAUM 1998). Some caecilians have uted South American caecilian. DUNN (1942) the presumed ancestral amphibian life cycle and later TAYLOR (1968) list records from of oviparity with aquatic larvae, as known for Argentina (San Ignacio), Brazil (Rio Grande many frogs and salamanders (e. g. KUPFER et do Norte, Goiás, Matto Grosso, Rio de Ja- al. 2005). Other oviparous caecilians have neiro, Sao Paulo), Paraguay (Guaira and Vil- direct development of juveniles with no lar- val stage.
    [Show full text]