Spatial and temporal distribution of breeding anurans in streams in southeastern Brazil

Journal of Natural History

Volumn 41, Issue 13-16, 2007, Pages 949-963

  Afonso, Lilian G ^a   Eterovick, Paula C ^a  

^a PONTIFICAL CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF MINAS GERAIS   (Brazil)

Author keywords

Anura; Southeastern Brazil; Spatial and temporal distribution; Species diversity; Stream size; Streamside habitat

Indexed keywords

BREEDING POPULATION; CALLING BEHAVIOR; FROG; HABITAT CONSERVATION; REPRODUCTION; SPATIAL DISTRIBUTION; SPECIES DIVERSITY; STREAM; TEMPORAL DISTRIBUTION; VICARIANCE;

BRAZIL; SOUTH AMERICA;

ANURA; BUFONIDAE; CENTROLENIDAE; HYLIDAE;

EID: 34250188812     PISSN: 00222933     EISSN: 14645262     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00222930701311680     Document Type: Article

References (52)

1. Afonso LA, Eterovick PC. 2007. Microhabitat choice and differential use by anurans in forest streams in southeastern Brazil. Journal of Natural History 41:937-948.
2. Alford RA. 1999. Ecology. Resource use, competition, and predation. In: McDiarmid RW, Altig R, editors. Tadpoles. The Biology of Anuran Larvae. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. p 240-278.
3. Angermeier PL, Schlosser IJ. 1989. Species-area relationships for stream fishes. Ecology 70:1450-1462.
4. Azevedo-Ramos C, Galatti U. 2002. Patterns of amphibian diversity in Brazilian Amazonia: conservation implications. Biological Conservation 103:103-111.
5. Bernarde PA, Anjos L. 1999. Distribuição espacial e temporal da anurofauna no Parque Estadual Mata dos Godoy, Londrina, Paraná, Brasil (Amphibia: Anura). Comunicações do Museu de Ciência e Tecnologia, PUCRS 12:127-140.
6. Bertoluci J, Rodrigues MT. 2002. Seasonal patterns of breeding activity of Atlantic Rainforest anurans at Boracéia, Southeastern Brazil. Amphibia-Reptilia 23:161-167.
7. BioEstat. 2003. Versão 3.0. Manaus: Sociedade Civil Mamirauá/MCT - CNPq.
8. Bokermann WCA, Sazima I. 1973. Anfíbios da Serra do Cipó, Minas Gerais, Brasil.1: Duas espécies novas de Hyla (Anura, Hylidae). Revista Brasileira de Biologia 33:241-249.
9. Cardoso AJ, Andrade GV, Haddad CFB. 1989. Distribuição espacial em comunidades de anfíbios (Anura) no sudeste do Brasil. Revista Brasileira de Biologia 49:241-249.
10. Cardoso AJ, Haddad CFB. 1992. Diversidade e turno de vocalizaç ões de anuros em comunidade neotropical. Acta Zoologica Lilloana 41:93-105.
11. Collins JP, Wilbur HM. 1979. Breeding habits and habitats of the amphibians of the Edwin S. George Reserve, Michigan, with notes on the local distribution of fishes. Occasional Papers of the Museum of Zoology, University of Michigan 686:1-34.
12. Colwell RK. 1974. Predictability, constancy and contingency of periodic phenomena. Ecology 55:1148-1153.
13. Crump ML. 1974. Reproductive strategies in a tropical anuran community. Miscellaneous Publications, Museum of Natural History, University of Kansas 61:1-68.
14. Crump ML. 1982. Amphibian reproductive ecology on the community level. In: Scott-Jr NJ, editor. Herpetological Communities. Washington, DC: Wildlife Research Report 13. p 21-36.
15. Dayton GH, Fitzgerald LA. 2001. Competition, predation, and the distribution of four desert anurans. Oecologia 129:430-435.
16. Derby OA. 1966. The Serra of Espinhaço. Brazilian Journal of Geology 14:374-40.
17. Doan TM, Arizábal WA. 2002. Microgeographic variation in species composition of the herpetofaunal communities of Tambopata region, Peru. Biotropica 34:101-117.
18. Donnely MA, Guyer C. 1994. Patterns of reproduction and habitat use in an assemblage of Neotropical hylid frogs. Oecologia 98:291-302.
19. Drummond GM, Martins CS, Machado ABM, Sebaio FA, Antonini Y, editors. 2005. Biodiversidade em Minas Gerais: um Atlas para sua Conservaçã o. 2nd ed. Belo Horizonte, Brazil: Fundação Biodiversitas.
20. Duellman WE. 1978. The biology of an equatorial herpetofauna in Amazon Ecuador. Miscellaneous Publications, Museum of Natural History, University of Kansas 65:1-352.
21. Duellman WE. 1989. Tropical herpetofaunal communities: patterns of community structure in neotropical rainforests. In: Harmelin-Vivien ML, Bourliere F, editors. Ecological Studies, vol. 69 - Vertebrates in complex tropical systems. New York: Springer-Verlag. p 61-88.
22. Duellman WE, Trueb L. 1994. Biology of amphibians. New York: McGraw-Hill.
23. Ernst R, Rödel M-O. 2005. Anthropogenically induced changes of predictability in tropical anuran assemblages. Ecology 86:3111-3118.
24. Ernst R, Rödel M-O. 2006. Community assembly and structure of tropical leaf-litter anurans. Ecotropica 12:113-129.
25. Eterovick PC. 2003. Distribution of anuran species among montane streams in south-eastern Brazil. Journal of Tropical Ecology 19:219-228.
26. Eterovick PC, Barata I. 2006. Distribution of tadpoles within and among Brazilian streams: the influence of predators, habitat size and heterogeneity. Herpetologica 62:367-379.
27. Eterovick PC, Sazima I. 2000. Structure of an anuran community in a montane meadow in southeastern Brazil: effects of seasonality, habitat, and predation. Amphibia-Reptilia 21:439-461.
28. Eterovick PC, Sazima I. 2004. Anfíbios da Serra do Cipó - Amphibians from the Serra do Cipó, Minas Gerais, Brasil. Belo Horizonte, Brazil: Ed. PUC Minas. 152 p.
29. Gascon C. 1991. Population and community level analysis of species occurrences of Central Amazonian rainforest tadpoles. Ecology 72:1731-1746.
30. Giulietti AM, Pirani JR. 1988. Patterns of geographic distribution of some plant species from the Espinhaço Range, Minas Gerais and Bahia. In: Vanzolini PE, Heyer WR, editors. Proceedings of a workshop on Neotropical distribution patterns. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: Academia Brasileira de Ciências. p 36-69.
31. Giulietti AM, Pirani JR, Harley RM. 1997. Espinhaço Range region, Eastern Brazil. In: Davis SD, Heywood V H, Herrera-MacBryde O, Villa-Lobos J, Hamilton AC, editors. Centres of plant diversity, a guide and strategy for their conservation, v. 3. Oxford, England: Information Press. p 397-404.
32. Hero JM, Gascon C, Magnusson WE. 1998. Direct and indirect effects of predation on tadpole community structure in the Amazon rainforest. Australian Journal of Ecology 23:474-482.
33. Heyer WR, MCDiarmid RW, Weigmann DL. 1975. Tadpoles, predation and pond habitats in the tropics. Biotropica 7:100-111.
34. Hödl W. 1977. Call differences and calling site segregation in anuran species from central Amazonian floating meadows. Oecologia 28:251-263.
35. MacArthur RH. 1968. The theory of the niche. In: Leotin RC, editor. Population biology and evolution. New York: Syracuse University Press. p 159-176.
36. McCune B, Mefford MJ. 1999. Multivariate Analysis of Ecological Data. Version 4.10. MjM Software, Gleneden Beach, Oregon, USA.
37. Palmer MW. 1993. Putting things in even better order: the advantages of canonical correspondence analysis. Ecology 74:2215-2230.
38. Parris KM, McCarthy MA. 1999. What influences the structure of frog assemblages at forest streams? Australian Journal of Ecology 24:495-502.
39. Pianka ER. 1973. The structure of lizard communities. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 4:53-74.
40. Pielou EC. 1975. Ecological diversity. New York: Wiley Interscience Publishers.
41. Pombal -JR JP. 1997. Distribuição espacial e temporal de anuros (Amphibia) em uma poça permanente na Serra de Paranapiacaba, sudeste do Brasil. Revista Brasileira de Biologia 57:583-594.
42. Quinn GP, Keough MJ. 2002. Experimental design and data analysis for biologists. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
43. Rossa-Feres DC, Jim J. 1994. Distribuição sazonal em comunidades de anfíbios anuros na região de Botucatu, São Paulo. Revista Brasileira de Biologia 54:323-334.
44. Schiesari LC. 2004. Performance tradeoffs across resource gradients in anuran larvae [PhD dissertation]. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan.
45. Skelly DK. 1997. Tadpole communities. American Scientist 85:36-45.
46. Ter Braak CJF. 1986. Canonical correspondence analysis: a new eigenvector technique for multivariate direct gradient analysis. Ecology 67:1167-1179.
47. Toft CA, Duellman WE. 1979. Anurans of the lower Rio Lullapichis, Amazonian Peru: a preliminary analysis of community structure. Herpetologica 35:71-77.
48. Ultsch GR, Bradford DF, Freda J. 1999. Physiology: Coping with the Environment. In: McDiarmid RW, Altig R, editors. Tadpoles: the biology of anuran larvae. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. p 189-214.
49. Werner EE, Glennemeier KS. 1999. Influence of forest canopy cover on the breeding pond distributions of several amphibian species. Copeia 1999:1-12.
50. Wiest-Jr JA. 1982. Anuran succession at temporary ponds in a post oak-savanna region of Texas. In: Scott-Jr NJ, editor. Herpetological communities. Wildlife Research Report 13, Washington, DC. p 39-47.
51. Zimmerman BL, Bierregaard RO. 1986. Relevance of the equilibrium theory of island biogeography and species-area relations to conservation with a case from Amazonia. Journal of Biogeography 13:133-143.
52. Zimmerman BL, Simberloff D. 1996. An historical interpretation of habitat use by frogs in a Central Amazonian Forest. Journal of Biogeography 23:27-46.