Breeding activity of Physalaemus signifer (Anura, Leptodactylidae) in a temporary pond;Atividade reprodutiva de Physalaemus signifer (Anura, Leptodactylidae) em ambiente temporário

Iheringia - Serie Zoologia

Volumn 92, Issue 2, 2002, Pages 57-70

  Wogel, Henrique ^a   Abrunhosa, Patrícia A ^a   Pombal Jr , José P ^a  

^a FEDERAL UNIVERSITY OF RIO DE JANEIRO   (Brazil)

Author keywords

Agonistic behavior; Amphibia; Mating success; Physalaemus; Satellite behavior

Indexed keywords

EID: 3543132246     PISSN: 00734721     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1590/S0073-47212002000200006     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. ARAK, A. 1983. Male-male competition and mate choice in anuran amphibians. In: BATENSON, P. ed. Mate Choice. Cambridge, Cambridge Univ. p.181-210.
2. BARRETO, L. & ANDRADE, G. V. 1995. Aspects of the reproductive biology of Physalaemus cuvieri (Anura: Leptodactylidae) in northeastern Brazil. Amphibia-Reptilia, Leiden, 16(1):67-76.
3. BASTOS, R. P. & HADDAD, C. F. B. 1995. Vocalizações e interações acústicas de Hyla elegans (Anura, Hylidae) durante a atividade reprodutiva. Naturalia, São Paulo, 20:165-176.
4. _. 1996. Breeding activity of the neotropical treefrog Hyla elegans (Anura, Hylidae). J. Herpetol., Lawrence, 30(3):355-360.
5. BOKERMANN, W. C. A. 1962. Observações biológicas sôbre Physalaemus cuvieri Fitz., 1826 (Amphibia, Salientia). Revta bras. Biol., Rio de Janeiro, 22(4):391-399.
6. _. 1966. Dos nuevas especies de Physalaemus de Espiritu Santo, Brasil (Amphibia, Leptodactylidae). Physis, Buenos Aires, 26(71):193-202.
7. BRASILEIRO, C. A. 1998. Physalaemus centralis (NCN). Male-male combat. Herpetological Review, Lawrence, 29(3):165.
8. CARDOSO, A. J. 1981. Biologia e sobrevivência de Physalaemus cuvieri Fitz., 1826 (Amphibia, Anura), na natureza. Ciênc. Cult., São Paulo, 33(9):1224-1228.
9. CARDOSO, A. J. & MARTINS, J. E. 1987. Diversidade de anuros durante o turno de vocalizações, em comunidade neotropical. Papéis Avuls Zool., São Paulo, 36(23):279-285.
10. CRUMP, M. L. 1988. Aggression in harlequin frogs: male-male competition and a possible conflit of interest between the sexes. Anim. Behav., London, 36(4):1064-1077.
11. DUELLMAN, W. E. & TRUEB, L. 1986. Biology of Amphibians. New York, McGraw-Hill. 670p.
12. DYSON, M. L. & PASSMORE, N. I. 1992. Inter-male spacing and aggression in African painted reed frogs, Hyperolius marmoratus. Ethology, Berlin, 91:237-247.
13. EMLEN, S. T. & ORING, L. W. 1977. Ecology, sexual selection, and the evolution of mating systems. Science, Washington, 197:215-223.
14. FELLERS, G. M. 1979. Agression, territoriality, and mating behaviour in North American treefrogs. Anim. Behav., London, 27:107-119.
15. FORESTER, D. C. & LYKENS, D. V. 1986. Significance of satellite males in a population of spring peepers (Hyla crucifer). Copeia, Lawrence, 1986 (3):719-724.
16. FROST, D. R. ed. 2000. Amphibian Species of the World: an online reference. V2.20. (1 september 2000). New York, The American Museum of Natural History.
17. HADDAD, C. F. B. 1991. Satellite behavior in the neotropical treefrog Hyla minuta. J. Herpetol., Lawrence, 25(2):226-229.
18. HADDAD, C. F. B. & POMBAL, J. P., JR. 1998. Redescription of Physalaemus spiniger (Anura: Leptodactylidae) and description of two new reproductive modes. J. Herpetol., Lawrence, 32(4):557-565.
19. HEYER, W. R.; RAND, A. S. et al. 1990. Frogs of Boraceia. Arq. Zool., São Paulo, 31:231-410.
20. HOWARD, R. D. 1978. The evolution of mating strategies in bullfrogs, Rana catesbiana. Evolution, Lawrence, 32:850-871.
21. KREBS, J. R. 1982. Territorial defence in the great tit (Parus major): do residents always win? Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol., New York, 11:185-194.
22. LEHNER, P. N. 1979. Handbook of ethological methods. New York, Garland STPM. 403p.
23. MARTINS, M.; POMBAL, J. P., JR. & HADDAD, C. F. B. 1998. Escalated aggressive behaviour and facultative parental care in the nest building gladiator frog, Hyla faber. Amphibia-Reptilia, Leiden, 19:65-73.
24. MARTOF, B. S. 1953. Territoriality in the green frog, Rana clamitans. Ecology, Washington, 34:165-174.
25. MIYAMOTO, M. M. & CANE, J. H. 1980. Behavioral observations of noncalling males in Costa Rican Hyla ebraccata. Biotropica, Lawrence, 12(3):225-227.
26. MURPHY, C. G. 1994a. Chorus tenure of male barking treefrogs, Hyla gratiosa. Anim. Behav., London, 48:763-777.
27. _. 1994b. Determinants of chorus tenure in barking treefrogs (Hyla gratiosa). Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol., New York, 34:285-294.
28. NASCIMENTO, L. B.; CARVALHO, R. R., JR. et al. 2001. Reproduç ão e descrição do girino de Physalaemus rupestris Caramaschi, Carcerelli & Feio, 1991 (Amphibia, Anura, Leptodactylidae). Bolm Mus. nac. Rio de J., Nova Série, Sér. Zool., Rio de Janeiro, 450:1-10.
29. PARKER, G. A. 1974. Assessment strategy and the evolution of fighting behaviour. J. Theor. Biol., New York, 47:223-243.
30. PASSMORE, N. I. & TELFORD, S. R. 1981. The effect of chorus organization on mate localization in the painted reed frog (Hyperolius marmoratus). Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol., New York, 9:291-293.
31. PERRIL, S. A.; GERHARDT, H. C. & DANIEL, R. 1978. Sexual parasitism in the green tree frog (Hyla cinerea). Science, Washington, 200:1179-1180.
32. POMBAL, J. P., JR.; SAZIMA, I. & HADDAD, C. F. B. 1994. Breeding behavior of the pumpkin toadlet, Brachycephalus ephippium (Brachycephalidae). J. Herpetol., Lawrence, 28(4):516-519.
33. RAND, A. S; RYAN, M. J. & WILCZYNSKI, W. 1992. Signal redundancy and receiver permissiveness in acoustic mate recognition by the túngara frog, Physalaemus pustulosus. Amer. Zool., New York, 32:81-90.
34. ROBERTSON, J. G. M. 1984. Acoustic spacing by breeding males of Uperoleia rugosa (Anura: Leptodactylidae). Z. Tierpsychol., Berlin, 64:283-297.
35. _. 1986. Male territoriality, fighting and assessment of fighting ability in the australian frog, Uperoleia rugosa. Anim. Behav., London, 34:763-772.
36. RYAN, M. J. 1985. The túngara frog. A study in sexual selection and communication. Chicago, The University of Chicago. 230p.
37. RYAN, M. J. & RAND, A. S. 1990. The sensory basis of sexual selection for complex calls in the túngara frog, Physalaemus pustulosus (sexual selection for sensory explotation). Evolution, Lawrence, 44:305-314.
38. SCHWARTZ, J. J. 1993. Male calling behavior, female discrimination and acoustic interference in the neotropical treefrog Hyla microcephala under realistic acoustic conditions. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol., New York, 32:401-414.
39. _. 1994. Male advertisement and female choice in frogs: recent findings and new approaches to the study of communication in a dynamic acoustic environment. Amer. Zool., New York, 34:616-624.
40. SULLIVAN, B. K. 1982. Sexual selection in woodhouse's toad (Bufo woodhousei) I. Chorus organization. Anim. Behav., London, 30(3):680-686.
41. VIELLIARD, J. 1993. "Side-bands" artefact and digital sound processing. Bioacoustics, Oxford, 5:159-162.
42. WALTZ, E. C. 1982. Alternative mating tactics and the law of diminishing returns: the satellite threshold model. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol., New York, 10(2):75-83.
43. WEBER, L. N. & CARVALHO E SILVA, S. P. 2001. Descrição da larva de Physalaemus signifer (Girard, 1853) (Amphibia, Anura, Leptodactylidae) e informações sobre a reprodução e a distribuição geográfica da espécie. Bolm Mus. nac. Rio de J., Nova Série, Sér. Zoologia, Rio de Janeiro, 462:1-6.
44. WELLS, K. D. 1977a. The social behaviour of anuran amphibians. Anim. Behav., London, 25(3):666-693.
45. _.1977b. Territoriality and male mating success in the green frog (Rana clamitans). Ecology, Washington, 58(4):750-762.
46. _.1978. Territoriality in the green frog (Rana clamitans): vocalizations and agonistic interactions. Anim. Behav., London, 26:1051-1063.
47. WOODWARD, B. 1982. Male persistence and mating success in woodhouse's toad (Bufo woodhousei). Ecology, Washington, 63(2):583-585.
48. ZAR, J. H. 1984. Biostatistical Analysis. 2. ed. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs. 718p.