Sexual dimorphism in the tusked frog, Adelotus brevis (Anura:Myobatrachidae): The roles of natural and sexual selection

Biological Journal of the Linnean Society

Volumn 60, Issue 1, 1997, Pages 39-51

  Katsikaros, Kaliope ^a   Shine, Richard ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

Anura; dentition; morphology; Myohatrachidae; niche; sexual dimorphism

Indexed keywords

ADELOTUS; ADELOTUS BREVIS; ANIMALIA; ANURA; ARTHROPODA; BROSME BROSME; MOLLUSCA; MYOBATRACHIDAE;

EID: 0030902262     PISSN: 00244066     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1006/bijl.1996.0087     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Andersson M. 1994. Sexual Section. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
2. Cogger HG. 1992. Reptiles and Amphibians of Australia. Sydney: Reed Books.
3. CSIRO. 1991. The Insects of Australia. A textbook for students and research workers. Melbourne: Melbourne University Press.
4. Darwin C. 1871. The Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex. London: Murray.
5. Duellman WE, Trueb L. 1986. Biology of Amphibians. New York: McGraw-Hill.
6. Emerson SF, Inger RF. 1992. The comparative ecology of voiced and voiceless Bornean frogs. Journal of Herpetology 26: 482-490.
7. Emerson SB, Voris H. 1992. Competing explanations for sexual dimorphism in a voiceless Bornean frog. Functional Ecology. 6: 654-660.
8. Farris JS, Kluge AG, Mickevich MF. 1982. Phylogenetic analysis, the monothetic group method, and myobatrachid frogs. Systematic Zoology 31: 317-327.
9. Giddings S. 1984. An observation of a display of aggressive behaviour between two male tusked frogs (Adelotus brevis). Herpetofauna 15: 50.
10. Given MF. 1988. Territoriality and aggressive interactions of male carpenter frogs, Rana virgatipes. Copeia 1988: 411-421.
11. Harvey PH, Pagel MD. 1991. The comparative method in evolutionary biology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
12. Heyer WR, Liem DS. 1976. Analysis of intergeneric relationships of the Australian frog family Myobatrachidae. Smithsonian Contributions in Zoology 233: 1-29.
13. Howard RD. 1981. Sexual dimorphism in bullfrogs. Ecology 62: 303-310.
14. Katsikaros K. 1994. Sexual dimorphism and reproductive biology in the tusked frog, Adelotus brevis. Unpublished M. Sc thesis, University of Sydney.
15. Lamb T. 1984. The influence of sex and breeding condition on microhabitat selection and diet in the pig trog Rana grylio. American Midland Naturalist 111: 311-318.
16. Madsen T, Shine R. 1992. Temporal variability in sexual selection acting on reproductive tactics and body size in male snakes. American Naturalist 141: 167-171.
17. Moore JA. 1961. The Frogs of Eastern New South Wales. Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History 121: 149-386.
18. Noble GK. 1931. The Biology of the Amphibia. New York: Dover Publications Inc.
19. Schoener TW. 1977. The ecological significance of sexual dimorphism in size in the lizard Anolis conspersus. Science 155: 474-476.
20. Selander RK. 1966. Sexual dimorphism and differential niche utilization in birds. Condor 68: 113-151.
21. Shine R. 1979. Sexual selection and sexual dimorphism in the Amphibia. Copeia 1979: 297-306.
22. Shine R. 1989. Ecological causes for the evolution of sexual dimorphism: a review of the evidence. Quarterly Review of Biology 64: 419-461.
23. Slatkin M. 1984. Ecological causes of sexual dimorphism. Evolution 38: 622-630.
24. Tyler MJ. 1976. Frogs. Sydney: William Collins (Australia) Ltd.
25. Tyler MJ. 1989. Australian Frogs. Sydney: Penguin Books Australia Ltd.