全部 标题 作者
关键词 摘要

OALib Journal期刊
ISSN: 2333-9721
费用:99美元

查看量下载量

相关文章

更多...

Effectsoflightintensityonactivityinfoursympatricanurantadpoles

DOI: 10.13918/j.issn.2095-8137.2014.4.332, PP. 332-337

Keywords: Anura,Activity,Developmentalstage,Lightintensity,Tadpole

Full-Text   Cite this paper   Add to My Lib

Abstract:

Thoughlightconditionsareknowntoaffectthedevelopmentandanti-predationstrategiesofseveralaquaticspecies,relativelylittleisknownabouthowdifferentspeciesreacttolight,orhowlightcanaffectthesespeciesduringdifferentpointsintheirlife-cycle.Inthisstudy,weusedfoursympatricanurantadpoles(Bufogargarizans,B.melanostictus,PelophylaxnigromaculatusandMicrohylafissipes)asanimalsystemtoexaminespecies-specificactivitiesoftheunderdoingdifferentlightintensitytreatments,soastobetterunderstandhowtheyrespondtolight.Weexposedfourdifferentspeciesoftadpolesto1660and14luxlightintensitytreatmentsandthenmeasuredseveralparametersincludingdevelopmentstage,bodylengthandtaillength,andaswellastheirbasicactivities.TheresultsofthisobservationandanalysisshowedthattheactivitiesoftadpolesweresignificantlygreaterinB.gargarizansandB.melanostictusthaninP.nigromaculatusandM.fissipes;andwerealsosignificantlygreaterduringtimesofhighlightintensityascomparedtoduringlowlightintensity.Moreover,theobservedrelationshipbetweenspeciesandlightintensitywassignificant.TheactivitiesofB.gargarizansandB.melanostictustadpolesweregreaterinhighlight,whiletheactivityofP.nigromaculatustadpoleswasgreaterinlowlightintensity,whileM.fissipestadpolesshowednodifferencesineitherloworhighintensitylight.Furthermore,theactivitiesofB.gargarizans,B.melanostictusandM.fissipestadpolesintermsofdevelopmentalstage,bodysizeortaillengthdidnotseemtodifferwithlightintensity,butduringearlylarvaldevelopmentalperiodofP.nigromaculatus,theactivityoftadpoleswasnegativelycorrelatedwithdevelopmentstage,butirrelevanttoeitherbodysizeortaillengthindifferentlightintensities.Theseresultsleadustoconcludetheobservedactivitiesofthefoursympatricanurantadpolesarecloselycorrelatedwiththeirspecificanti-predationstrategies.

References

[1]  álvarez D, Nicieza AG. 2009. Differential success of prey escaping predators: tadpole vulnerability or predator selection? Copeia, 2009(3): 453-457.
[2]  Anholt BR, Negovetic S, Rauter C, Som C. 2005. Predator complement determines the relative success of tadpoles of the Rana esculenta complex. Evolutionary Ecology Research, 7(5): 733-741.
[3]  Dayton GH, Saenz D, Baum KA, Langerhans RB, DeWitt TJ. 2005. Body shape, burst speed and escape behavior of larval anurans. Oikos, 111(3): 582-591.
[4]  de Vlaming VL, Bury RB. 1970. Thermal selection in tadpoles of the tailed frog, Ascaphus truei.Journal of Herpetology, 4(3/4): 179-189.
[5]  Eterovick PC, Sazima I. 1999. Description of the tadpole of Bufo rufus with notes on aggregative behavior. Journal of Herpetology, 33(4): 711-713.
[6]  Fei L, Hu SQ, Ye C, Huang YZ. 2009. Fauna Sinica: Amphibia. Beijing: Science Press (in Chinese).
[7]  Golden DR, Smith GR, Rettig JE. 2000. Effects of age and group size on habitat selection and activity Level in Xenopus laevis tadpoles. Nebraska Academy of Sciences, 26: 23-27.
[8]  Gosner KL. 1960. A simplified table for staging anuran embryos and larvae with notes on identification. Herpetologica, 16(3): 183-190.
[9]  Griffiths RA, Getliff JM, Mylotte VJ. 1988. Diel patterns of activity and vertical migration in tadpoles of the common toad, Bufo bufo.Herpetological Journal, 1(1): 223-226.
[10]  Huey RB. 1980. Sprint velocity of tadpoles (Bufoboreas) through metamorphosis. Copeia, 1980(3): 537-540.
[11]  Anholt BR, Werner E, Skelly DK. 2000. Effect of food and predators on the activity of four larval ranid frogs. Ecology, 81(12): 3509-3521.
[12]  Arendt J. 2010. Morphological correlates of sprint swimming speed in five species of spadefoot toad tadpoles: Comparison of morphometric methods. Journal of Morphology, 271(9): 1044-1052.
[13]  Ashby KR. 1969. The population ecology of a self-maintaining colony of the Common frog (Rana temporaria). Journal of Zoology, 158(4): 453-474.
[14]  Beiswenger RE. 1972. Aggregative Behavior of Tadpoles of the American Toad, Bufo americanus in Michigan. Ph.D. thesis, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor MI.
[15]  Beiswenger RE. 1977. Diel patterns of aggregativebehavior in tadpoles of Bufo americanus, in relation to light and temperature. Ecology, 58(1): 98-108.
[16]  Branch LC. 1983. Social behavior of the tadpoles of Phyllomedusa vaillanti.Copeia, 1983(2): 420-428.
[17]  Hews DK. 1988. Alarm response in larval western toads, Bufo boreas: release of larval chemicals by a natural predator and its effect on predator capture efficiency. Animal Behaviour, 36(1): 125-133.
[18]  Holomuzki JR. 1986. Predation avoidance and diel patterns of microhabitat use by larval tiger salamanders. Ecology, 67(3): 737-748.
[19]  Jaeger RG, Hailman JP. 1976. Phototaxis in anurans: Relation between intensity and spectral preferences. Copeia, 1976(1): 92-98.
[20]  Justis CS, Taylor DH. 1976. Extraocular photoreception and compass orientation in larval bullfrogs, Rana catesbeiana.Copeia, 1976(1): 98-105.
[21]  Lardner B. 2000. Morphological and life history responses to predators in larvae of seven anurans. Oikos, 88(1): 169-179.
[22]  Laurila A. 1998. Breeding habitat selection and larval performance of two anurans in freshwater rock-pools. Ecography, 21(5): 484-494.
[23]  Laurila A, Pakkasmaa S, Crochet PA, Merila J. 2002. Predator-induced plasticity in early life history and morphology in two anuran amphibians. Oecologia, 132(4): 524-530.
[24]  Lefcort H. 1996. Adaptive, chemically mediated fright response in tadpoles of the southern leopard frog, Rana utricularia.Copeia, 1996(2): 455-459.
[25]  McClure KV, Mora JW, Smith GR. 2009. Effects of light and group size on the activity of wood frog tadpoles (Rana sylvatica) and their response to a shadow stimulus. Acta Herpetol ogica, 4(1): 103-107.
[26]  McIntyre PB, Baldwin S, Flecker AS. 2004. Effects of behavioral and morphological plasticity on risk of predation in a neotropical tadpole. Oecologia, 141(1): 130-138.
[27]  Nelson DWM, Crossland MR, Shine R. 2011a. Behavioural responses of native predators to an invasive toxic prey species. Austral Ecology, 36(6): 605-611.
[28]  Nelson DWM, Crossland MR, Shine R. 2011b. Foraging responses of predators to novel toxic prey: effects of predator learning and relative prey abundance. Oikos, 120(1): 152-158.
[29]  Relyea RA. 2005. The heritability of inducible defenses in tadpoles. Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 18(4): 856-866.
[30]  Smith GR, Awan AR. 2009. The roles of predator identity and group size in the antipredator responses of American toad (Bufo americanus) and Bullfrog (Rana catesbeiana) tadpoles to different predators. Behaviour, 146(2): 225-243.
[31]  Smith GR, Burgett AA, Sparks KA, Temple KG, Winter KE. 2007. Temporal patterns in bullfrog (Rana catesbeiana) tadpole activity: a mesocosm experiment on the effects of density and bluegill sunfish (Lepomis macrochirus) presence. Herpetological Journal, 17(3): 199-203.
[32]  Smith GR, Burgett AA, Temple KG, Sparks KA, Winter KE. 2008. The ability of three species of tadpoles to differentiate among potential fish predators. Ethology, 114(7): 701-710.
[33]  Spieler M. 2005. Can aggregative behaviour of Phrynomantis microps tadpoles reduce predation risk. Herpetological Journal, 15(3): 153-157.
[34]  Taylor J. 1983. Orientation and flight behavior of a neotenic salamander (Ambystoma gracile) in Oregon. American Midland Naturalist, 109(1): 40-49.
[35]  Van Buskirk J. 2001. Specific induced responses to different predator species in anuran larvae. Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 14(3): 482-489.
[36]  Van Buskirk J, Mccollum SA. 2000. Functional mechanisms of an inducible defence in tadpoles: morphology and behaviour influence mortality risk from predation. Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 13(2): 336-347.
[37]  Warkentin KM. 1992. Effects of temperature and illumination on feeding rates of green frog tadpoles (Rana clamitans). Copeia, 1992(3): 725-730.
[38]  Wei L, Lin ZH, Zhao RY, Chen ST. 2013. Prey selection by tiger frog larvae (Hoplobatrachus chinensis) of two sympatric anuran species'' tadpoles. Zoological Research, 34(3): 209-213. (in Chinese)
[39]  Wilson RS, Kraft PG, Van Damme R. 2005. Predator-specific changes in the morphology and swimming performance of larval Rana lessonae.Functional Ecology, 19(2): 238-244.
[40]  Wright ML, Jorey ST, Myers YM, Fieldstad ML, Paquette CM, Clark MB. 1988. Influence of photoperiod, day length, and feeding schedule on tadpole growth and development. Development, Growth & Differentiation, 30(3): 315-323.

Full-Text

Contact Us

service@oalib.com

QQ:3279437679

WhatsApp +8615387084133