Frog_leg_11_Aug2004
16
frog leg Newsletter of the Declining Amphibian Populations Task Force - South Asia No. 11, August 2004 Molecular phylogeny of Molecular phylogeny of Molecular phylogeny of Molecular phylogeny of Molecular phylogeny of Indian Anura (Amphibia: Indian Anura (Amphibia: Indian Anura (Amphibia: Indian Anura (Amphibia: Indian Anura (Amphibia: Lissamphibia): a Lissamphibia): a Lissamphibia): a Lissamphibia): a Lissamphibia): a preliminary report preliminary report preliminary report preliminary report preliminary report M.S. Dharne M.S. Dharne M.S. Dharne M.S. Dharne M.S. Dharne 1 , H.V. Ghate , H.V. Ghate , H.V. Ghate , H.V. Ghate , H.V. Ghate 2 2 2 2 2 *, *, *, *, *, A.D. Padhye A.D. Padhye A.D. Padhye A.D. Padhye A.D. Padhye 3 , Y.S. Shouche , Y.S. Shouche , Y.S. Shouche , Y.S. Shouche , Y.S. Shouche 1 1 National Centre for Cell Science, Pune Maharashtra 411007, India. 2 Zoology Department, Modern College, Pune, Maharashtra 411005, India. 3 Zoology Department, Garware College, Pune, Maharashtra 411004, India. * Corresponding author email: [email protected] Anuran amphibians are a problematic group. Most frogs and toads look very similar, in general, as the overall body form is highly conserved. Families such as Ranidae are cosmopolitan and are distributed over most of the suitable habitats of the world but many are species of very restricted distribution. The systematics of this group (especially higher level phylogenetic relationship of Anura) is still incompletely resolved (Emerson et al., 2000) and, until recently, many morphologically similar forms were lumped in to one or few genera. Genus Rana being one such speciose genus that had to be divided into several subgenera and several subgenera had to be elevated to generic rank in recent years. Even today the situation is far from clear as many Asiatic genera and species need to be studied in detail. For example genus Philautus is still problematic and genus Polypedates is included as subgenus of Rhacophorus by some but treated as valid genus by others. Earlier only morphological characters were available to base our phylogenetic interpretation but now the situation has changed. With the advent of PCR amplification technique and automated DNA sequencing facilities, it has become possible to construct “phylogenetic trees” on the basis of similarities/dissimilarities of gene sequences. The use of DNA sequences in anuran systematics is increasingly becoming popular and useful as a phylogenetic tool, as pointed out by Dawood, Channing and Bogart (2002). This analysis provides abundant data (or character states) for inferring phylogeny accurately as morphological data may be affected by adaptive traits or convergent evolution. These kinds of “molecular data” are rapidly being accumulated on the amphibians of different parts the world, as is evident from the sequences of various genes deposited in GenBank. Very few species of the Indian subcontinent have been studied at molecular level so far and hence we have initiated these studies at Pune (Modern College and National Centre for Cell Science, Pune, Maharashtra, India). The purpose of this project is: 1) to test some of the phylogenetic relationships proposed recently among the species of genus Rana sensu Boulenger; 2) to find out if there are any cryptic species, among local amphibians, that are morphologically indistinguishable; 3) to see how many of the recently suggested genera / families form monophyletic groups; and 4) to acquire molecular data for all the available species. It must be emphasized that there are still surprises in store for us as far as Indian frogs are considered, as shown by recent discovery of an interesting frog by Biju and Bossuyt (2003). This frog turned out to be belonging to a new family, and, of course, to a new genus and species! This discovery has further thrown light on our ancient relationship with Seychelles. It is our considered opinion that every effort must be made now to collect molecular, ethological and ecological data for our amphibians, whenever possible. This is not to suggest that morphological data are obsolete, because both, morphological and molecular data have been shown to contain significant phylogenetic information (Emerson et al., 2000) to settle the issues in systematics and that no new classification is proposed without such data. This will improve knowledge of the systematics of our anurans and reduce the burden of names that become synonyms. We agree with Vences and Glaw (2001), who have pointed out problems with respect to systematics of superfamily Ranoidea and suggested that polyphyletic taxa be excluded and at the most a few paraphyletic taxa may be accepted. Our analysis, at present, is based on sequence comparison of a small fragment of mitochondrial 12S rDNA (small subunit of mitochondrial ribosomal RNA gene) among common frogs and toads found in and around Pune. This is only a preliminary report, much analysis remains to be done, and we have tissue samples of at least 25 more species (from different parts of India) at hand that are being sequenced and analysed. We are presenting only a couple of “phylogenetic trees” here and rest of the analysis will be published in a detailed paper. Salient findings of the project Salient findings of the project Salient findings of the project Salient findings of the project Salient findings of the project The genus Fejervarya with species like F. limnocharis, F. rufescens, F. greenii and F. syhadrensis, is a complex group and perhaps many different species are today recognized as Fejervarya limnocharis. Hoplobatrachus is closer to Spheroteca and the various species of Spherotheca, with Hoplobatrachus, form a clade with Euphlyctis cyanophlyctis as a sister species .
description
National Centre for Cell Science, Pune Maharashtra 411007, India. Zoology Department, Modern College, Pune, Maharashtra 411005, India. M.S. DharneM.S.DharneM.S.DharneM.S.DharneM.S.Dharne 11111 , H.V. Ghate,H.V.Ghate,H.V.Ghate,H.V.Ghate,H.V.Ghate 22222 *,*,*,*,*, A.D. PadhyeA.D.PadhyeA.D.PadhyeA.D.PadhyeA.D.Padhye 33333 , Y.S. Shouche,Y.S.Shouche,Y.S.Shouche,Y.S.Shouche, Y.S. Shouche 11111 1 2 3 frog leg 10 0 9 9 9 8 8 5 7 4 6 4 9 9 9 8 5 5 8 2 6 0 8 1 8 2 9 4 5 6 9 2 9 2 9 9 6 0
Transcript of Frog_leg_11_Aug2004
frog legNewsletter of the Declining Amphibian PopulationsTask Force - South AsiaNo. 11, August 2004
Molecular phylogeny ofMolecular phylogeny ofMolecular phylogeny ofMolecular phylogeny ofMolecular phylogeny ofIndian Anura (Amphibia:Indian Anura (Amphibia:Indian Anura (Amphibia:Indian Anura (Amphibia:Indian Anura (Amphibia:Lissamphibia): aLissamphibia): aLissamphibia): aLissamphibia): aLissamphibia): apreliminary reportpreliminary reportpreliminary reportpreliminary reportpreliminary report
M.S. DharneM.S. DharneM.S. DharneM.S. DharneM.S. Dharne11111, H.V. Ghate, H.V. Ghate, H.V. Ghate, H.V. Ghate, H.V. Ghate 2 2 2 2 2*,*,*,*,*,A.D. Padhye A.D. Padhye A.D. Padhye A.D. Padhye A.D. Padhye 33333, Y.S. Shouche , Y.S. Shouche , Y.S. Shouche , Y.S. Shouche , Y.S. Shouche 11111
1 National Centre for Cell Science, PuneMaharashtra 411007, India.
2 Zoology Department, Modern College,Pune, Maharashtra 411005, India.
3 Zoology Department, Garware College,Pune, Maharashtra 411004, India.
* Corresponding author email:[email protected]
Anuran amphibians are aproblematic group. Most frogs andtoads look very similar, in general, asthe overall body form is highlyconserved. Families such as Ranidaeare cosmopolitan and are distributedover most of the suitable habitats of theworld but many are species of veryrestricted distribution. The systematicsof this group (especially higher levelphylogenetic relationship of Anura) is stillincompletely resolved (Emerson et al.,2000) and, until recently, manymorphologically similar forms werelumped in to one or few genera. GenusRana being one such speciose genus thathad to be divided into several subgeneraand several subgenera had to beelevated to generic rank in recent years.Even today the situation is far from clearas many Asiatic genera and speciesneed to be studied in detail. Forexample genus Philautus is stillproblematic and genus Polypedates isincluded as subgenus of Rhacophorusby some but treated as valid genus byothers. Earlier only morphologicalcharacters were available to base ourphylogenetic interpretation but now thesituation has changed. With the adventof PCR amplification technique andautomated DNA sequencing facilities, it
has become possible to construct“phylogenetic trees” on the basis ofsimilarities/dissimilarities of genesequences. The use of DNA sequencesin anuran systematics is increasinglybecoming popular and useful as aphylogenetic tool, as pointed out byDawood, Channing and Bogart (2002).This analysis provides abundant data (orcharacter states) for inferring phylogenyaccurately as morphological data maybe affected by adaptive traits orconvergent evolution. These kinds of“molecular data” are rapidly beingaccumulated on the amphibians ofdifferent parts the world, as is evidentfrom the sequences of various genesdeposited in GenBank. Very few speciesof the Indian subcontinent have beenstudied at molecular level so far andhence we have initiated these studies atPune (Modern College and NationalCentre for Cell Science, Pune,Maharashtra, India). The purpose of thisproject is:1) to test some of the phylogeneticrelationships proposed recently amongthe species of genus Rana sensuBoulenger;2) to find out if there are any crypticspecies, among local amphibians, thatare morphologically indistinguishable; 3)to see how many of the recentlysuggested genera / families formmonophyletic groups; and4) to acquire molecular data for all theavailable species.
It must be emphasized thatthere are still surprises in store for us asfar as Indian frogs are considered, asshown by recent discovery of aninteresting frog by Biju and Bossuyt(2003). This frog turned out to bebelonging to a new family, and, ofcourse, to a new genus and species!This discovery has further thrown lighton our ancient relationship withSeychelles.It is our considered opinion that every
effort must be made now to collectmolecular, ethological and ecologicaldata for our amphibians, wheneverpossible. This is not to suggest thatmorphological data are obsolete,because both, morphological andmolecular data have been shown tocontain significant phylogeneticinformation (Emerson et al., 2000) tosettle the issues in systematics and thatno new classification is proposed withoutsuch data. This will improve knowledgeof the systematics of our anurans andreduce the burden of names thatbecome synonyms. We agree withVences and Glaw (2001), who havepointed out problems with respect tosystematics of superfamily Ranoidea andsuggested that polyphyletic taxa beexcluded and at the most a fewparaphyletic taxa may be accepted.
Our analysis, at present, isbased on sequence comparison of asmall fragment of mitochondrial 12SrDNA (small subunit of mitochondrialribosomal RNA gene) among commonfrogs and toads found in and aroundPune. This is only a preliminary report,much analysis remains to be done, andwe have tissue samples of at least 25more species (from different parts ofIndia) at hand that are being sequencedand analysed. We are presenting only acouple of “phylogenetic trees” here andrest of the analysis will be published ina detailed paper.
Salient findings of the projectSalient findings of the projectSalient findings of the projectSalient findings of the projectSalient findings of the projectThe genus Fejervarya with
species like F. limnocharis, F. rufescens,F. greenii and F. syhadrensis, is acomplex group andperhaps many different species aretoday recognized as Fejervaryalimnocharis. Hoplobatrachus is closerto Spheroteca and the various speciesof Spherotheca, with Hoplobatrachus,form a clade with Euphlyctiscyanophlyctis as a sister species.
frog leg Newsletter of the DAPTF South Asia 2004 August 02
Limnonectes brevipalmata is closer toFejervarya sp. from the northeast. Inshort, Hoplobatrachus, Limnonectes,Fejervarya and Spherotheca as well asEuphlyctis (all formerly under genusRana and now placed in different genera)are grouped in a large clade.Relationship between these generaneeds additional studies. These findingsare more or less similar to those ofMarmayou et al. (2000) who also foundHoplobatrachus chinensis (= rugulosus)and Spherotheca pluvialis forming aclade with Fejervarya limnocharis as asister species. Richards, Nussbaum andRaxworthy (2000) found AfricanHoplobatrachus occipitalis andFejervarya limnocharis to be in one cladewhile Vences et al. (2000) foundFejervarya limnocharis to be sisterspecies to a clade of Sphereothecadobsoni and S. breviceps. With respectto F. greenii, it is believed to be presentin Sri Lanka only. It is necessary now tosee whether morphologically similarspecies found in India is close to true F.greenii or it is a different species orperhaps a variant of F. limnocharis, assuggested by some workers (see Dutta,1997).
Bootstrap support for all theclade/subclades in the group of speciespresented here, as shown in figure, ismostly above 50%. Further, it is clearthat Euphlyctis is also closer toCeratobatrachinae (sensu Dubois,1992) members, as also found byKosuch et al. (2001) and its earlierinclusion in subfamily Dicroglossinae(Marmayou et al., 2000) along with thegenera Phrynoglossus and Occidozyganeeds reconsideration.
All Nyctibatrachus species thatwe analysed are in one clade supportedby high bootstrap score. Inclusion ofavailable GenBank sequences of N.major and N. aliciae indicates that thelatter two are different species ascompared to our group. Nyctibatrachusmajor appears to be a basal species.Nyctibatrachus from Raigad andTamhini-Mulshi are similar and aremorphologically closer to N. major butit appears to be different (at molecularlevel) from the available N. majorsequence. There are perhaps one ortwo cryptic species in this genus. It isalso apparent that the two species ofIndirana are forming separate clade thatis basal to all other Ranidae members.These are not close to Nyctibatrachus
as previously suggested. Thus it wouldbe better to separate these two generaunder Indiraninae and Nyctibatrachinae(rather than in one subfamily Ranixalinaesensu Dubois, 1992), as has beenadopted by Bossuyt and Milinkovitch(2000). Our data are similar to that ofBossuyt and Milinkovitch (2000).
Limnonectes kuhli (sequencefrom GenBank) and L. brevipalmataincluded in this study are widelyseparated in this analysis, as shownearlier by Vences et al. (2000) and L.kuhli is sister to the large groupcontaining Hoplobatrachus, Fejervarya,Spherotheca, Euphlyctis and Limnonectesbrevipalmata (although the bootstrapsupport to this node is below 50%).
Microhylidae are groupedtogether, however Rana malabarica ispresent as a sister to this microhylidgroup in Figure 1. When other Ranasequences available from GenBank areincluded in the analysis and Microhylidaemembers are removed, Ranamalabarica groups with other Ranaspecies. Nyctibatrachus species are thengrouped with Rana members in a clade(Figure 2).
Bufo scaber, B. stomaticus andB. melanostictus form one clade, similarlyPolypedates leucomystax and P.maculatus form one clade, as expected.We are using the name Polypedatesinstead of Rhacophorus as used byWilkinson et al. (2002). Indotyphlus orBufo species were used as an outgroup.Traditional Rhacophoridae has been nowconsidered as subfamily Rhacophorinaeof family Ranidae (see Dubois, 1992),though there is no unanimity about thisplacement. More species are necessaryto resolve this problem.
When African species of thegenus Tomopterna sensu stricto (assuggested by Marmayou et al., 2000)are included (using GenBank sequences)in the analysis (data not shown here),these species form a separatemonophyletic clade supporting thecontention of other workers (Vences etal., 2000) that genus Tomopterna (aspreviously recognized) should be splitto different genera. It is also certain thatthe Asian genus Spherotheca (alsoformerly treated as Tomopterna) is atotally different group with only similarmorphological features and habits.
We feel that phylogeny workinvolving “Fejervarya –Limnonectescomplex” of species will be a challenging
task and much more material fromdifferent parts of the Indian subcontinentand Asia will have to be studied. It isalso apparent that species Fejervaryalimnocharis, as presently recognized, isperhaps a complex of many species /subspecies spread over entire Asia.Sumida et al. (2002), who have veryrecently analysed limnocharispopulations from different islands ofJapan and Taiwan, are of the opinionthat- “…hereafter it will be necessary tobring together all aspects of thesystematics of R. limnocharis complexwidely distributed in Southeast Asia, andto comprehensively elucidate thephylogenetic relationships andevolutionary processes among themusing various techniques such asmorphological and ecologicalobservations, karyotype and allozymeanalysis, molecular DNA sequenceanalysis and crossing experiments..”
We thank our Institutions forfacilities and encouragement. We alsothank Dr. S.K. Dutta (Utkal University,Bhubaneshwar) and Dr. M.S.Ravichandran (ZSI, Chennai) who helpedsorting some out taxonomical problems.Thanks are also due to Mr. Vivek Gour-Broome for sharing his experience andrelevant data with respect to the localamphibians. We also thank Dr. FrankyBossuyt for encouragement and forpointing some errors that could now becorrected at proofs stage.
Materials and MethodsMaterials and MethodsMaterials and MethodsMaterials and MethodsMaterials and MethodsHigh Molecular weight genomic
DNA was extracted from the crushedand powdered muscle and liver tissuesor even toe-clips according to standardmethods (Sambrook et al., 1989).Mitochondrial 12 S rDNA was partiallyamplified (380 bp) using the vertebrateuniversal primers UniL1091 UniL1091 UniL1091 UniL1091 UniL1091 andUniH1478 UniH1478 UniH1478 UniH1478 UniH1478 (Kocher et al., 1989).Amplification reactions were performedin PTC-200 MJR. For 25 ìl of reaction,conditions followed were: 940Cdenaturation for 1 min, 550C annealingfor 1 min and 720C extension for 1 min,for 35 cycles. Positive PCR productswere checked by agarose gelelectrophoresis. PCR products werepurified by PEG-NaCl protocol (20%PEGand 2.5mM NaCl).
The purified DNA samples weresequenced for 430 bp region, using ABI310 DNA sequencer by capillaryelectrophoresis as per manufacturer’s
frog leg Newsletter of the DAPTF South Asia 2004 August 03
Fejervarya limnocharis B Fejervarya limnocharis tadpole
Fejervarya limnocharis A Fejervarya limnocharis Raigad Fejervarya rufescens Satara Fejervarya rufescence Limnonectes brevipalmata Satara Fejervarya sp. Northeast Fejervarya syhadrensis Mulshi Fejervarya ?greenii Satara Euphlyctis cyanophlyctis tad Euphlyctis cyanophlyctis liv Sphaerotheca dobsoni Mulshi
Sphaeroteca cf. dobsoni Raigad Sphaeroteca cf. breviceps Satara Hoplobatrachus crassus Sphaeroteca breviceps Sarole
Nyctibactrachus humayuni Satara Nyctibatrachus sp. Castle Rock Nyctibatrachus sp.Tamhini Nyctibatrachus sp. Raigad Indirana leithii Helwak
Indirana beddomii Satara Rana malabarica Raigad
Uperodon globulosus Jambhe
Microhyla ornata Jambhe Microhyla sp. NE nr. Kaziranga Bufo scaber Kerala
Bufo stomaticus Jambhe Bufo melanostictus Bufo melanostictus Patan Polypedates leucomystax nr. Kaziranga
Polypedates maculatus Jambhe Indotyphlus battersbyi Helwak
99
74
92
100
100
100
64
100
92
100
100
58
100
99
99
98
98
94
85
55
82
82
60
81
60
56
Figure 1: A strict consensus neighbor-joining tree drawn by MEGA VERSION 2.1, showing the relationshipFigure 1: A strict consensus neighbor-joining tree drawn by MEGA VERSION 2.1, showing the relationshipFigure 1: A strict consensus neighbor-joining tree drawn by MEGA VERSION 2.1, showing the relationshipFigure 1: A strict consensus neighbor-joining tree drawn by MEGA VERSION 2.1, showing the relationshipFigure 1: A strict consensus neighbor-joining tree drawn by MEGA VERSION 2.1, showing the relationshipbetween Rhacophoridae, Ranidae, Microhylidae and Bufonidae, withbetween Rhacophoridae, Ranidae, Microhylidae and Bufonidae, withbetween Rhacophoridae, Ranidae, Microhylidae and Bufonidae, withbetween Rhacophoridae, Ranidae, Microhylidae and Bufonidae, withbetween Rhacophoridae, Ranidae, Microhylidae and Bufonidae, with Indotyphlus Indotyphlus Indotyphlus Indotyphlus Indotyphlus spspspspsp. . . . . as outgroupas outgroupas outgroupas outgroupas outgroup
frog leg Newsletter of the DAPTF South Asia 2004 August 04
Fejervarya syhadrensis Fejervarya ?greenii AY141797 Fejervarya syhadrensis
Fejervarya sp. (Northeast) Limnonectes brevipalmata
Fejervarya rufescence (Raigad) Fejervarya limnocharis A
Fejervarya limnocharis (Raigad) Fejervarya limnocharis B
AF205549 Limnonectes limnocharis AF215210 Fejervarya limnocharis
Euphlyctis cyanophlyctis AF205554 Hoplobatrachus rugulosus
AF261245 Hoplobatrachus occipitalis AF215211 Sphaeroteca pluvialis
AF215212 Sphaeroteca dobsoni Sphaeroteca dobsoni Sphaeroteca cf. dobsoni (Raigad)
Sphaeroteca breviceps Hoplobatrachus crassus Sphaeroteca breviceps
AF215209 L. kuhlii Nyctibatrachus sp. (Raigad)
Nyctibatrachus sp. (Tamhini/Mulshi) Nyctibatrachus sp. (Castle Rock)
Nyctibatrachus humayuni AF249018 Nyctibatrachus aliciae
AF249017 Nyctibatrachus major AF161035 Rana taipehensis
Rana malabarica AF249022 Rana temporalis
AF249021 Rana curtipes AF205565 Rana livida
AY043045 Rana arvalis AF249023 Rana temporaria
Indirana leithi Indirana beddomei
Bufo stomatictus (Jambhe) Bufo melanostictus (Patan)
Bufo scaber (Kerala)
100
100
35
100
100
100
81
100
91
87
56
52
90
63
83
97
94
75
83
100
65
93
68
87
38
79
46
56
56
37
60
41
53
74
37
38
47
0.05
Figure 2: Phylogenetic relationship drawn using Jukes-Cantor parameter, indicating the relationship amongFigure 2: Phylogenetic relationship drawn using Jukes-Cantor parameter, indicating the relationship amongFigure 2: Phylogenetic relationship drawn using Jukes-Cantor parameter, indicating the relationship amongFigure 2: Phylogenetic relationship drawn using Jukes-Cantor parameter, indicating the relationship amongFigure 2: Phylogenetic relationship drawn using Jukes-Cantor parameter, indicating the relationship amongIndian Anura using 12 S rRNA gene as a molecular marker, supported with bootstrap values ranging from 35Indian Anura using 12 S rRNA gene as a molecular marker, supported with bootstrap values ranging from 35Indian Anura using 12 S rRNA gene as a molecular marker, supported with bootstrap values ranging from 35Indian Anura using 12 S rRNA gene as a molecular marker, supported with bootstrap values ranging from 35Indian Anura using 12 S rRNA gene as a molecular marker, supported with bootstrap values ranging from 35to 100, outgroup to 100, outgroup to 100, outgroup to 100, outgroup to 100, outgroup BufoBufoBufoBufoBufo.....
frog leg Newsletter of the DAPTF South Asia 2004 August
instructions. The sequencing reactions were performed usingUniL 1091 primer on PE Gene Amp 9700 PCR machine.The conditions were 960C denaturation for 10sec, 500Cannealing for 5 sec and 600C extension for 4 sec usingfluorescent dye labeled nucleotides.
Sequences obtained were analyzed for closesthomology database search by standard BLAST searchprovided by NCBI (http:/www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/blast). Thesequences are being deposited in GenBank. The sequenceswere primarily aligned with default parameters of CLUSTALW online software (http:/www.ebi.ac.uk). All taxa (Transitionand Transversion) were weighted uniformly in the analysis.
Phylogenetic relationship among investigated taxawere analyzed by using Neighbor-Joining (NJ) method asdescribed by Kumar et al., (2001), using the MEGA Version2.1 (Molecular Evolutionary Genetic Analysis), in which geneticdistance was measured by Jukes-Cantor (JC) model.
ReferencesReferencesReferencesReferencesReferencesBiju, S.D. and Bossuyt, F. (2003). Biju, S.D. and Bossuyt, F. (2003). Biju, S.D. and Bossuyt, F. (2003). Biju, S.D. and Bossuyt, F. (2003). Biju, S.D. and Bossuyt, F. (2003). New frog family from India revealsan ancient biogeographical link with the Seychelles. Nature 425: 711–714Bossuyt, F. & M.C. Milinkovitch (2000).Bossuyt, F. & M.C. Milinkovitch (2000).Bossuyt, F. & M.C. Milinkovitch (2000).Bossuyt, F. & M.C. Milinkovitch (2000).Bossuyt, F. & M.C. Milinkovitch (2000). Convergent adaptiveradiations in Madagascan and Asian Ranid frogs reveal covariation betweenlarval and adult traits. Proceeding of National Academy of Science, USA. 97:6585-6590Dawood, A., A. Channing & J.P. Bogart (2001).Dawood, A., A. Channing & J.P. Bogart (2001).Dawood, A., A. Channing & J.P. Bogart (2001).Dawood, A., A. Channing & J.P. Bogart (2001).Dawood, A., A. Channing & J.P. Bogart (2001). A molecularphylogeny of the frog genus Tomopterna in southern Africa: Examiningspecies boundaries with mitochondrial 12S rRNA sequence data. MolecularPhylogenetics and Evolution 22: 407-413.Dutta, S.K. (1997). Dutta, S.K. (1997). Dutta, S.K. (1997). Dutta, S.K. (1997). Dutta, S.K. (1997). Amphibians of India and Sri Lanka. Odyssey PublishingHouse, Bhubaneswar, Orissa.Dubois, A. (1992).Dubois, A. (1992).Dubois, A. (1992).Dubois, A. (1992).Dubois, A. (1992). Notes sur la classification des Ranidae (AmphibiensAnoures). Extrait du Bulletin Mensuel de la Societe Linneenne de Lyon 61:::::305-352.Emerson, S., C. Richards, R.C. Drewes & K.M. Kjer (2000).Emerson, S., C. Richards, R.C. Drewes & K.M. Kjer (2000).Emerson, S., C. Richards, R.C. Drewes & K.M. Kjer (2000).Emerson, S., C. Richards, R.C. Drewes & K.M. Kjer (2000).Emerson, S., C. Richards, R.C. Drewes & K.M. Kjer (2000). On therelationship among Ranoid frogs: A review of the evidence. Herpetologica56: 209-230.Kocher, T.D., W.K. Thomas, A. Meyer, S.V. Edwards, S.F. Paabo,Kocher, T.D., W.K. Thomas, A. Meyer, S.V. Edwards, S.F. Paabo,Kocher, T.D., W.K. Thomas, A. Meyer, S.V. Edwards, S.F. Paabo,Kocher, T.D., W.K. Thomas, A. Meyer, S.V. Edwards, S.F. Paabo,Kocher, T.D., W.K. Thomas, A. Meyer, S.V. Edwards, S.F. Paabo,S.F. Villablanca & A. Wilson (1989S.F. Villablanca & A. Wilson (1989S.F. Villablanca & A. Wilson (1989S.F. Villablanca & A. Wilson (1989S.F. Villablanca & A. Wilson (1989). Dynamics of Mitochondrial DNAevolution in animals: amplification and sequencing with conserved primers.Proceeding of National Academy of Science, USA. 86: 6196-6200Kosuch, J., M. Vences, A. Dubois, A. Ohler & W. Bohmer (2001Kosuch, J., M. Vences, A. Dubois, A. Ohler & W. Bohmer (2001Kosuch, J., M. Vences, A. Dubois, A. Ohler & W. Bohmer (2001Kosuch, J., M. Vences, A. Dubois, A. Ohler & W. Bohmer (2001Kosuch, J., M. Vences, A. Dubois, A. Ohler & W. Bohmer (2001).Out of Asia: Mitochondrial DNA evidence for an Oriental origin of tigerfrogs, genus Hoplobatrachus. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 21:398-407Kumar, S., K. Tamura, I.B. Jakobsen & M. Nei (2001Kumar, S., K. Tamura, I.B. Jakobsen & M. Nei (2001Kumar, S., K. Tamura, I.B. Jakobsen & M. Nei (2001Kumar, S., K. Tamura, I.B. Jakobsen & M. Nei (2001Kumar, S., K. Tamura, I.B. Jakobsen & M. Nei (2001). MEGA2:Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis Software, BioinformaticsMarmayou, J., A. Dubois, A. Ohler, E. Pasquet & A. Tillier (2000Marmayou, J., A. Dubois, A. Ohler, E. Pasquet & A. Tillier (2000Marmayou, J., A. Dubois, A. Ohler, E. Pasquet & A. Tillier (2000Marmayou, J., A. Dubois, A. Ohler, E. Pasquet & A. Tillier (2000Marmayou, J., A. Dubois, A. Ohler, E. Pasquet & A. Tillier (2000).Compte Rendu Academie de Sciences, Paris., Sciences de la vie, 323::::: 287-297Richards, C., R.A. Nussbaum & C.J. Raxworthy (2000Richards, C., R.A. Nussbaum & C.J. Raxworthy (2000Richards, C., R.A. Nussbaum & C.J. Raxworthy (2000Richards, C., R.A. Nussbaum & C.J. Raxworthy (2000Richards, C., R.A. Nussbaum & C.J. Raxworthy (2000). Phylogeneticrelationships within the Madagascan boophids and mantellids as elucidatedby mitochondrial ribosomal genes. African Journal of Herpetology 49: 23-32.Sambrook, J., E.F. Fritsch & T. Maniatis (1989). Sambrook, J., E.F. Fritsch & T. Maniatis (1989). Sambrook, J., E.F. Fritsch & T. Maniatis (1989). Sambrook, J., E.F. Fritsch & T. Maniatis (1989). Sambrook, J., E.F. Fritsch & T. Maniatis (1989). Molecular Cloning:A laboratory manual. Cold Spring Harbor, New York.Vences, M., F. Glaw, J. Kosuch, I. Das & M. Veith (2000Vences, M., F. Glaw, J. Kosuch, I. Das & M. Veith (2000Vences, M., F. Glaw, J. Kosuch, I. Das & M. Veith (2000Vences, M., F. Glaw, J. Kosuch, I. Das & M. Veith (2000Vences, M., F. Glaw, J. Kosuch, I. Das & M. Veith (2000). Polyphylyof Tomopterna (Amphibia:Ranidae)based on sequences of mitochondrial 16Sand 12S rRNA genes, and ecological biogeography of Malagasy relictamphibian groups. Diversite et Endemisme a Madagaskar, pp. 229-242. In:Lourenco, W.R. & S.M. Goodman (Eds.). Memoires de la Societe deBiogeographie. Paris.Vences, M. & F. Glaw (2001).Vences, M. & F. Glaw (2001).Vences, M. & F. Glaw (2001).Vences, M. & F. Glaw (2001).Vences, M. & F. Glaw (2001). When molecules claim for taxonomicchanges: New proposals on the classification of Old World treefrogs. Spixiana24: 85-92Wilkinson, J.A., R.C. Drewes & O.L. Tatum (2002). Wilkinson, J.A., R.C. Drewes & O.L. Tatum (2002). Wilkinson, J.A., R.C. Drewes & O.L. Tatum (2002). Wilkinson, J.A., R.C. Drewes & O.L. Tatum (2002). Wilkinson, J.A., R.C. Drewes & O.L. Tatum (2002). A molecularphylogenetic analysis of the family Rhacophoridae with an emphasis on theAsian and African genera. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 24::::: 265-273.
2002 CAMP-GAA Report2002 CAMP-GAA Report2002 CAMP-GAA Report2002 CAMP-GAA Report2002 CAMP-GAA Report
The much-awaited Report on the status of amphibiansof South Asia as worked out in the Conservation As-sessment and Management Plan Workshop and GlobalAmphibian Assessment in July 2002 is to be launchedsoon in September 2004. The delay in the assess-ments have been due to the continuing confusion inamphibian taxonomy. This is hopefully resolved to someextent, but no surprises if it adds to more confusion,given the various sources and styles of species identi-fication in the region and the overwhelming influenceof foreign experts with specimens for comparison.
The Report will be in two forms -- the global perspec-tive from GAA, which will have an analysis of the statusof all amphibians of the World. The CAMP Report willhave a regional focus with global assessments of en-demic amphibians of the region and regional and na-tional assessments for all the South Asian countries ofamphibians with wider distribution.
Also to expect in these reports are a plethora of newspecies assessments, some of them yet formallyundescribed.
Some salient features of the South Asian AmphibianCAMP Report will include:1. Species assessments of all the described amphib-ians of the region according to the 2001 IUCN Red ListCriteria and Categories.2. Distribution information3. Threats4. Approximate range and area of occupancy5. Synonyms6. Distribution maps7. Conservation measures / recommendations8. Global status of endemic species9. Regional status in South Asia10. National status within each South Asian country.
F R O G L E GF R O G L E GF R O G L E GF R O G L E GF R O G L E Gis now available online at
www.zoosprint.orgwww.zoosprint.orgwww.zoosprint.orgwww.zoosprint.orgwww.zoosprint.org
along with all other taxonomic network newslettersand monthly publications of Zoos' Print Magazineand Zoos' Print Journal, published by Zoo OutreachOrganisation and Wildlife Information & Liaison
Development Society, Coimbatore.
05
frog leg Newsletter of the DAPTF South Asia 2004 August 06
Some Field TechniquesSome Field TechniquesSome Field TechniquesSome Field TechniquesSome Field Techniquesand Sampling Methods forand Sampling Methods forand Sampling Methods forand Sampling Methods forand Sampling Methods forAmphibiansAmphibiansAmphibiansAmphibiansAmphibians
Anslem de SilvaAnslem de SilvaAnslem de SilvaAnslem de SilvaAnslem de SilvaChair, DAPTF, Working group, Sri Lanka
Convener, CBSG Sri Lanka Net [email protected]
This handout was preparedfor the “Amphibian Hands-on Training”workshop at Thrissur, Kerala from 24to 28 June, 2002. All techniques andsampling methods are collated fromvarious books and papers on fieldtechniques and sampling methods (seereferences), except the canopytechnique, which the author carried outfor one year at Horton PlainsEcosystem (a 3000-odd-hectarecloud forest at 2100m asl in Sri Lanka).It was felt that access to some paperslisted may be difficult for Asianstudents to find. However, interestedstudents can consult a few books,especially Measuring and monitoringbiological diversity: standard methodsfor amphibians by Ronald Heyer et al.(1994), Sampling amphibians in lentichabitats by Deanna Olson et al. (1997)and Herpetofauna workers’ manual byTony Gent and S. Gibson.
Few important tipsFew important tipsFew important tipsFew important tipsFew important tipsBefore commencing a field study firstattend to the following:1. Check for the ownership of theland you intend studying. If itbelongs to the Department ofWildlife, Forestry, Companyplantation or private sector, obtainapprovals to carry out your project.State the names of the participantsand their address, dates and timesyou will conduct the study.2. Inquire from watchers and peoplearound the study area you wish toconduct the study for possible trapguns, unprotected wells and wildanimals (wild elephants, leopardsetc).3. Obtain relevant maps of the studyarea (e.g. contour, vegetation, soiletc).4. If it is a short term study, checkfor the best season for theamphibians in the area you wish tostudy.5. Laminate keys that you will use inthe field (e.g. Gosner’s scale ofstaging anuran larvae).
6. Print or duplicate the surveyforms according to the number ofplots, transects you wish to conduct.Duplicate a few extra copies whichcould be attached along with thefinal report.
Basic items requiredBasic items requiredBasic items requiredBasic items requiredBasic items requiredSome basic items required by a fieldresearcher:1. Wellingtons or high boots for theentire team.2. Powerful head lamps or torchesfor the entire team.3. A good camera with a flash andclose up lenses, tripod and otheraccessories.4. Snake sticks and probing sticks -These could be home made orimported.5. Dip-net.6. Preservatives with relevantcontainers.
The following items could becarried in the multiple pocket field kitsworn by professional cameramen. Ifind this jacket very useful andconvenient which could carry all thefollowing items.1. A GPS with an altimeter. If a GPSis not available include a compassand an altimeter2. Hygrometer to measure the Rh.3. Thermometer to record the airtemperature4. Gastric canula for stomachflushing5. Litmus paper for quickassessment of pH6. Measuring tapes (in millimeters)7. Collecting bags8. A pocket knife9. Pen and pencil10. Rubber bands11. Field note book12. Plastic rain cape13. Empty film cans for fragilespecimens (gastrapod shells)14. Strong nylon rope (5 to 10meters).15. Field water bottle.16. First aid items such as abandage, medicated plaster,antiseptic with cotton wool and a fewparacetamol tablets.
Steps in designing a studySteps in designing a studySteps in designing a studySteps in designing a studySteps in designing a study1. Define the goals of the study*2. Select the study area3. Select a suitable protocol formeeting the study goals
4. Select specific survey sites withinthe study area5. Determine what data will becollected at each site6. Determine what data analyses willbe used to be sure the study designand survey protocol will provide thenecessary data7. Assemble and train field workers8. Conduct the field work9. Analyze the data10. Prepare and distribute the finalreport11. Publish results in a peer-reviewed journal*(Is the goal to determine whatamphibians occur in an area to measuretheir relative abundances, or to estimatethe population size?)
Species presence is the mostfundamental information that can begained from a biological survey.
Relative abundance is the mostcommonly used measure of amphibianabundance. Abundance can becalculated in reference to either time,area, or effort (e.g. number of trapsper night) for example, visualencounter surveys for amphibianlarvae results in an index of individualsper hour for each species found [e.g30 adult Common Hour-glass Tree-frogs (Polypedates cruciger) per hour].Area-constrained surveys result in anindex of individuals per area searched(e.g. 23 larval Limnonectes per 10m2).Sometimes the time spent searching ispredominated and the technique isreferred to as a time constrainedsurvey·
Determination of populationsize is difficult and is normally doneonly as part of a detailed researchinvolving a single species or a fewecologically similar species occupyinga specific site (e.g. frogs and newts ina signal pond). To estimate populationsize, individual amphibians are usuallymarked, released, and recaptured.Several statistical models can be usedto estimate population size based onthe population of marked andunmarked individuals in subsequentsamples (Donnelly & Guyer, 1994).
The study areaThe study areaThe study areaThe study areaThe study areaThe study area must be clearly
delineated. There are three basicways to define the study area: bywatershed, by management area, and
frog leg Newsletter of the DAPTF South Asia 2004 August 07
by the habitat or range of a species.
Species habitat or rangeSpecies habitat or rangeSpecies habitat or rangeSpecies habitat or rangeSpecies habitat or rangeThis type of survey focuses on
an individual species, typically onewhich is listed or believed to be rare.A single species survey would includeall suitable habitats for that specieswithin either the entire geographicrange or an area of interest such as aNational Forest or a State Park.
Complete surveyComplete surveyComplete surveyComplete surveyComplete surveyComplete surveys conducted
in a naturally defined area (e.g. awatershed) provide the bestinformation on the population status ofamphibians, especially if the studyarea has boundaries which are barriersto dispersal. A complete surveyincludes all aquatic habitats within thestudy area, e.g., the entire length ofall streams and rivers, and all ponds,lakes, and meadows.
Some survey methodsSome survey methodsSome survey methodsSome survey methodsSome survey methods1. Visual encounter surveys (VES):
The field researchers walkthrough the study site for a prescribedtime period, systematically searchingfor amphibians.
2. Audio strip transects (AST):All calling frogs along a line
transect is counted.
3. Transect sampling:Transect sampling is ideal for
studying elevational gradients fromlowlands to uplands depending on thearea of the study site. Mark thetransects on the map (of the studyarea) so that it will cover most of theimportant vegetation and aquatichabitats. Five plots, a 100m x 6meach, leaving a gap of 50 to 100mshould be used as a transect.
4. Quadrate sampling of forest floorfrogs:
This simple technique byAllmon (1991), Jaeger & lnger (1994)is a widely used and acceptedtechnique conducted in many parts ofthe world in assessing the forest litterfrogs. A barrier is made of plasticnetting measuring 5mx5m and 45cmhigh, and it is erected using metal rods(50cm long). Care should be taken notto walk inside the quadrate whileerecting the netting.
Two or three persons, usuallyon their hands and knees, removeleaf-litter, logs, and boulders;approximately 3-4cm of the soil ischecked for fosserial amphibians andtheir eggs, using standard gardeningtools. One observer checks for animalsattempting to escape.
The altitude in meters andother environmental data within thequadrate is recorded; relative humidity1.5m above the ground inside thequadrate, air temperature (1.5mabove the ground), and soiltemperature in centigrade 1cm insidethe soil is recorded as well.
The moisture content of thelitter in the centre of the quadrate ismeasured by collecting all the leaf-litter within an area of 652 cm2. Theleaf-litter has to be collected from thecentre of the plot into a polythene bag,which should be immediately tiedsecurely with a rubber band to preventmoisture escaping and weighed. Alabel with the plot number is pastedon the bag. The litter emptied into ametal container should be placedinside an oven. The temperatureshould be raised to 150
o C . The ovenis then switched off to allow gradualcooling. The dried litter is transferredinto the same bag and re-weighed. Thelitter moisture content is calculated bysubtracting the moisture content of thedried mass from the wet mass.
5. A Modified Drift Fence For CapturingTree frogs:
Drift Fences have becomestandard equipment for catchingamphibians, and their use has becomecentral to studies on demography,population dynamics, and behavior ofamphibians.
The fence consists of a supportstructure made of PVC pipes and nylonstrings and a flexible barrier made ofclear, roll plastic.
6. Canopy sampling:Very few canopy studies have
been conducted in Asia. The presentmethod I used in my study at HertonPlains National Park (HPNP) wasdevised to check canopy and tree holeamphibian species.
i) A 10x10 meter quadrate wasdemarcated using a yellow nylon cord.A cluster of ten to fifty plots should be
assessed 100m. apart.ii) Two people climbed andinvestigated trees over 50cm dbhinside this quadrate. They checkedthe: a) crevices, b) tree holes, c)mossand ferns that grow on the trunk andbranches and d) the canopy. Thesecond person on the ground checkedthe loose bark of the trunk up to eyelevel and stays alert to catch any animalfalling/jumping from the canopy.iii) Specially made wire probes wereused to check the tree holes. If a frogwas present in a tree hole thedimensions of the tree hole was takenusing a Holtain steel spring tape, andthe height from the ground. If waterwas present the Ph was taken.
7. Patch sampling:Amphibians are often found in
specific microhabitats or patches suchas underneath logs, tree holes andbromeliads. Patch sampling can beused to determine the number,relative abundances and densities insuch patches.
8. Sampling at breeding sites:Some species are common at
breeding ponds and other waterbodies. Data on the sex ratio, sizesand patterns could be collected at suchsites.
9. Sampling of amphibian larvae:There are many techniques of
sampling anuran larvae: live seining,dip-net and the use of a bucket. Ifound seining smaller ponds to beeffective and easy.
Additional tips for field workersAdditional tips for field workersAdditional tips for field workersAdditional tips for field workersAdditional tips for field workers1. Method for measuring caeciliansand salamanders in the field:
Caecilians and salamandersare difficult to measure in the field asthey are slimy and because of theirsinuous movements. Hence thefollowing simple home madeapparatus will help a field worker tomeasure these amphibians accurately.A transparent 2mm thick Plexiglas(Perspex) (30 x 15cm), a base plate32 x 15cm on which a sponge (sheet)1.5cm thick and 29 x 13cm pasted orfixed. The Plexiglas is attached withhinges. When measuring a caecilian ora salamander, the animal is kept onthe inner surface of the Plexiglas.Moisten the Plexiglas before keeping
frog leg Newsletter of the DAPTF South Asia 2004 August 08
the animal). Immediately cover thespecimen with the sponge surfacedplate. The stop bolts prevent the fullweight of the cover pressing on theanimal. Measurements, photograph-ing and other observations could beconducted without handling andharming the animal.
2. Staging anuran embryos and larvae:The widely used key for
staging anuran tadpoles is theGosner’s (1960) scale. I laminate thisfor use in the field.
3. Single hand restraining a frog ortoad:
Hold the knee joint firmlybetween thumb and forefinger.
4. Marking techniques:i. Toe clippingii. Tattooingiii. Waistbandsiv. Photographic records of dorsalpatterns
5. Stomach flushing:The flushing apparatus
consists of a syringe to which flexibletubing or a gastric canula is fixed. Thefrogs could be anesthetized usingaqueous solution of tricainemethanesulfonate (1 g/l). However, Iprefer not to anesthetize the animal.
Voucher specimenVoucher specimenVoucher specimenVoucher specimenVoucher specimenFixation and preservation:
Voucher specimen should beinitially kept in proper positions so thatit could be studied easily, fingers andtoes extended so that webbing isdistinct. Most specimens in majormuseums are initially preserved in 10%formalin and later transferred toethanol. However, to preventpostmortem decomposition of softamphibian tissues; and for rapidfixation the SSAR recommendsformalin-alcohol-acetic acid (FAA)solution. Mix 10 parts of commercial(40%) formalin, 50 parts 95% alcohol(ethyl or isopropyl), 40 parts water and2 parts glacial acetic acid (the aceticacid should be added just before useas it evaporates).
Tissue samples:One or two toe tips are
sufficient for mitochondrial DNAanalysis.
Photographic vouchers:Good colour photographs of
the dorsal, ventral and lateral aspectincluding the fingers and toes withwebbing, could be used as a voucherif the authorities do not allowpreservation of the specimens.
Some Recommended ReferencesSome Recommended ReferencesSome Recommended ReferencesSome Recommended ReferencesSome Recommended References
Allmon, W.D. (1991). Allmon, W.D. (1991). Allmon, W.D. (1991). Allmon, W.D. (1991). Allmon, W.D. (1991). A plot study of forestfloor frogs, Central Amazon, Brazil. Journal ofTropical Ecology 7: 503-522.Burke, R.L. & S.R. Humphrey (1987).Burke, R.L. & S.R. Humphrey (1987).Burke, R.L. & S.R. Humphrey (1987).Burke, R.L. & S.R. Humphrey (1987).Burke, R.L. & S.R. Humphrey (1987).Rarity as a criterion for endangerment inFlorida’s fauna. Oryx 21(2): 97-102.Burke, R.L. (1991).Burke, R.L. (1991).Burke, R.L. (1991).Burke, R.L. (1991).Burke, R.L. (1991). Relocations,repatriations and translocations of amphibiansand reptiles: taking a broader view.Herpetologica 47(3): 350-357.Bury, R.B. & P.S. Corn (1991). Bury, R.B. & P.S. Corn (1991). Bury, R.B. & P.S. Corn (1991). Bury, R.B. & P.S. Corn (1991). Bury, R.B. & P.S. Corn (1991). Samplingmethods for amphibians in streams in thePacific Northwest. United States Department ofAgriculture, 29pp.Donnelly M.A. & C. Guyer (1994).Donnelly M.A. & C. Guyer (1994).Donnelly M.A. & C. Guyer (1994).Donnelly M.A. & C. Guyer (1994).Donnelly M.A. & C. Guyer (1994). Mark-recapture, pp.183-200. In: Heyer et alMeasuring and Monitoring Biological Diversity:Standard Methods for Amphibians. SmithsonianInstitution Press.Fellers, G.M. & K.L. Freel (1995).Fellers, G.M. & K.L. Freel (1995).Fellers, G.M. & K.L. Freel (1995).Fellers, G.M. & K.L. Freel (1995).Fellers, G.M. & K.L. Freel (1995). Astandard protocol for surveying aquaticamphibians. United States Department of theInterior, 117pp.French, D.D. (1994).French, D.D. (1994).French, D.D. (1994).French, D.D. (1994).French, D.D. (1994). Hierarchical richnessindex (HRI): a simple procedure for scoring‘richness’, for use with grouped data. BiologicalConservation 69: 207-212.Gent, T. & S. Gibson (1998).Gent, T. & S. Gibson (1998).Gent, T. & S. Gibson (1998).Gent, T. & S. Gibson (1998).Gent, T. & S. Gibson (1998). Herpetofaunaworkers’ manual. Peterborough, Joint NatureConservation Committee 152pp.....Gosner, K.L. (1960). Gosner, K.L. (1960). Gosner, K.L. (1960). Gosner, K.L. (1960). Gosner, K.L. (1960). A simplified table forstaging anuran embryos and larvae with noteson identification. Herpetologica 16: 183-190.Jaeger, R.G. & R.F. lnger (1994). Jaeger, R.G. & R.F. lnger (1994). Jaeger, R.G. & R.F. lnger (1994). Jaeger, R.G. & R.F. lnger (1994). Jaeger, R.G. & R.F. lnger (1994). Quadratesampling, pp. 97-102. In: Measuring andMonitoring Biological Diversity: StandardMethods for Amphibians.Heyer, W.A. Heyer, W.A. Heyer, W.A. Heyer, W.A. Heyer, W.A. et al.et al.et al.et al.et al. (Eds.) (Eds.) (Eds.) (Eds.) (Eds.) Measuring andMonitoring Biological Diversity: StandardMethods for Amphibians. SmithsonianInstitute, USA.Leclerc, J. & D. Courtois (1993).Leclerc, J. & D. Courtois (1993).Leclerc, J. & D. Courtois (1993).Leclerc, J. & D. Courtois (1993).Leclerc, J. & D. Courtois (1993). A simplestomach flushing method for ranid frogs.Herpetological review. 24(4): 142-143.Magurran, A.E. (1998)Magurran, A.E. (1998)Magurran, A.E. (1998)Magurran, A.E. (1998)Magurran, A.E. (1998) Ecological diversityand its measurement. Croom Helm Limited,London, 179pp.Murphy, C.G. (1993).Murphy, C.G. (1993).Murphy, C.G. (1993).Murphy, C.G. (1993).Murphy, C.G. (1993). A modified drift fencefor capturing tree frogs. Herpetological review.24(4): 143-145Olson D.H., W.P. Leonard & R.B. BuryOlson D.H., W.P. Leonard & R.B. BuryOlson D.H., W.P. Leonard & R.B. BuryOlson D.H., W.P. Leonard & R.B. BuryOlson D.H., W.P. Leonard & R.B. Bury(1997).(1997).(1997).(1997).(1997). Sampling amphibians in lentic habitats:methods and approaches for the PacificNorthwest. Society for Northwest vertebrateBiology, Olympia, Washington, 134pp.Pisani G.R. (1973).Pisani G.R. (1973).Pisani G.R. (1973).Pisani G.R. (1973).Pisani G.R. (1973). A guide to preservationtechniques for amphibians and reptiles. Societyfor the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles. USA22pp.Rice, T.M. & D.H. Taylor (1993).Rice, T.M. & D.H. Taylor (1993).Rice, T.M. & D.H. Taylor (1993).Rice, T.M. & D.H. Taylor (1993).Rice, T.M. & D.H. Taylor (1993). A newmethod for marking waistbands to markanurans. Herpetological Review 24(4): 141-142.Rodgem, W.A. (1991).Rodgem, W.A. (1991).Rodgem, W.A. (1991).Rodgem, W.A. (1991).Rodgem, W.A. (1991). Techniques forwildlife census in India, a field manual. WildlifeInstitute of India, Dehra Dun, 82pp.
Designing amphibianDesigning amphibianDesigning amphibianDesigning amphibianDesigning amphibianpopulation monitoringpopulation monitoringpopulation monitoringpopulation monitoringpopulation monitoringprotocolprotocolprotocolprotocolprotocol
Karthikeyan VasudevanKarthikeyan VasudevanKarthikeyan VasudevanKarthikeyan VasudevanKarthikeyan Vasudevan
The importance of a “reliable”amphibian population monitoringprotocol cannot be emphasized betterin the wake of clearly documentedamphibian declines globally (Houlahanet al., 2000). In the early 1990s therewere intense debates on what'amphibian declines' were and how oneshould differentiate them from humanimpacts and natural populationfluctuations (Peclunan & Wilbur, 1994).Today, there is no doubt that 'amphibiandeclines' are unique and can beidentified as distinct, from other formsof biological diversity loss. The progressof our understanding of the phenomenonhas led to identifying causal mechanisms(Kiesecker & Blaustein, 1995; Daszaket al., 1999). The reports of amphibiandeclines have used variety of methods,those range from opportunistic recordsto rigorous experimental work or use ofremote sensed data. Irrespective of thetool used to arrive at a judgement on'amphibian declines' the primaryobjective of unambiguously docu-menting the change in amphibianpopulation remains unchanged. This hasthrown a challenge to herpeto-logistsround the world to carry out intensivesurveys using appropriate monitoringdesigns. The appropriateness of anymonitoring design depends on theobjective(s) of the study, the method(s)to be employed, and the amphibian(s)in question. However, there are someoverriding factors that need to taken intoconsideration during the design of aprotocol, which we will discuss here.
More the merrierMore the merrierMore the merrierMore the merrierMore the merrierEvery study will aim to sight as
many target groups as possible. Theprimary consideration for the choice ofa method should be 'Increase Detection'.Increased observations on the specieswill provide a better insight to theresearcher about the biology of thespecies. The biologist should view anymethod that provides poor detectionseriously and consultation with otherbiologists and a statistician isrecommended. Too many zerodetections in the data set will increase
frog leg Newsletter of the DAPTF South Asia 2004 August
the variance and result in an inaccurateestimate. Stratification of sampling canbe a choice that one might want toexplore.
Improvisation is key to solvingthis problem, statisticians have a greatdeal of theoretical knowledge onaddressing issues related to lowdetection. The use of adaptive clustersampling is an example of suchimprovisation (Vasudevan et al., 1999).
Blind man's bluffBlind man's bluffBlind man's bluffBlind man's bluffBlind man's bluffRecently, some statisticians
opened the Pandora’s box byhighlighting the significance of spatialautocorrelation and its implications atarriving at reliable estimates. Why is thatthe poor biologist is always pinned againstthe wall? Biologists should tread carefullyduring the early stages of any study. Oneshould ensure that the sampling israndomized so that each data point isproviding a measure that reflects the'true estimate' and the variationassociated with it. Randomization is apainful process if one were roughing itout on the mountains looking for frogs,but it should be better to go through itthan get nailed by the number punditsat the end of the study.
Doing the same thing again andDoing the same thing again andDoing the same thing again andDoing the same thing again andDoing the same thing again andagainagainagainagainagain
A researcher might bearduously keeping counts of frogs in apitfall trap, but these counts are withina sample. A 'large sample' will haveseveral counts of animals repeated in away that the mean of the sample willreflect a reliable estimate of theabundance of the frog in that area. Ifthe same biologists asks what is a 'largesample'? The answer to this question isnot easy. The size of a sample isinversely related to the amount ofvariability it captures. A statistician mightgo ahead and suggest that data basedon counts in samples would tend to benormally distributed when samples aregreater than 40. However, this is notthumb rule, one needs to examine thedata as it is being collected. It varieswith the target population and howheterogeneous it is.
The data dart board exampleThe data dart board exampleThe data dart board exampleThe data dart board exampleThe data dart board example'Precision and accuracy' are two
important attributes of a sample. Howbest the sample describes the 'universe'rests on these two attributes. Both
precision and accuracy are desirableand should be aimed during anysampling design. However, in moststudies in field biology accuracy isdesired over precision. Monitoringprotocols should build in these attributesto the sample in order to achievesuccessful results.
When everything else remainsWhen everything else remainsWhen everything else remainsWhen everything else remainsWhen everything else remainsconstantconstantconstantconstantconstant
Not all relationships in the datacan be meaningful and can be attributedas causal mechanisms to the changedocumented in the population ofamphibians. In order to tease out 'realcausal relationships' one has to sieve thedata through filters called 'controls'. Ineffect, these controls refine the analysisand remove extraneous influence on thedata other than those that one wants toexplore a causal relationship. Againone’s wisdom during designing comesinto fore, prior knowledge of the systemplays a very important role. In the caseof amphibian declines there are somegood examples of this (Broomhall et al.,2000). Statistical tests cannot take careof the problem of interfering variables ifproper controls are not built in thesampling design in the first place.
Ten most often committedTen most often committedTen most often committedTen most often committedTen most often committedmistakesmistakesmistakesmistakesmistakes1. Sample only in places where theanimal is found.2. Continue the same samplingstrategy when one has poordetections.3. Stratify sampling without priorknowledge of the distribution of thetarget species.4. Sample at constant intervals orproportions.5. Few replicates and numerouspseudoreplicates.6. Checking variance in data, whenthe period for data collection is over.7. Statistical tests and software’s aregodly things; they will rectify all theabove mistakes.8. Avoid complications by notproviding controls.9. Null models are too much mathsjust discard them.10. The results should always complywith the findings by renowned orreputed biologists. If not the data isfaulty.
09
REFERENCESREFERENCESREFERENCESREFERENCESREFERENCESHoulahan J,E., C.S. Findlay, B.R. Scmidt,Houlahan J,E., C.S. Findlay, B.R. Scmidt,Houlahan J,E., C.S. Findlay, B.R. Scmidt,Houlahan J,E., C.S. Findlay, B.R. Scmidt,Houlahan J,E., C.S. Findlay, B.R. Scmidt,A.H. Meyer and S.L. Kuzmin (2000).A.H. Meyer and S.L. Kuzmin (2000).A.H. Meyer and S.L. Kuzmin (2000).A.H. Meyer and S.L. Kuzmin (2000).A.H. Meyer and S.L. Kuzmin (2000).Quantitative evidence for global amphibianpopulation declines. Nature 404: 752-755.Peclunan, J.H.K., H.M. Wilbur (1994).Peclunan, J.H.K., H.M. Wilbur (1994).Peclunan, J.H.K., H.M. Wilbur (1994).Peclunan, J.H.K., H.M. Wilbur (1994).Peclunan, J.H.K., H.M. Wilbur (1994).Putting declining amphibian populations inperspective: natural fluctuations and humanimpacts. Herpetological 50: 65-84.Kiesecker, J.M. and A.R. Blaustein (1995).Kiesecker, J.M. and A.R. Blaustein (1995).Kiesecker, J.M. and A.R. Blaustein (1995).Kiesecker, J.M. and A.R. Blaustein (1995).Kiesecker, J.M. and A.R. Blaustein (1995).Synergy between UV-B. Radiation and a pathogenmagnifies amphibian embryo mortality in nature.PNAS 92:11049,11052.Daszak, P., L. Berger, A.A. Cunningham,Daszak, P., L. Berger, A.A. Cunningham,Daszak, P., L. Berger, A.A. Cunningham,Daszak, P., L. Berger, A.A. Cunningham,Daszak, P., L. Berger, A.A. Cunningham,A.D. Hyatt, D.E. Green, and R. SpearA.D. Hyatt, D.E. Green, and R. SpearA.D. Hyatt, D.E. Green, and R. SpearA.D. Hyatt, D.E. Green, and R. SpearA.D. Hyatt, D.E. Green, and R. Spear(1999).(1999).(1999).(1999).(1999). Emerging infectious diseases andamphibian population declines. EmergingInfectious Diseases 5: 735-748.Vasudevan K., R. Chellam and A. KumarVasudevan K., R. Chellam and A. KumarVasudevan K., R. Chellam and A. KumarVasudevan K., R. Chellam and A. KumarVasudevan K., R. Chellam and A. Kumar(1999). (1999). (1999). (1999). (1999). Structure and composition of forestfloor amphibians in Kalakkad-MundanthuraiTiger Reserve. Current ScienceBroomhall, S.D., W.S. Osborne, and R.B.Broomhall, S.D., W.S. Osborne, and R.B.Broomhall, S.D., W.S. Osborne, and R.B.Broomhall, S.D., W.S. Osborne, and R.B.Broomhall, S.D., W.S. Osborne, and R.B.Cunningham (2000).Cunningham (2000).Cunningham (2000).Cunningham (2000).Cunningham (2000). Comparative effects ofambient Ultraviolet-B radiation on two sympatricspecies of Australian frogs. Conservation Biology14: 420-427.
DeclineDeclineDeclineDeclineDecline ofofofofof RanaRanaRanaRanaRanataipehensis taipehensis taipehensis taipehensis taipehensis populationpopulationpopulationpopulationpopulationin southern Assamin southern Assamin southern Assamin southern Assamin southern Assam
Mithra DeyMithra DeyMithra DeyMithra DeyMithra DeySenior Lecturer, Department of
Zoology, G.C. College, Silchar 788004,India.
Email: mdey_19@ indiatimes.com
The northeastern region of Indiahas been identified as one of the globalbiodiversity hot spots and is the homeof about 72 species of amphibians(Chanda, 2002). The Barak Valley ofsouthern Assam comprises threedistricts, viz., Cachar, Hailakandi andKarimganj (24o82' & 25o82'N and92o15' & 93o15'E) and abounds inwetlands of various sizes, formed in theflood plains of River Barak and itstributaries, with low hills strewninbetween. The myriad freshwaterecosystems along with thick tropicalvegetation offer excellent habitats foranurans. During a survey conductedbetween November 1996 andDecember 2002, in this region tenspecies of anurans belonging to eightgenera and four families where recorded(Table 1). These include Microhylaornata, Kaloula pulchra, Euphlyctiscyanophylictis, Fejervarya limnocharis,Hoplobatrachus tigerinus, Ranataipehensis, Polypedates leucomystax,
frog leg Newsletter of the DAPTF South Asia 2004 August
Spec i e sSpec i e sSpec i e sSpec i e sSpec i e s Registration No.Registration No.Registration No.Registration No.Registration No. S t a t u sS t a t u sS t a t u sS t a t u sS t a t u s
Family: Bufonidae1. Bufo melanostictus Schneider 1799 ZSI A 9092, 9093 Abundant
Family: Ranidae2. Euphlyctis cyanophlyctis Schneider 1799 ZSI A 9076, 9081-86 Abundant3. Fejervarya limnocharis Gravenhorst, 1829 ZSI A 9087, 88 Abundant4. Hoplobatrachus tigerinus Daudin, 1803 ZSI A 9089 Common5. Rana taipehensis Van Denburgh, 1909 ZSI A 9090 Very rare
Family: Microhylidae6. Kaloula pulchra Gray, 1831 ZSI A 9094 Rare7. Microhyla ornata Dumeril & Bibron, 1841 ZSI A 9080, 9079 Rare
Family: Rhacophoridae8. Polypedates leucomystax Gravenhorst, 1829 ZSI A 9091 Abundant9. Rana sp. 1 Rare10. Rana sp 2 Rare
Table 1: Anuran species of Barak Valley recorded duringTable 1: Anuran species of Barak Valley recorded duringTable 1: Anuran species of Barak Valley recorded duringTable 1: Anuran species of Barak Valley recorded duringTable 1: Anuran species of Barak Valley recorded duringNovember 1996-December 2002November 1996-December 2002November 1996-December 2002November 1996-December 2002November 1996-December 2002
REFERENCESREFERENCESREFERENCESREFERENCESREFERENCESAhmed, M. and U.C. Goswami (1999)Ahmed, M. and U.C. Goswami (1999)Ahmed, M. and U.C. Goswami (1999)Ahmed, M. and U.C. Goswami (1999)Ahmed, M. and U.C. Goswami (1999)Amphibians in and around Gauhati Univer-sity, Guwahati, Assam. Frogleg 3(2): 3Chanda, S.K. (2002).Chanda, S.K. (2002).Chanda, S.K. (2002).Chanda, S.K. (2002).Chanda, S.K. (2002). Northeast India isone of the biodiversity hotspots conserva-tion sites of the world. Frogleg 10: 10.Choudhury, N.K., B. Hussain, M.Choudhury, N.K., B. Hussain, M.Choudhury, N.K., B. Hussain, M.Choudhury, N.K., B. Hussain, M.Choudhury, N.K., B. Hussain, M.Baruah, S. Saikia and S. SenguptaBaruah, S. Saikia and S. SenguptaBaruah, S. Saikia and S. SenguptaBaruah, S. Saikia and S. SenguptaBaruah, S. Saikia and S. Sengupta(2001).(2001).(2001).(2001).(2001). Fauna of Kamrup District, Assam,with notes on their natural history. Ha-madryad 26(2): 276-282.Dahmer, T.D, K.H. Kai and M.L. FelleyDahmer, T.D, K.H. Kai and M.L. FelleyDahmer, T.D, K.H. Kai and M.L. FelleyDahmer, T.D, K.H. Kai and M.L. FelleyDahmer, T.D, K.H. Kai and M.L. Felley(2001). (2001). (2001). (2001). (2001). Porcupine, Newsletter of the Deptt.of Ecology and Biodiversity, Univ. of HongKong.Cheng, L.Y. and L.H. Chin (2002).Cheng, L.Y. and L.H. Chin (2002).Cheng, L.Y. and L.H. Chin (2002).Cheng, L.Y. and L.H. Chin (2002).Cheng, L.Y. and L.H. Chin (2002).Program of Taipei Grass Frog (Ranataipehensis) in situ. Taipei Zoo, Taiwan inZoo’s Print XVII(11): 15.
Bufo melanostictus, Rana sp. 1 and Ranasp. 2.
Rana taipehensis belonging toFamily Ranidae was caught from a lowlying marshy area in Silchar (24o50'N,92o 51'E) in Cachar District. The areais thickly vegetated with Enhydrafluctuans, Commelina benghalensis,Eclipta prostrata and Eicchornia sp.This was the only habitat from whichthe frog was collected out of the total41 sites surveyed. The number ofspecimens caught was only three (onein March 1997 and two in March 1998)and has not been sighted since then.(One of the specimens was depositedat ZSI Kolkata ZSI-A9090, one retainedby the author and one was released inits habitat).
The limited number ofspecimen caught and the restricteddistribution observed indicates thatthis species has a habitat preference
Kamrup District of Assam.The primary reason for decline
is habitat destruction due to urban-ization and increasing human settle-ment. In addition, improper waste dis-posal like polythene bags plastics etc,into the unused ponds as well as themarshy habitat is resulting in loss ofbreeding grounds. It is therefore es-sential to develop awareness amongthe local residents regarding the con-servation of this species and also giveprotection to the habitat in which it wasfound. It is also suggested that artifi-cial rearing of this species can be takenup to prevent its total loss from thisarea.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTACKNOWLEDGEMENTACKNOWLEDGEMENTACKNOWLEDGEMENTACKNOWLEDGEMENTI am grateful to Dr. S.K. Chanda, ZoologicalSurvey of India, Kolkatta for identifying the Ranataipenhensis specimens and I also gratefullyacknowledge UGC for financial assistance.
and is becoming rare in this area. Thesight from which this specimen wasrecorded is being drastically altereddue to construction of a residentialcomplex. Silchar is rapidly undergoingurbanization and low lying areas arebeing reclaimed for development.Ahmed and Goswamy(1999) alsoobserved Rana taipehensis to be arare species in and around Guwahati,Assam. Subsequently, Dahmer et al.,(2001) assigned this speciesthreatened status and recommendedstatutory protection in Hong Kong whileLi Yi Cheng and Lin Hua Chin (2002)reported it as Vulnerable withrestricted distributed from Taiwan.However, Choudhury et al. (2001)have observed it to be abundant in
Hoplobatrachus crassusHoplobatrachus crassusHoplobatrachus crassusHoplobatrachus crassusHoplobatrachus crassusswallowing a swallowing a swallowing a swallowing a swallowing a PolypedatesPolypedatesPolypedatesPolypedatesPolypedatesmaculatusmaculatusmaculatusmaculatusmaculatus in Sri Lanka in Sri Lanka in Sri Lanka in Sri Lanka in Sri Lanka
Roshan K. Rodrigo, V.A.M.P.KRoshan K. Rodrigo, V.A.M.P.KRoshan K. Rodrigo, V.A.M.P.KRoshan K. Rodrigo, V.A.M.P.KRoshan K. Rodrigo, V.A.M.P.KSamarawickrama, Naalin Perera,Samarawickrama, Naalin Perera,Samarawickrama, Naalin Perera,Samarawickrama, Naalin Perera,Samarawickrama, Naalin Perera,M. Sandun, J. Perera, T.N. PeriesM. Sandun, J. Perera, T.N. PeriesM. Sandun, J. Perera, T.N. PeriesM. Sandun, J. Perera, T.N. PeriesM. Sandun, J. Perera, T.N. Peries
and C.N.B. Bambaradeniyand C.N.B. Bambaradeniyand C.N.B. Bambaradeniyand C.N.B. Bambaradeniyand C.N.B. BambaradeniyIUCN-The World Conservation Union, 53,
Horton Place, Colombo 07, Sri Lanka.Email: [email protected]
The observation was made on 2November 2002 in Kalametiya WildlifeSanctuary around 2030hr. The locationwas adjacent to the road leading to Kiula-Kalametiya fishing harbour and thehabitat was a seasonal pond. The shallowpond had accumulated water from the midinter-monsoon showers. Grasslands andscrublands were the surroundingvegetations. Species identification wasdone by their colour patterns and othermorphological character based on Duttaand Manamendra-Arachchi (1996). Prey(P. maculatus) was identified before it wasswallowed; its colour pattern and welldeveloped disk on tips of digits.
An adult H. crassus (Jerdon’s BullFrog) was swallowing another adult P.maculatus (Chunam Tree-frog) at the edgeof the pond. P. maculatus was beingswallowed slowly from its head end.Swallowing took place for about 8 minutes.Microhyla ornata (Ornate narrow mouthfrog), Fejervarya limnocharis (Commonpaddy field frog) and Uperodon systoma(Balloon frog) were also recorded from thesame pond during the time of observation.Most amphibian larvae are cannibalistic(Pough et al., 2001). Bambaradeniya(1997) had recored a H. crassusswallowing a microhylid (Microhyla rubrum)in a rice field at Bathalagoda, Sri Lanka.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTACKNOWLEDGEMENTACKNOWLEDGEMENTACKNOWLEDGEMENTACKNOWLEDGEMENTI would like to thank Dr. Deepani Jayantha forher kind assistance to prepare this shortcommunication.
REFERENCESREFERENCESREFERENCESREFERENCESREFERENCESBambaradeniya, C.N.B.Bambaradeniya, C.N.B.Bambaradeniya, C.N.B.Bambaradeniya, C.N.B.Bambaradeniya, C.N.B. (1997).(1997).(1997).(1997).(1997).Observation of a Ranid (Hoplobatrachuscrassus) swallowing a Microhylid (Microhylarubrum). Lyriocephalus 3(2): 32.De Silva, A. (1996).De Silva, A. (1996).De Silva, A. (1996).De Silva, A. (1996).De Silva, A. (1996). The herpetofauna of SriLanka: a brief review. Published by the author,pp. 38-43.Dutta, S.K. and K. Manamendra-Dutta, S.K. and K. Manamendra-Dutta, S.K. and K. Manamendra-Dutta, S.K. and K. Manamendra-Dutta, S.K. and K. Manamendra-ArachchiArachchiArachchiArachchiArachchi (1996).(1996).(1996).(1996).(1996). The Amphibian Fauna ofSri Lanka. The Wildlife Heritage Trust, Sri Lanka.Pough, F.H. Pough, F.H. Pough, F.H. Pough, F.H. Pough, F.H. et alet alet alet alet al..... (2001).(2001).(2001).(2001).(2001). Herpetology, pp.436-437. 2nd Edition. Prentice-Hall, Inc. NewJersey.
10
frog leg Newsletter of the DAPTF South Asia 2004 August 11
Conservation Biology, 2001, 15(4): 903-913Amphibian declines and environmental change: UseAmphibian declines and environmental change: UseAmphibian declines and environmental change: UseAmphibian declines and environmental change: UseAmphibian declines and environmental change: Useof remote-sensing data to identify environmentalof remote-sensing data to identify environmentalof remote-sensing data to identify environmentalof remote-sensing data to identify environmentalof remote-sensing data to identify environmentalco r re l a tescor re l a tescor re l a tescor re l a tescor re l a tesCynthia Carey, W. Ronald Heyer, John Wilkinson, Ross A. Alford, J.W.Arntzen, Tim Halliday, Laura Hungerford, Karen R. Lips, Elizabeth M.Middleton, Stan A. Orchard & A. Stanley Rand
Populations of many amphibian species are decliningworldwide, and a few species appear to have become extinct.In an attempt to evaluate the potential usefulness of remote-sensing techniques as a tool for identifying the causes of thesedeclines, we compiled a database that contains descriptionsof 120 localities, both at which declines have been documentedand at which no declines are yet known. The number of speciesinvolved, dates and degree of declines, habitat characteristics,and other factors are provided for each locality. Four relativelyundisturbed areas in northeastern Australia, Costa Rica-Panama, central Colorado, and Puerto Rico were chosen forexamination of environmental correlates coincident with massmortalities at these localities. We used data predicted bymodels or collected by satellites, airplanes, or direct samplingon the ground to evaluate variations over time in temperature,precipitation, wind direction, UV-B radiation, andconcentrations of certain contaminants at these sites. We askedwhether unusual changes in these environmental variablesoccurred either just in advance of or concurrent with dates ofamphibian mass mortalities. The variation in certainenvironmental variables documented by others (Alexander &Eischeid 2001; Middleton et al. 2001; Stallard 2001 [all thisissue] appears unlikely to have directly caused amphibiandeaths. But correlations between these environmental changesand the occurrence of amphibian die-offs invite furtherinvestigation into synergistic interactions amongenvironmental variables and possible indirect causalrelationships.
Conservation Biology, 2001, 15(4): 914-929Evaluating ultraviolet radiation exposure withEvaluating ultraviolet radiation exposure withEvaluating ultraviolet radiation exposure withEvaluating ultraviolet radiation exposure withEvaluating ultraviolet radiation exposure withsatellite data at sites of amphibian declines insatellite data at sites of amphibian declines insatellite data at sites of amphibian declines insatellite data at sites of amphibian declines insatellite data at sites of amphibian declines inCentral and South AmericaCentral and South AmericaCentral and South AmericaCentral and South AmericaCentral and South AmericaElizabeth M. Middleton, Jay R. Herman, Edward A. Celarier, John W.Wilkinson, Cynthia Carey & Robert J. Rusin
Many amphibian species have experienced substantialpopulation declines or have disappeared altogether during thelast several decades at a number of amphibian survey sites inCentral and South America. Our study addresses the use oftrends in solar UV-B radiation exposure (280-320 nm) at thesesites over the last two decades, derived from the Total OzoneMapping Spectrometer satellite data. It is intended todemonstrate a role for satellite observations in determiningwhether UV-B radiation is a contributing factor in amphibiandeclines. We used these data to calculate the daily erythemal(sunburning)) UV-B, or UV-Bery exposure at the latitude,longitude and elevation of each of 20 survey sites. The annuallyaveraged UV-Bery dose,as well as the maximum values, havebeen increasing in both Central and South America, with higherlevels reached at the Central American sites. The annuallyaveraged UV-Bery exposure increased significantly from 1979-1998 at all 11 Central American sites we examined (r2 =0.60-0.79; p d” 0.015) with smaller but significant increases at fiveof the nine South American sites (r2=0.24-0.42;p d” 0.05).The number of days having the highest UV-B exposure (e”6.75kJ/m2/day) increased in both regions from ,< 40 days per
year to approximately 58 days per year in 1998 (r2= 0.24-0.42; p d” 0.001). In Central America, the contribution of thesevery high UV-Bery total increased from approximately 5 toapproximately 15% over the 19-year period, but actual dailyexposures for each species are unknown. A UV-B ratio, thehighest monthly UV-B exposure relative to the annual averagefor the highest UV-B category (e” 6.75 kJ/m2), increased inboth regions over this time period (r2 = 00.73;p d” 0.001).This UV index was consistently higher for Central America,where species declines have been the most severe. Theseresults should justify further research into whether UV-B eryradiation plays a role in amphibian population declines andextinctions. We discuss synergy among UV-B radiation andother factors, especially those associated with alterations ofwater chemistry (e.g., acidification) in aqueous habitats.
Conservation Biology, 2001, 15(4): 943-953Possible environmental factors underlyingPossible environmental factors underlyingPossible environmental factors underlyingPossible environmental factors underlyingPossible environmental factors underlyingamphibian decline in eastern Puerto Rico: analysisamphibian decline in eastern Puerto Rico: analysisamphibian decline in eastern Puerto Rico: analysisamphibian decline in eastern Puerto Rico: analysisamphibian decline in eastern Puerto Rico: analysisof U.S. government data archivesof U.S. government data archivesof U.S. government data archivesof U.S. government data archivesof U.S. government data archivesRober F. Stallard
The past three decades have seen major declines in populationsof several species of amphibians at high elevations in easternPuerto Rico, a region unique in the humid tropics because ofthe degree of environmental monitoring that has taken placethrough the efforts of U.S. government agencies. I examinedchanges in environmental conditions by examining time-seriesdata sets that extend back at least into the 1980s, a periodwhen frog populations were declining. The data include forestcover; annual mean, minimum, and maximum dailytemperature; annual rainfall; rain and stream chemistry; andatmospheric-dust transport. I examined satellite imagery andair-chemistry samples from a single National Aeronautics andSpace Administration aircraft flight across the Caribbeanshowing patches of pollutants, described as thin sheets orlenses, in the lower troposphere. The main source of thesepollutants appeared to be fires from land clearing anddeforestation, primarily in Africa. Some pollutantconcentrations were high and, in the case of ozone, approachedhealth limits set for urban air. Urban pollution impinging onPuerto Rico, dust generation from Africa (potential soilpathogens) and tropical forest burning (gaseous pollutants)have all increased during the last three decades, overlappingthe timing of amphibian declines in eastern Puerto Rico. Noneof the data sets pointed directly to changes so extreme thatthey might be considered a direct lethal cause of amphibiandeclines in Puerto Rico. More experimental research is requiredto link any of these environmental factors to this problem.
Conservation Biology, 2001, 15(4): 930-942Climate variabil ity in regions of amphibian declinesClimate variabil ity in regions of amphibian declinesClimate variabil ity in regions of amphibian declinesClimate variabil ity in regions of amphibian declinesClimate variabil ity in regions of amphibian declinesMichael A. Alexander & Jon K. Eischeid
We explored the relationship between amphibian declines andclimate variations in Colorado (U.S.A), Puerto Rico, Costa Rica-Panama and Queensland (Australia) through two sources ofdata: output from the National Center for EnvironmentalPrediction “reanalysis system” and area-averaged station data.The reanalysis system merges observations from airplanes,land stations, satellites, ships, and weather balloons with outputfrom a weather-forecast model to create global fields ofatmospheric variables. Station data consisted of temperatureand precipitation measured with thermometers and rain gauges
ABSTRACTS FROM VARIOUS JOURNALSABSTRACTS FROM VARIOUS JOURNALSABSTRACTS FROM VARIOUS JOURNALSABSTRACTS FROM VARIOUS JOURNALSABSTRACTS FROM VARIOUS JOURNALS
frog leg Newsletter of the DAPTF South Asia 2004 August 12
at fixed locations. Temperatures were near normal in Coloradowhen the amphibian declines occurred in the 1970s, whereasin Central America temperatures were warmer than normal,especially during the dry season. The station data from PuertoRico and Australia indicated that temperatures were abovenormal during the period of amphibian declines, but reanalysisdid not show such a clear temperature signal. Althoughdeclines occurred while the temperature and precipitationanomalies in some of the regions were large and of extendedduration, the anomalies were not beyond the range of normalvariability. Thus, unusual climate, as measured by regionalestimates of temperature and precipitation, is unlikely to bethe direct cause of amphibian declines, but it may haveindirectly contributed to them. Previous researchers havenoted that the declines appear to have propagated fromnorthwest to southeast from Costa Rica to Panama and fromsoutheast to northwest in Queensland, Australia. Wind has thepotential to transport pathogens that cause amphibianmortality. The mean direction of the near-surface winds tendedto parrallel the path of amphibian declines from July-Octoberin Central America and from May-July in Australia. The winddirection was highly variable, however, and the propagationrate of amphibian declines was much slower than the meanwind speed. In addition, the most likely pathogen is a chytridfungus that does not produce desiccation-resistant spores.Thus, if wind is involved in the progpagation of amphibiandeclines, it is through a complex set of processes.
Conservation Biology, 2001, 15(4): 1175-1178Climate warming and call ing phenology of frogsClimate warming and call ing phenology of frogsClimate warming and call ing phenology of frogsClimate warming and call ing phenology of frogsClimate warming and call ing phenology of frogsnear Ithaca, New York, 1900-1999near Ithaca, New York, 1900-1999near Ithaca, New York, 1900-1999near Ithaca, New York, 1900-1999near Ithaca, New York, 1900-1999James P. Gibbs & Alvin R. Breisch
Because ambient temperature strongly influencesreproduction in frogs, the seasonal timing of frog callingprovides a sensitive index of biotic response to climate change.Over the last century, daily temperatures increased during 5of the 8 months key to gametogenesis in frogs and toads nearIthaca, New York (U.S.A). Earliest dates of calling frogs recordedby Albert Hazen Wright between 1900 and 1912 near Ithacawere compared to those from the New York State Amphibianand Reptile Atlas Project for 1990-1999 for the three countriessurrounding Ithaca. Four species are now calling 10-13 daysearlier, two are unchanged, and none is calling later. The datasuggest that climate has warmed in central New York Stateduring this century and has resulted in earlier breeding insome amphibians - a possible first indication of biotic responseto climate change in eastern North America.
Conservation Biology, 2001, 15(4): 1064-1070Transfer of a pathogen from fish to amphibiansTransfer of a pathogen from fish to amphibiansTransfer of a pathogen from fish to amphibiansTransfer of a pathogen from fish to amphibiansTransfer of a pathogen from fish to amphibiansJoseph M. Kiesecker, Andrew R. Blaustein & Cheri L. Miller
Ecological studies of exotic species focus primarily on howinvaders directly affect particular resident species. In contrast,little is known about the indirect effects of introduced specieson native communities, including how pathogens may bespread by introduced species. We provide evidence suggestingthat introduced fish may serve as a vector for a pathogenicoomycete, Saprolegnia ferax, that has been associated withembryonic mortality of amphibians in the Cascade Mountainsof Oregon, U.S.A. In laboratory experiments, mortality inducedby S. ferax was greater in western toad (Bufo boreas) embryosexposed directly to hatchery-reared rainbow trout(Oncorhynchus mukiss) experimentally infected with S. feraxand hatchery reared trout not experimentally infected than in
control embryos. Embryos also developed significant S. feraxinfections when raised on soil that was exposed to troutexperimentally infected with S. ferax Furthermore, toadembryos exposed to S. ferax isolated from sites whereSaprolegnia outbreaks are common experienced highermortality than embryos exposed to S. ferax isolated from siteswhere Saprolegnia outbreaks have not occurred. Given thewidespread practice of introducing hatchery-reared fishes, wesuggest that fish used in stocking programs could be animportant vector for diseases responsible for amphibianlosses.
Conservation Biology, 2001, 15(4): 1071-1078Effects of road traffic on two amphibian species ofEffects of road traffic on two amphibian species ofEffects of road traffic on two amphibian species ofEffects of road traffic on two amphibian species ofEffects of road traffic on two amphibian species ofdiffering vagil itydiffering vagil itydiffering vagil itydiffering vagil itydiffering vagil ityLaurie W. Carr & lenore Fahrig
Vehicular traffic can be a major source of mortality for somespecies. Highly vagile organisms may be at a disadvantage inlandscapes with roads because they are more likely toencounter roads and incur traffic mortality. To test thisprediction, we assessed the population abundance of twoanuran species of differing vagility, the leopard frog (Ranapipiens, more vagile) and the green frog (Rana clamitans, lessvagile), at 30 breeding ponds. Traffic density, an index of theamount of potential traffic mortality, was measured inconcentric circles radiating from the ponds out to 5 km. Weconducted multiple linear regressions relating populationabundance to traffic density, pond variables, and landscapehabitat variables and found that leopard frog population densitywas negatively affected by traffic density within a radius of 1.5km. There was no evidence that the presence of vehiculartraffic affected green frog populations. These results suggestthat traffic mortality can cause population declines and thatmore vagile species may be more vulnerable to road mortalitythan less vagile species.
Conservation Biology, 2001, 15(4): 1079-1090Edge effects on lizards and frogs in tropical forestEdge effects on lizards and frogs in tropical forestEdge effects on lizards and frogs in tropical forestEdge effects on lizards and frogs in tropical forestEdge effects on lizards and frogs in tropical forestf r agmen t sf r agmen t sf r agmen t sf r agmen t sf r agmen t sMartin A. Schlaepfer & Thomas A. Gavin
We investigated whether forest-pasture edges affect thedistribution of an assemblage of smaller vertebrate ectothermsin a consistent and predictable manner. We describe theabundance and distribution of two species of anoline lizards(Norops) and five species of leaf-litter frogs (Eleutherodactylus)along the edges and in the interiors of nine forest fragmentsnear Las Cruces, Costa Rica. Over 4 months, we surveyed 44pairs of plots by visual encounter. In each pair of plots, onewas immediately adjacent to the pasture and the second waswithin the forest “interior”. Both plots of a pair were searchedsimultaneously. This block design controlled for the effectsof weather, topography, and searcher ability. The distributionof all species was highly variable with respect to edges. Onlytwo species of frogs, Eleutherodactylus podiciferus and E.cruentus, were significantly more abundant in interior plotsthan in edge plots, although not consistently so. Both speciesof Norops lizards were more abundant in interior plots than inedge plots, although not consistently so. Both species of Noropslizards were more abundant along forest edges during the dryseason. Both Norops species and several Eleutherodactylusspecies, however, appeared to become more abundant in theforest interior after the onset of the wet season, suggesting aseasonal edge effect. In Norops polylepis, the most abundantanole, rates of ectoparasitism were lower along edges than in
frog leg Newsletter of the DAPTF South Asia 2004 August 13
forest interiors. The magnitude of the edge effect on any onespecies was not influenced by the size of fragments or by thedistance of the interior plot from the nearest edge. We believethat edge effects should not be defined by the distance towhich they are detected. Rather, they should be viewed ashighly dynamic in space and time; taxa appear to respond todifferent components of edge effects according to theirparticular biological requirements.
Zoos' Print Journal, 2002, 17(3): 723-728A redescription of A redescription of A redescription of A redescription of A redescription of Gegeneophis carnosusGegeneophis carnosusGegeneophis carnosusGegeneophis carnosusGegeneophis carnosus (Beddome, (Beddome, (Beddome, (Beddome, (Beddome,1870) (Amphibia: Gymnophiona)1870) (Amphibia: Gymnophiona)1870) (Amphibia: Gymnophiona)1870) (Amphibia: Gymnophiona)1870) (Amphibia: Gymnophiona)G.M. Malathesh, K.R. Gundappa, S. Ravichandra Reddy & Katre Shakuntala
Eight specimens of the lesser known Gegeneophis carnosus(Beddome) sighted and collected during June-September 1996from the General Cariappa Biodiversity Park at Madikeri,Karnataka State, India are redescribed with details of their mor-phology, morphometry and comparative taxonomic analysis.The species appears to be an altitudinal one, restricted in itsdistribution to the wet semi-evergreen forest range of the West-ern Ghat belt of Kerala and Karnataka and inhabits a uniquecryptic subterranean habitat.
Zoos' Print Journal, 2002, 17(3): 735-740An overview of amphibian fauna of Maharashtra StateAn overview of amphibian fauna of Maharashtra StateAn overview of amphibian fauna of Maharashtra StateAn overview of amphibian fauna of Maharashtra StateAn overview of amphibian fauna of Maharashtra StateA.D. Padhye & H.V. Ghate
There are 43 species of amphibia in Maharashtra State of the224 species found in India, distributed among six different fami-lies as: Icthyophiidae, Caecilidae, Bufonidae, Microhylidae,Ranidae and Rhacophoridae. Out of seven genera endemic tothe Western Ghats, three are represented in Maharashtra State.
Zoos' Print Journal, 2002, 17(4): 757-763An overview of amphibian fauna of Pune DistrictAn overview of amphibian fauna of Pune DistrictAn overview of amphibian fauna of Pune DistrictAn overview of amphibian fauna of Pune DistrictAn overview of amphibian fauna of Pune Districtwith special reference to their status in and aroundwith special reference to their status in and aroundwith special reference to their status in and aroundwith special reference to their status in and aroundwith special reference to their status in and aroundPune CityPune CityPune CityPune CityPune CityA.D. Padhye, Mukul Mahabaleshwarkar & H.V. Ghate
For the last 30 years, Pune has been a center of industrializationand concomitant urbanization. As a result the city is rapidlygrowing, in size as well as in population, at the cost of its envi-ronment. This has severely impacted the flora and fauna of thecity and its outskirts. We have been studying the impact ofurbanization on amphibians for the last few years. Our studiesreveal that there has been a loss of one-third of amphibianspecies from the city area in the last 25 years, mainly due tohabitat destruction. The situation is similar in other townshipsthroughout Pune District.
Zoos’ Print Journal, 2003, 18(6): 1117-1125Amphibian fauna of Nagaland with nineteen newAmphibian fauna of Nagaland with nineteen newAmphibian fauna of Nagaland with nineteen newAmphibian fauna of Nagaland with nineteen newAmphibian fauna of Nagaland with nineteen newrecords from the state including five new recordsrecords from the state including five new recordsrecords from the state including five new recordsrecords from the state including five new recordsrecords from the state including five new recordsfor Indiafor Indiafor Indiafor Indiafor IndiaJ. Meren Ao , Sabitry Bordoloi & Annemarie Ohler
The amphibian fauna of Nagaland is updated to 32 species, 19of which are new to the state and five species, Megophryswuliangshanensis, Megophrys glandulosa, Amolopsviridimaculatus, Rana humeralis and Rhacophorusgongshanensis, are new to India. The elements that composethis fauna are complex and include species from Himalayanregion from north-eastern montane region and also from theIndian subcontinent.
Zoos’ Print Journal, 2002, 17(12): 951-953A note on morphometry of tadpole and adult ofA note on morphometry of tadpole and adult ofA note on morphometry of tadpole and adult ofA note on morphometry of tadpole and adult ofA note on morphometry of tadpole and adult ofMicrohyla Ornata (Duméril & Bibron) (Anura:Microhyla Ornata (Duméril & Bibron) (Anura:Microhyla Ornata (Duméril & Bibron) (Anura:Microhyla Ornata (Duméril & Bibron) (Anura:Microhyla Ornata (Duméril & Bibron) (Anura:Microhy l idae )Microhy l idae )Microhy l idae )Microhy l idae )Microhy l idae )Mithra Dey and Abhik Gupta
The morphometry of the tadpole of Microhyla ornata (Duméril& Bibron) including morphometric measurements of adult, inaddition to those made by earlier studies, were carried out inand around Silchar, Assam. These measurements were madein four developmental stages of tadpoles and in froglet andadult, with notes on their ecology. The morphological andmorphometric changes associated with growth and metamor-phosis and their possible adaptational significance are dis-cussed.
Zoos’ Print Journal, 2003, 18(2): 1007-1010Impact of some pesticides on the growth of tad-Impact of some pesticides on the growth of tad-Impact of some pesticides on the growth of tad-Impact of some pesticides on the growth of tad-Impact of some pesticides on the growth of tad-poles of common Indian toad poles of common Indian toad poles of common Indian toad poles of common Indian toad poles of common Indian toad Bufo MelanostictusBufo MelanostictusBufo MelanostictusBufo MelanostictusBufo MelanostictusSchne ide rSchne ide rSchne ide rSchne ide rSchne ide rMercy Mathew and M.I. Andrews
Impact of Organophosphate fungicide (HinosanTM) andOrganochlorine (EndosulfanTM) on the growth of tadpoles ofBufo melanostictus was studied. The weight and length oftadpoles exposed to both Hinosan and Endosulfan decreasedin all pesticide concentrations, (0.001 to 0.04ppm Endosulfanand 0.1 to 0.45ppm Hinosan) with maximum reduction onthirtieth day. Endosulfan was found to be more toxic thanHinosan to tadpoles of this toad.
Zootaxa 2003, 351: 1–10www.mapress.com/zootaxa/A new species of A new species of A new species of A new species of A new species of Gegeneophis Gegeneophis Gegeneophis Gegeneophis Gegeneophis Peters (Amphibia:Peters (Amphibia:Peters (Amphibia:Peters (Amphibia:Peters (Amphibia:Gymnophiona: Caecil i idae) from southernGymnophiona: Caecil i idae) from southernGymnophiona: Caecil i idae) from southernGymnophiona: Caecil i idae) from southernGymnophiona: Caecil i idae) from southernMaharashtra, India, with a key to the species of theMaharashtra, India, with a key to the species of theMaharashtra, India, with a key to the species of theMaharashtra, India, with a key to the species of theMaharashtra, India, with a key to the species of thegenusgenusgenusgenusgenusVarad Giri , Mark Wilkinson & David J. Gower
A new species of Indian caeciliid caecilian, Gegeneophis danieli(Amphibia: Gymnophiona), is described from a single specimenfrom the Western Ghats of southern Maharashtra. Thisdistinctive species differs from all other Indian caeciliids inhaving more numerous secondary annuli that are not restrictedto the posterior half of the body. A new key to the species ofGegeneophis is presented, and the diversity of the genus isbriefly discussed.
Nature, 16 October 2003, 425: 711-714www.nature.com/natureNew frog family from India reveals an ancient bio-New frog family from India reveals an ancient bio-New frog family from India reveals an ancient bio-New frog family from India reveals an ancient bio-New frog family from India reveals an ancient bio-geographical l ink with the Seychellesgeographical l ink with the Seychellesgeographical l ink with the Seychellesgeographical l ink with the Seychellesgeographical l ink with the SeychellesS.D. Biju & Franky Bossuyt
About 96% of the more than 4,800 living anuran species1belong to the Neobatrachia or advanced frogs2–4. Because ofthe extremely poor representation of these animals in theMesozoic fossil record, hypotheses on their early evolutionhave to rely largely on extant taxa. Here we report the discoveryof a burrowing frog from India that is noticeably distinct fromknown taxa in all anuran families. Phylogenetic analyses of 2.8kilobases of mitochondrial and nuclear DNA unambiguouslydesignate this frog as the sister taxon of Sooglossidae, a familyexclusively occurring on two granitic islands of the Seychellesarchipelago8. Furthermore, molecular clock analyses9 uncoverthe branch leading to both taxa as an ancient split in the crown-
frog leg Newsletter of the DAPTF South Asia 2004 August 14
group Neobatrachia. Our discovery discloses a lineage thatmay have been more diverse on Indo-Madagascar in theCretaceous period, but now only comprises four species onthe Seychelles and a sole survivor in India. Because of its verydistinct morphology and an inferred origin that is earlier thanseveral neobatrachian families10, we recognize this frog as anew family.
Current Science, 10 January 2004, 86(1): 211-216Jurassic frogs and the evolution of amphibianJurassic frogs and the evolution of amphibianJurassic frogs and the evolution of amphibianJurassic frogs and the evolution of amphibianJurassic frogs and the evolution of amphibianendemism in the Western Ghatsendemism in the Western Ghatsendemism in the Western Ghatsendemism in the Western Ghatsendemism in the Western GhatsSushil K. Dutta, Karthikeyan Vasudevan, M. S. Chaitra, Kartik Shanker &Ramesh K. Aggarwal
The diversity of frogs and toads (Anurans) in tropical ever-green forests has recently gained importance with reports ofseveral new species1. We describe here a fossorial frog taxonrelated to the African Heleophrynidae and SeychellianSooglossidae from the Western Ghats of India. This frog pos-sesses a suite of unique ancient characters indicating that it isa transitional form between Archaeobatrachians andNeobatrachians. Molecular clock analysis based on the nucle-otide diversity in mitochondrial 12S and 16S genes dates thisfrog as a Gondwana relic, which evolved 150–195 Mya duringthe mid-Jurassic period. With this taxon, the evolution of en-demism in the Western Ghats and other Gondwana break uplandmasses is now dated much before the Cretaceous–Ter-tiary boundary. We propose that sea level surges in the lateJurassic2 isolated tablelands creating insular amphibian fauna.Reduction in area may have promoted stochastic extinctionsand resulted in amphibian endemism. Our study reinforcesthe conservation significance of the Western Ghats as majorglobal hotspot of biodiversity. The habitat of this endemic am-phibian lineage is currently endangered due to various up-coming dam projects, which is a cause of serious conserva-tion concern.
Hamadryad, 2001, 26(2): 235-246Description of advertisement calls of five Description of advertisement calls of five Description of advertisement calls of five Description of advertisement calls of five Description of advertisement calls of five BufoBufoBufoBufoBufospecies (Bufonidae) from South and South-eastspecies (Bufonidae) from South and South-eastspecies (Bufonidae) from South and South-eastspecies (Bufonidae) from South and South-eastspecies (Bufonidae) from South and South-eastAs ia .As ia .As ia .As ia .As ia .Stephane Grosjean & Alain Dubois
The advertisement calls of five Asian species of the genus Bufoare described, three of them (Bufo asper, Bufo parvus and Bufostomaticus) for the first time. For each species, numeroustemporal parameters are given, as well as the mean values ofthe frequency bands. Each call is illustrated by an oscillogramand a spectrogram, and is compared with available data fromthe literature for the calls of the same as well as closely-relatedspecies.
Hamadryad 2001, 26(2): 253-260Herpetofaunal mortality on roads in the AnamalaiHerpetofaunal mortality on roads in the AnamalaiHerpetofaunal mortality on roads in the AnamalaiHerpetofaunal mortality on roads in the AnamalaiHerpetofaunal mortality on roads in the Anamalaihil ls, southern Western Ghats.hil ls, southern Western Ghats.hil ls, southern Western Ghats.hil ls, southern Western Ghats.hil ls, southern Western Ghats.S.P. Vijayakumar, Karthikeyan Vasudevan & N.M. Ishwar
We sampled road-killed amphibians and reptiles from the high-way segments passing through rainforest fragments and teagardens in the Anamalai hills in order to evaluate the effects ofvehicular traffic on the herpetofauna. There was greater mor-tality among amphibians than reptiles due to vehicular move-ment. A total of 73 reptiles belonging to 24 species, 13 generaand seven families and 311 amphibians belonging to eightgenera and five families killed on the highway were recorded.These figures included several endemic species of amphib-
ians and reptiles. Rainfall resulted in increased activity ofamphibians and uropeltids, thereby making them vulnerableto road traffic. Amphibian roadkills were associated with cof-fee and forest habitats while reptiles were found most often inforested habitats. Road segments passing through tea plan-tations had the lowest number of amphibian and reptileroadkills compared with other vegetation categories. Possibleexplanations for differences in species richness and relativecounts in the forest in relation to roadkill are discussed. Thelong-term effects of mortality due to roads is of conservationimportance considering the low abundance of herpetofaunain the rainforests.
Hamadryad, 2001, 26(2): 276-282Amphibian fauna of Kamrup District, Assam, withAmphibian fauna of Kamrup District, Assam, withAmphibian fauna of Kamrup District, Assam, withAmphibian fauna of Kamrup District, Assam, withAmphibian fauna of Kamrup District, Assam, withnotes on their natural history.notes on their natural history.notes on their natural history.notes on their natural history.notes on their natural history.N.K. Choudhury, B. Hussain, M. Baruah, S. Saikia & S. Sengupta
The amphibian fauna of Assam state, north-eastern India hasbeen poorly evaluated and so far, 30 species have beenreported. Kamrup District of Assam with an area of 4,345 km2
shows a great diversity of habitats. In the present study, wereport 20 species of amphibian from the District. This includestwo species (Philautus garo and Ichthyophis garoensis) thatare being reported for the first time the state.
Hamadryad, 2002, 27(1):62-70Rana Rana Rana Rana Rana (((((HylaranaHylaranaHylaranaHylaranaHylarana) ) ) ) ) sensusensusensusensusensu Dubois (1992) in India and Dubois (1992) in India and Dubois (1992) in India and Dubois (1992) in India and Dubois (1992) in India andthe identity of the identity of the identity of the identity of the identity of Hylorana tytleriHylorana tytleriHylorana tytleriHylorana tytleriHylorana tytleri Theobald, 1868. Theobald, 1868. Theobald, 1868. Theobald, 1868. Theobald, 1868.A. Ohler & P.K. Mallick
Morphometric comparison of frogs of the subgenus Rana(Hylorana) (s. str., Dubois, 1992) showed siginificant differencesbetween the populations from West Bengal, India and those ofRana erythraea and Rana taipehensis from more easternregions. Study of the holotype of Hylorana tytleri shows thatfor the Indian and Nepalese populations the name Rana(Hylarana) tytleri is available. A key to the species of Rana(Hylarana) and the known distributions of Rana tytleri, Ranaerythraea and Rana taipehensis are provided.
Hamadryad, 2002, 27(1): 71-77Tadpoles of Tadpoles of Tadpoles of Tadpoles of Tadpoles of Indirana beddomiiIndirana beddomiiIndirana beddomiiIndirana beddomiiIndirana beddomii (Anura: Ranidae). (Anura: Ranidae). (Anura: Ranidae). (Anura: Ranidae). (Anura: Ranidae).Mitsuru Kuramoto & S.H. Joshy
External and internal morphology of the semiterrestrialtadpoles of Indirana beddomii (stages 37 and 39) from south-western India was examined. Advanced tadpoles had well-developed hind limbs with nearly the same ratio to head-bodylength as in adults. However, the fore limbs were still in theearly stages of development and most skeletal componentswere cartilaginous. These indicate that the hind limbs developprecociously. In spite of their semiterrestrial life, the tadpolesdid not have lungs. With strongly serrated beaks and branched,curved labial teeth, they feed on green algae and diatoms.Comparisons with previously described tadpoles of the genusIndirana and with semiterrestrial tadpoles in other anuran taxaare discussed.
Hamadryad, 2002, 27(1): 90-98Observations on geographic variation in the AsianObservations on geographic variation in the AsianObservations on geographic variation in the AsianObservations on geographic variation in the AsianObservations on geographic variation in the AsianFrog, Frog, Frog, Frog, Frog, Hoplobatrachus rugulosus Hoplobatrachus rugulosus Hoplobatrachus rugulosus Hoplobatrachus rugulosus Hoplobatrachus rugulosus (Anura: Ranidae).(Anura: Ranidae).(Anura: Ranidae).(Anura: Ranidae).(Anura: Ranidae).Timothy D. Schmalz & George R. Zug
This study examines a series of morphometric, meristic, and
frog leg Newsletter of the DAPTF South Asia 2004 August
Field study, collection,Field study, collection,Field study, collection,Field study, collection,Field study, collection,identification, legal & ethical issues,identification, legal & ethical issues,identification, legal & ethical issues,identification, legal & ethical issues,identification, legal & ethical issues,conservation and distribution statusconservation and distribution statusconservation and distribution statusconservation and distribution statusconservation and distribution statusof South Asian amphibiansof South Asian amphibiansof South Asian amphibiansof South Asian amphibiansof South Asian amphibians
S.K. Dutta S.K. Dutta S.K. Dutta S.K. Dutta S.K. DuttaCo-Chair, DAPTF-South Asia
Department of Zoology, Utkal University, Bhubaneswar751004, Orissa, India.
E-mail: sk [email protected]
The present report includes some of the parameters,which relate to amphibian studies in South Asia. The firstissue relates to field study, which can not be compared withstudies being conducted in other countries. This is due toseveral reasons and the most noteworthy is the inaccessiblegeographic localities, specifically in the western and the EasternHimalayan region, the northeast India, the Western and EasternGhat Ranges of India and the northern Sri Lankan region.Ironically, some of these areas are rich with amphibian species.As field study involves money, expertise, man power,coordination between the field researcher and the policymakers and also time frame, it is a mandatory task to maintainbalance between and within the above parameters. Forexample, some researchers might complain about financialconstraints and others about proper facility. However, theseare not the major problems involved in field study. In order toaccomplish a successful field study, one needs to do a varietyof home works (establish contact, standardize fieldmethodologies, select locality and species or species groups,review the past and the present status of species known fromthe locality and lastly arrangement of field trips at a suitabletime of the year). Selection of locality and time period of fieldstudy are the most important factors involved in a successfulfield survey. However. without proper expertise one can notexpect to gain substantially from a field study and this seemsto be a major hurdle in our region. I do not mean that all thefield researchers are without proper expertise, but there is notenough coordination between the researchers and also notenough exchange of ideas. There are several examples ofsolitary field studies and the findings are not published withhighly rated standards. Under the circumstances, we shouldtry to evolve a working methodology for a coordinated fieldsurvey and this will enhance our knowledge in the field.
The second parameter is quite important fromresearch and conservation point of view, because the term“collection” is the most critical word so far as the biodiversityconservation is concerned. Currently, the policy makers ofmost of the South Asian countries are quite sensitive whenone talks about collection of fauna and flora for conservationstudies. In fact. majority of us does not understand the valueof collection and subsequent study. Collection does not meankilling and killing does not mean destroying the biodiversity.However, we should understand the reason of collection, whatto collect, when to collect and where to collect. Once, thesefacts are clear, the next step is to make people understand theimportance of collection. We should understand thatbiodiversity conservation needs collection and if necessarykilling or sacrificing biotic components. Let us look into animportant chapter in taxonomy, which is type concept. Infact,“type” or the “types” are the specimens of a species, which arethe results of “sacrifice”. Does this mean that the specimenshave been killed for nothing. Of course not, but a lot of us doesnot understand this and on the other hand we create severalproblems to workers involved in assessing the biodiversity.The above comments need to be discussed in detail.
15
colouration traits in the wide-ranging Hoplobatrachusrugulosus. Comparison of four samples (Myanmar, Thailand,Hong Kong, Taiwan) reveals minor differences within andamong the sample localities, but the differences do not displayconcordant patterns of geographic variation of the twenty-three traits examined. All populations display sexualdimorphism in morphometric traits, no dimorphism inhindfoot webbing or dorsal rugosity, and dimorphism ofcolouration in Taiwan and Myanmar populations. Discriminantanalysis of the morphometric traits provides evidence ofmodest segregation of the sample localities, but the smallsample sizes make these results equivocal. Eastern H.rugulosus averages larger and more rugose than westernpopulations. Taiwan frogs usually have spotted bellies, andspotting decreases westward to immaculate bellies in Myanmarfrogs. Hong Kong frogs have less hindfoot webbing than thethree other populations. Other traits differ, but theirgeographic patterns do not match that of the preceding onesor display another single pattern.
Hamadryad, 2003, 27(2): 248-253Chromosomal sex determination in anuranChromosomal sex determination in anuranChromosomal sex determination in anuranChromosomal sex determination in anuranChromosomal sex determination in anuranamphib ians .amphib ians .amphib ians .amphib ians .amphib ians .Samarendra Nath Banerjee & Samar Chakrabarti
The sex chromosome constitution in amphibians has been aconflicting issue, with occurrence of heteromorphic sex chro-mosome being demonstrated in 55 species of the over 5,000extant species. Among anurans, cytogenetically recognizableheteromorphic sex chromosomes have been confirmed in fourspecies.
Hamadryad, 2004, 28(1&2): 7-18A synopsis of the amphibian fauna of GoaA synopsis of the amphibian fauna of GoaA synopsis of the amphibian fauna of GoaA synopsis of the amphibian fauna of GoaA synopsis of the amphibian fauna of GoaA.K. Sarkar & Sukumar Ray
This report deals with 27 species in 12 genera, five familes andtwo orders representing the amphibian fauna of the State ofGoa State, western India, based on collections in the ZoologicalSurvey of India that were made between March, 1966 and July,1979. A total of 397 specimens of amphibians are beingreported. Four additional species (including Microhyla rubra,Indirana beddomii, Limnonectes brevipalmatus andGegeneophis ramaswami) are recorded for the first time fromGoa. A microhylid, Ramanella mormorata Rao, which wasrecorded by Das and Whitaker (1997) from southern Goa afterover half a centuary, is here being reported from both thenorthern and southern parts of Goa. Diagnoses have beenadded for determination of species.
Hamadryad, 2004, 28(1&2): 98-104An overview of the biodiversity of Indian caecil iansAn overview of the biodiversity of Indian caecil iansAn overview of the biodiversity of Indian caecil iansAn overview of the biodiversity of Indian caecil iansAn overview of the biodiversity of Indian caecil ians(Amphibia: Gymnophiona)(Amphibia: Gymnophiona)(Amphibia: Gymnophiona)(Amphibia: Gymnophiona)(Amphibia: Gymnophiona)M.S. Ravichandran
A brief overview of the caecilian diversity of India is presented.The fauna consists of 21 species in three families, concen-trated primarily in the Western Ghats, but also in the EasternGhats and in north-eastern India. The taxonomy, distribu-tion, ecology, and life history of caecilians in India, as else-where, are inadequately studied, but some recent progress isreviewed. Studies are hampered by the small sample size avail-able for most species. Improved taxonomy is urgently re-quired, and this can form the basis for other studies, includ-ing conservation assessments.
frog leg Newsletter of the DAPTF South Asia 2004 August
disapprove animal sacrifice for research.Perhaps the worst sufferers in the handsof animal ethical committee could betaxonomists and systematists, whocertainly need to sacrifice animals as andwhen required. However, I am stillconfused whether we taxonomists orsystematists still need the approval of theanimal ethics committee for sacrificingorganisms as and when required. Is itpossible to seek the approval of thecommittee when we are conducting fieldsurvey when specimens need to besacrificed? I also do not understand thedeal between the authority involved inissuing collection permits (for examplethe Forest Department of Govt. of Indiaor of a state) and the animal ethicscommittee.
Conservation issues are manyand currently we are quite aware with theconservation status of maga species ofvertebrates. So far as the amphibians areconcerned, the conservation status ispractically nil (except few speciesprotected by the Wildlife Protection Act).However, we are desperately trying to linkour research involvement withconservation, because the fascinatingword “conservation” is being utilized inour research proposals to pull money ormore money from funding agencies. ThisI feel is a desperate attempt to murder“conservation” of amphibians in ourcountry, because without a substantialcontribution, we use the term andcontinue our goal. As 1 understand,without a proper understanding of thebiology of a species, we cannot sayanything about conservation of thatspecies. We do not have proper anddetailed biological data of our species.
So far as the amphibians areconcerned, evaluation of their distributionstatus is an old story, because there areplenty of literature on distributionrecords. However, we need to quantify,the amount of data available ondistribution of a species. Of course, most
16
Identification is a perennialproblem in our subcontinent and this isassociated with several factors. The mostnoteworthy is the lack of expertise, whichdoes not mean non-availability ofexperienced researchers. What I mean isthe proper knowledge in the field ofidentification and this revolves aroundliterature, long term researchinvolvement, knowledge of the types andcharacter selection etc. However, someof us are in a hurry for identifying thespecies by themselves and also many ofus search for “identification key” to settledown with putting a name to a specimen.To me this is a gross mistake, because itneeds time to learn the identificationtechniques. A printed “key foridentification” can not be useful enoughto identify your specimen. It is necessarythat you work in the field, study theecology, behavior and breeding of thespecies, analyze the characters and doplenty of homework with existingliterature. Lastly, it might be possible tofinalize the identification task. The wholeexercise might involve several years, butnot several days or months, which is ageneral practice with some of us. Toovercome the above problem, we againneed cooperation and coordinationamong and between individuals.
Legal and ethical issues aremany and I will stress upon a few. Mostof the South Asian countries have theirown laws and regulations forconservation of biotic community andspecies. For example, India has WildlifeProtection Act (1972), which is beingupdated time to time. However, there aresome peculiar restrictions, which neverpermit a researcher to conduct a properfield survey and collect samples. This isa major hazard in India and I am sureseveral of us face this problem. Anotherrecent issue relates to ethics andcurrently animal ethics committee iseverywhere. The main task of animalethics committee is either to approve or
frog legAugust 2004 No. 11
Editor: Sanjay MolurEdtorial Advisor: Sally WalkerDAPTF-SA Co-chairs: Sushil Dutta & SanjayMolurfrog leg is the Newsletter of the DecliningAmphibian Populations Task Force - SouthAsia, the regonal network of the DecliningAmphibian Populations Task Force, SSC,IUCN.frog leg is published by Zoo OutreachOrganisation and Conservation BreedingSpecialist Group India as a service to theamphibian conservation community aswell as conservation actioners and enthu-siasts of South Asia.For communication:DAPTF-SA, c/o Zoo Outreach OrganisationPB 1683, 29-1 Bharathi ColonyPeelamedu, CoimbatoreTamil Nadu 641004, India.E-mail: [email protected] leg is available online atwww.zoosprint.org
DAPTF-SA CBSG-I FRAWG CBSG-SA
Special thanks to the following organisations for the technical andSpecial thanks to the following organisations for the technical andSpecial thanks to the following organisations for the technical andSpecial thanks to the following organisations for the technical andSpecial thanks to the following organisations for the technical andmonetary support provided to run the Declining Amphibian Popula-monetary support provided to run the Declining Amphibian Popula-monetary support provided to run the Declining Amphibian Popula-monetary support provided to run the Declining Amphibian Popula-monetary support provided to run the Declining Amphibian Popula-tions Task Force-South Asia network and in the publication of thistions Task Force-South Asia network and in the publication of thistions Task Force-South Asia network and in the publication of thistions Task Force-South Asia network and in the publication of thistions Task Force-South Asia network and in the publication of this
Newsletter.Newsletter.Newsletter.Newsletter.Newsletter.
of us will agree to the fact that, “notenough” is known about the distributionrecord of more than 50% of ouramphibian species. This seems to be analarming number. How can we overcomethis problem? Certainly, more fieldworkis needed, but again in appropriate placeand time of the year. Another problemassociated with amphibians is theirdiscontinuous distribution record over alarge geographic range and this iscertainly an artifact of inadequate fieldsurvey, coupled with gross identificationerrors.
The last comment deals with theethics surrounding publication andreferred specimens. Infact, the voucherspecimens and the types of new speciesshould be available to the herpetologicalcommunities for further study andscrutiny. Hence, until unless theresearchers deposit their specimen in arecognized national or internationalrepository, it makes no sense to providenew locality records or describe newspecies. There are several instanceswhere new species have been describedwithout designating the types ordeposition in proper organizations, whichare not accessible to herpetologists.
DAPTF SSC IUCN
