Larval interactions with an invasive species (the Cane Toad Rhinella marina) affect life-history traits in an Australian anuran (the Marbled Frog Limnodynastes convexiusculus)

Australian Zoologist

Volumn 36, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 424-428

  Greenlees, Matthew J ^a   Crossland, Michael R ^a   Shine, Richard ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Bufo marinus; Bufonidae; Competition; Limnodynastidae; Metamorphosis; Phenotypic plasticity; Tadpole

Indexed keywords

BODY SIZE; DESICCATION; ECOLOGICAL IMPACT; FITNESS; FROG; INVASIVE SPECIES; LABORATORY METHOD; LARVA; LARVAL DEVELOPMENT; LIFE HISTORY TRAIT; METAMORPHOSIS; NATIVE SPECIES; PHENOTYPIC PLASTICITY; POISONING; PREDATION; TOAD;

AUSTRALIA;

EID: 84895783295     PISSN: 00672238     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.7882/az.2013.013     Document Type: Review

References (51)

1. Alford, R.A. 1989. Variation in predator phenology affects predator performance and prey community composition. Ecology 70: 206-219. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1938427 (Pubitemid 20417389)
2. Beebee, T.J.C. 1991. Purification of an agent causing growth inhibition in anuran larvae and its identification as a unicellular unpigmented alga. Canadian Journal of Zoology 69: 2146-2153. http://dx.doi.org/10.1139/z91-300
3. Berven, K.A. 1990. Factors affecting population fluctuations in larval and adult stages of the wood frog (Rana sylvatica). Ecology 71: 1599-1608. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1938295
4. Berven, K.A. and Gill, D.E. 1983. Interpreting geographic variation in life-history traits. American Zoologist 23: 85-97. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ icb/23.1.85
5. Blanchet, S., Loot, G., Grenouillet, G. and Brosse, S. 2007. Competitive interactions between native and exotic salmonids: a combined field and laboratory demonstration. Ecology of Freshwater Fish 16: 133-143. http://dx.doi.Org/10.1111/j.1600-0633.2007.00205.x (Pubitemid 46737894)
6. Bohn, T., Amundsen, P-A. and Sparrow, A. 2008. Competitive exclusion after invasion? Biological Invasions 10: 359-368. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1007/ s10530-007-9135-8 (Pubitemid 351640156)
7. Boland, C.R.J. 2004. Introduced cane toads Bufo marinus are active nest predators and competitors of rainbow beeeaters Merops ornatus: observational and experimental evidence. Biological Conservation 120: 53-62. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/j-biocon.2004:01.025 (Pubitemid 38991677)
8. Bureau of Meteorology. 2009. Climate records. accessed 25 March 2009.
9. Carroll, S.P. 2007. Natives adapting to invasive species: ecology, genes, and the sustainability of conservation. Ecological Research 22:892-901. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11284-007-0352-5 (Pubitemid 350105376)
10. Child, T., Phillips, B.L. and Shine, R. 2009. Does desiccation risk drive the distribution of juvenile cane toads (Bufo marinus) in tropical Australia? Journal of Tropical Ecology 25: 193-200. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/ S0266467408005695
11. Crossland, M.R. 2000. Direct and indirect effects of the introduced toad Bufo marinus (Anura: Bufonidae) on populations of native anuran larvae in Australia. Ecography 23: 283-290. http://dx.doi.org/10-1111/j.1600-0587-2000. tb00283.x (Pubitemid 30416476)
12. Crossland, M.R., Brown, G.R, Anstis, M., Shilton, C. and Shine, R. 2008. Mass mortality of native anuran tadpoles in tropical Australia due to the invasive cane toad (Bufo marinus). Biological Conservation 141: 2387-2394. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2008.07.005
13. Crossland, M.R., Alford, R.A. and Shine, R. 2009. Impact of the invasive cane toad (Bufo marinus) on an Australian frog (Opisthodon ornatus) depends on reproductive timing. Oecologia 158: 625-632. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00442- 008-1167-y (Pubitemid 50300446)
14. Crossland, M. and Shine, R. 2010. Vulnerability of an Australian anuran assemblage to the toxic eggs of the invasive cane toad (Bufo marinus). Austral Ecology 35: 197-204. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-9993.2009.02027.x
15. Dash, M.C. and Hota, A.K. 1980. Density effects on the survival, growth rate, and metamorphosis of Rana tigrina tadpoles. Ecology 61: 1025-1028. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1936818
16. Denver, R.J. 1997. Proximate mechanisms of phenotypic plasticity in amphibian metamorphosis. American Zoologist 37: 172-184. http://dx.doi.Org/10. 1093/icb/37.2.172
17. Eastwood, M.M., Donahue, M.J. and Fowler, A.E. 2007. Reconstructing past biological invasions: niche shift in response to invasive predators and competitors. Biological Invasions 9: 397-407. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10530- 006-9041-5 (Pubitemid 46742115)
18. Geiger, W., Alcorlo, P., Batanas, A. and Montes, C. 2005. Impact of an introduced Crustacean on the trophic webs of Mediterranean wetlands. Biological Invasions 7: 49-73. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10530-004-9635-8
19. Gosner, K.L. 1960. A simplified table for staging anuran embryos and larvae with notes on identification. Herpetologica 16: 183-190.
20. Greenlees, M.J., Brown, G.P., Webb, J.K., Phillips, B.L. and Shine, R. 2006. Effects of an invasive anuran [the cane toad (Bufo marinus)] on the invertebrate fauna of a tropical Australian floodplain. Animal Conservation 9: 431-438. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-1795.2006.00057.x
21. Greenlees, M.J., Brown, G.P., Webb, J.K., Phillips, B.L. and Shine, R. 2007. Do invasive cane toads (Chaunus marinus) compete with Australian frogs (Cyclorana australis)? Austral Ecology 32: 900-907. http://dx.doi.org/10-1111/j. 1442-9993.2007.01778.x (Pubitemid 350076269)
22. Greenlees, M.J., Phillips, B.L. and Shine, R. 2010a. An invasive species imposes selection on life-history traits of a native frog. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 100:329-336. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8312.2010. 01432.x
23. Greenlees, M.J., Phillips, B.L. and Shine, R. 2010b. Adjusting to a toxic invader: native Australian frogs learn not to prey on cane toads. Behavioral Ecology 21: 966-971. http://dx.doi. org/10.1093/beheco/arq095
24. Griffiths, A.D. and McKay, J.L. 2007. Cane toads reduce the abundance and site occupancy of Merten's water monitor (Varanus mertensi). Wildlife Research 34: 609-615. http://dx.doi. org/10.1071/WR07024
25. Hayes, R.A., Crossland, M.R., Hagman, M., Capon, R.J. and Shine, R. 2009. Ontogenetic variation in the chemical defenses of cane toads (Bufo marinus): toxin profiles and effects on predators. Journal of Chemical Ecology 35: 391-399. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10886-009-9608-6
26. Heyer, W.R., McDiarmid, R.W. and Weigmann, D.L. 1975. Tadpoles, predation and pond habitats in the tropics. Biotropica 7: 100-111. http://dx.doi.org/10. 2307/2989753
27. Hoare, J.M., Pledger, S., Nelson, N.J. and Daugherty, C.H. 2007. Avoiding aliens: behavioural plasticity in habitat use enables large, nocturnal geckos to survive Pacific rat invasions. Biological Conservation 136: 510-519. http://dx.doi. org/10.1016/j.biocon.2006.12.022
28. Katzmann, S., Waringer-Loschenkohl, A. and Waringer, J.A. 2003. Effects of inter- and intra-specific competition on growth and development of Bufo viridis and Bufo bufo tadpoles. Limnologica 33: 122-130. http://dx.doi.org/10. 1016/S0075-9511(03)80041-5 (Pubitemid 37014738)
29. Kelehear, C., Webb, J.K. and Shine, R. 2009. Rhabdias pseudosphaerocephab infection in Bufo marinus: lung nematodes reduce viability of metamorph cane toads. Parasitology 136: 919-927. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0031182009006325
30. Kiesecker, J.M. and Blaustein, A.R. 1997. Population differences in responses of red-legged frogs (Rana aurora) to introduced bullfrogs. Ecology 78: 1752-1760. http://dx.doi. org/10.2307/2266098
31. Knight, C.M., Parris, M.J. and Gutzke, W.H.N. 2009. Influence of priority effects and pond location on invaded larval amphibian communities. Biological Invasions 11: 1033-1044. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10530-008-9314-2
32. Kupferberg, S.J. 1997. Bullfrog (Rana catesbiana) invasion of a California river: the role of larval competition. Ecology 78: 1736-1751. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2266097 (Pubitemid 28054167)
33. Letnic, M., Webb, J.K. and Shine, R. 2008. Invasive cane toads (Bufo marinus) cause mass mortality of freshwater crocodiles (Crocodylus johnstoni) in tropical Australia. Biological Conservation 141: 1773-1782. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j-biocon.2008.04-031
34. Lever, C. 2001. The Cane Toad. The History and Ecology of a Successful Colonist. Westbury Academic Publishing, Otley, West Yorkshire.
35. Licht, L.E. 1967. Growth inhibition in crowded tadpoles: intraspecific and interspecific effects. Ecology 48: 736-745. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/ 1933731
36. Llewelyn, J.S., Phillips, B.L. and Shine, R. 2009. Sublethal costs associated with the consumption of toxic prey by snakes. Austral Ecology 34: 179-184 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/J.1442-9993.2008.01919.x
37. Morin, P.J. 1983. Predation, competition, and the composition of larval anuran guilds. Ecological Monographs 53: 119-138. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/ 1942491
38. Phillips, B.L., Greenlees, M.J., Brown, G.P. and Shine, R. 2010. Predator behaviour and morphology mediates the impact of an invasive species: cane toads and death adders in Australia. Animal Conservation 13: 53-59. http://dx.doi. org/10.1111/j.1469-1795.2009.00295.x
39. Pizzatto, L. and Shine, R. 2008. The behavioral ecology of cannibalism in cane toads (Bufo marinus). Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 63: 123-133. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00265-008-0642-0
40. Richter-Boix, A., Llorente, G.A. and Montori, A. 2007. Hierarchical competition in pond-breeding anuran larvae in a Mediterranean area. Amphibia-Reptilia 28: 247-261. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1163/156853807780202549 (Pubitemid 47265679)
41. Rose, S.M. 1960. A feedback mechanism of growth control in tadpoles. Ecology 41: 188-199. http://dx.doi. org/10.2307/1931953
42. Salo, P., Korpimaki, E., Banks, P.B., Nordstrom, M. and Dickman, C.R. 2007. Alien predators are more dangerous than native predators to prey populations. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 274: 1237-1243. http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/ rspb.2006.0444
43. Smith, D.C. 1987. Adult recruitment in chorus frogs: effects of size and date of metamorphosis. Ecobgy 68: 344-350. http:// dx.doi.org/10.2307/1939265
44. Smith, K.G. 2005. Effects of non-indigenous tadpoles on native tadpoles in Florida: evidence of competition. Biologbal Conservation 123: 433-441. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j-biocon.2005.01.005
45. Steinwascher, K. 1979. Competitive interactions among tadpoles: responses to resource level. Ecology 60: 1172-1183. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1936965
46. Strauss, S.Y., Lau, J.A. and Carroll, S.P. 2006. Evolutionary responses of natives to introduced species: what do introductions tell us about natural communities. Ecobgy Letters 9: 357-374http://dx.doi.Org/10.1111/j.1461-0248. 2005.00874.x
47. Tyler, M.J., Crook, G.A. and Davies, M. 1983. Reproductive biology of the frogs of the Magela creek system, Northern Territory. Records of the South Australian Museum 18: 415-440.
48. Ward-Fear, G., Brown, G.P., Greenlees, M.J. and Shine, R. 2009. Maladaptive traits in an invasive species: in Australia, cane toads are more vulnerable to predatory ants than are native frogs. Functional Ecobgy 23: 559-568. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ j.1365-2435.2009.01556.x
49. Wilbur, H.M. 1977. Density-dependent aspects of growth and metamorphosis in Bufo americanus. Ecology 58: 196-200. http:// dx.doi.org/10.2307/1935122
50. Wilbur, H.M. 1980. Complex life-cycles. Annual Review of Ecobgy and Systematics 11: 67-93. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/ annurev.es. 11.110180.000435
51. Wilbur, H.M. and Collins, J.P. 1973. Ecological aspects of amphibian metamorphosis. Science 182: 1305-1314. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.182. 4119.1305