Habitat Selection of Amphibians during Their Aquatic Phase

Strijbosch, H.

doi:10.2307/3544324

Cited by 80 publications

(56 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Water depth is a good indicator of pond size and permanence, usually favouring more species (Fryer 1985;Laan and Verboom 1990;Oertli et al 2002). Large open-canopy ponds are associated with higher primary productivity, including high standing crop and diversity of periphyton and macrophytes (Skelly et al 2002), which can be beneficial for amphibians as a refuge from predators and substrate for eggs (Strijbosch 1979). Hydroperiod is another widely cited factor influencing amphibian species richness Aquat Ecol (Snodgrass et al 2000;Skelly 2001;Babbitt, Baber and Tarr 2003;Werner et al 2007a).…”

Section: Relative Importance Of Metacommunity Processesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Metacommunity dynamics of amphibians in years with differing rainfall

Péntek

Vad

Zsuga³

et al. 2016

Aquat Ecol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many studies investigated the habitat preference and behaviour ecology of individual amphibian species while we know less about how their community assembly reflects changes in environmental factors, including the role of climatic extremes. Communitylevel studies also allow us to apply trait-based analyses that are crucial for a better understanding of the functioning of amphibian communities and metacommunities. In two years with contrasting rainfall (2012 and 2013), we found amphibian species in 85 different waterbodies of a heterogeneous landscape in Central Europe (Hungary). Within the metacommunity framework, the contributions of local, landscape and spatial variables to community assembly were assessed. We also measured the local extinction-colonisation rates in the ponds for all species between the two years. To investigate the role of dispersal traits in explaining the spatial distribution of species, we studied the relationship between body size and the pure spatial fraction of variation. According to our results, the main drivers were the same in both the dry and wet year, but their relative contribution changed. Local variables played a predominant role in the assembly of the amphibian metacommunity. Spatial signals were more evident in the dry year. This implies not only the adverse effect of decreased connectivity due to the drying out of several habitats but also a loss of breeding sites for the studied amphibians. Local colonisation rates were higher in primarily terrestrial species (Hyla arborea, Pelobates fuscus, Bufo bufo) which only visit ponds during breeding. We found a negative relationship between the pure spatial effect and body size, suggesting an increased level of dispersal limitation in small-bodied species. Our results showed that while the strength and relative role of local and spatial processes changed between years, the role of dispersal traits in explaining the spatial distribution of species was similar. Specialisation to different habitats seems to be a major process in determining vertebrate metacommunities in landscapes. Dispersal traits of different species should be taken more into consideration in the practical conservation of amphibian habitats.

show abstract

Section: Relative Importance Of Metacommunity Processesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Metacommunity dynamics of amphibians in years with differing rainfall

Péntek

Vad

Zsuga³

et al. 2016

Aquat Ecol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…В олиготроф-ных «кислых» водоемах этих ландшафтных фаций R. arvalis преобладает или оказыва-ется единственным размножающимся ви-дом амфибий, однако в остальных случаях в постоянных и временных водоемах болот нерестятся оба вида. За пределами «болот-ной зоны» страны R. arvalis отсутствует, R. temporaria нерестится в искусственных водоемах (Strijbosch, 1979;Vos, Chardon, 1998;.…”

Section: аналитический обзор зимовкаunclassified

Spatial-ecological divergence of the common frog (Rana temporaria L.) and the moor frog (Rana arvalis Nilss.) within their geographic ranges

Kutenkov¹

2017

Principles of the Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…It is likely that the effects of these pathogens are influenced by co-factors (Taylor et al 1999, Blaustein & Kiesecker 2002, Kiesecker 2002, Christin et al 2003, Gendron et al 2003 Saprolegnia, a water mold, is one important pathogen found in many amphibian populations (e.g. Strijbosch 1979, Banks & Beebee 1988, Blaustein et al 1994. Furthermore, Saprolegnia-associated mortality appears to increase in the presence of abiotic stressors (Strijbosch 1979, Banks & Beebee 1988, Kiesecker & Blaustein 1995, Kiesecker et al 2001a.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Strijbosch 1979, Banks & Beebee 1988, Blaustein et al 1994. Furthermore, Saprolegnia-associated mortality appears to increase in the presence of abiotic stressors (Strijbosch 1979, Banks & Beebee 1988, Kiesecker & Blaustein 1995, Kiesecker et al 2001a.Saprolegnia (family Saprolegniaceae) is both saprobic and parasitic, obtaining nutrition from decaying organic matter or living hosts (Seymour 1970). Saprolegnia infects a wide variety of organisms, including insects, turtles, fishes, and amphibians (MacGregor 1921, Seymour 1970.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Host species show strong interspecific variation in their susceptibility to infection (Richards & Pickering 1978, Wood & Willoughby 1986, Kiesecker & Blaustein 1995. Factors such as water temperature, pH, pollution, exposure to UV-B radiation, injury from biting, silt, and host behavior may modify the effects of Saprolegnia on its hosts (MacGregor 1921, Strijbosch 1979, Walls & Jaeger 1987, Banks & Beebee 1988, Carballo & Muñoz 1991, Bly et al 1993, Pickering 1994, Carballo et al 1995, Kiesecker & Blaustein 1995, Lefcort et al 1997. Saprolegnia may influence community structure by altering competition between hosts (Kiesecker & Blaustein 1999).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effects of nitrate and the pathogenic water mold Saprolegnia on survival of amphibian larvae

Romansic¹,

Diez²,

Higashi³

et al. 2006

Dis. Aquat. Org.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We tested for a synergism between nitrate and Saprolegnia, a pathogenic water mold, using larvae of 3 amphibian species: Ambystoma gracile (northwestern salamander), Hyla regilla (Pacific treefrog) and Rana aurora (red-legged frog). Each species was tested separately, using a 3 × 2 fully factorial experiment with 3 nitrate treatments (none, low and high) and 2 Saprolegnia treatments (Saprolegnia and control). Survival of H. regilla was not affected significantly by either experimental factor. In contrast, survival of R. aurora was affected by a less-than-additive interaction between Saprolegnia and nitrate. Survival of R. aurora was significantly lower in the Saprolegnia compared to the control treatment when nitrate was not added, but there was no significant difference in survival between Saprolegnia and control treatments in the low and high nitrate treatments, consistent with increased nitrate preventing Saprolegnia from causing mortality of R. aurora. Survival of A. gracile followed a similar pattern, but the difference between Saprolegnia and control treatments when nitrate was not added was not significant, nor was the nitrate × Saprolegnia interaction. Our study suggests that Saprolegnia can cause mortality in amphibian larvae, that there are interspecific differences in susceptibility and that the effects of Saprolegnia on amphibians are context-dependent. KEY WORDS: Pathogen · Saprolegnia · Amphibian Resale or republication not permitted without written consent of the publisherDis Aquat Org 68: [235][236][237][238][239][240][241][242][243] 2006 Saprolegnia, a water mold, is one important pathogen found in many amphibian populations (e.g. Strijbosch 1979, Banks & Beebee 1988, Blaustein et al. 1994. Furthermore, Saprolegnia-associated mortality appears to increase in the presence of abiotic stressors (Strijbosch 1979, Banks & Beebee 1988, Kiesecker & Blaustein 1995, Kiesecker et al. 2001a.Saprolegnia (family Saprolegniaceae) is both saprobic and parasitic, obtaining nutrition from decaying organic matter or living hosts (Seymour 1970). Saprolegnia infects a wide variety of organisms, including insects, turtles, fishes, and amphibians (MacGregor 1921, Seymour 1970. In amphibians, embryos and larvae can become infected (Bragg & Bragg 1958, Walls & Jaeger 1987, Blaustein et al. 1994. Saprolegnia-infected embryos of fishes and amphibians become covered with visible white hyphal filaments and usually do not hatch (Blaustein et al. 1994). Infection can spread via contact from growing hyphae (in the case of immobile hosts such as amphibian egg masses) or through colonization by free-swimming zoospores (Wood & Willoughby 1986). Transmission can occur between species, for example, between fishes and amphibians (Kiesecker et al. 2001b). Fishes and amphibians may also be infected by Saprolegnia via contact with infected soil (Kiesecker et al. 2001b). Host species show strong interspecific variation in their susceptibility to infection (Richards & Pickering 1978, Wood & Willoughby 1986, Kiesecker & Blau...

show abstract

Habitat Selection of Amphibians during Their Aquatic Phase

Cited by 80 publications

References 11 publications

Metacommunity dynamics of amphibians in years with differing rainfall

Metacommunity dynamics of amphibians in years with differing rainfall

Spatial-ecological divergence of the common frog (Rana temporaria L.) and the moor frog (Rana arvalis Nilss.) within their geographic ranges

Effects of nitrate and the pathogenic water mold Saprolegnia on survival of amphibian larvae

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About