2010
DOI: 10.3354/cr00878
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Contrasting effects of environmental factors during larval stage on morphological plasticity in post-metamorphic frogs

Abstract: In organisms with complex life cycles, environmentally induced plasticity across sequential stages can have important consequences on morphology and life history traits such as developmental and growth rates. However, previous research in amphibians and other ectothermic vertebrates suggests that some morphological traits are generally insensitive to environmental inductions. We conducted a literature survey to examine the allometric responses in relative hind leg length and head shape of post-metamorphic anur… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

6
93
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 109 publications
(106 citation statements)
references
References 59 publications
(62 reference statements)
6
93
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Warming increased development rate more than growth rate in the absence of predators, while it increased growth rate more than development rate in the presence of predators, such that size at metamorphosis was reduced in the absence of predators but was increased in the presence of predators. The negative effect of warming on size at metamorphosis in the absence of predators is consistent with the prediction, based on the general rule for ectotherms, that increased temperature will facilitate development more than growth (Smith-Gill and Berven 1979), and it is also consistent with many experimental studies that show a reduced size at metamorphosis under higher temperatures (Newman 1998;Alvarez and Nicieza 2002;Tejedo et al 2010). However, the positive effect of warming on size at metamorphosis in Fig.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 77%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Warming increased development rate more than growth rate in the absence of predators, while it increased growth rate more than development rate in the presence of predators, such that size at metamorphosis was reduced in the absence of predators but was increased in the presence of predators. The negative effect of warming on size at metamorphosis in the absence of predators is consistent with the prediction, based on the general rule for ectotherms, that increased temperature will facilitate development more than growth (Smith-Gill and Berven 1979), and it is also consistent with many experimental studies that show a reduced size at metamorphosis under higher temperatures (Newman 1998;Alvarez and Nicieza 2002;Tejedo et al 2010). However, the positive effect of warming on size at metamorphosis in Fig.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 77%
“…For instance, Newman (1998) found that Scaphiopus couchii metamorphosed earlier with a smaller size at metamorphosis at higher temperatures. This tendency has been further confirmed in many latter reports (Alvarez and Nicieza 2002;Laurila et al 2008; see also review by Tejedo et al 2010). However, such a tendency may not always hold true as there are often contrasting trait responses to specific environmental cues (Tejedo et al 2010).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 48%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The effects of warming on time to metamorphosis and early growth support the hypothesis that higher water temperatures accelerate larval growth and development by increasing metabolic rate (Newman 1998) as well as resource availability. Likewise, larvae in temporary pools accelerated growth and development, likely in response to desiccation cues (Leips et al 2000, Tejedo et al 2010. The effect of warming in reducing time to metamorphosis was about three times stronger than the effect of drying, suggesting that drying rate may not have imposed as strong a constraint on development.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 91%
“…For both approaches, the key steps are the characterization of environmental predictability (as discussed by Cavieres & Sabat 2008 to explain unexpected results), the choice of the metrics of phenotypic plasticity to be used (e.g. Ghalambor et al 2007, Tejedo et al 2010 and the phenotypic traits to be measured.…”
Section: Future Research and Conclusionmentioning
confidence: 99%