Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-m8qmq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T11:12:23.940Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

11 - Alternative reproductive tactics in amphibians

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 August 2009

Kelly R. Zamudio
Affiliation:
Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Cornell University E209 Corson Hall Ithaca, NY 14853 USA
Lauren M. Chan
Affiliation:
Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Cornell University A406a Corson Hall Ithaca, NY 14853 USA
Rui F. Oliveira
Affiliation:
Instituto Superior Psicologia Aplicada, Lisbon
Michael Taborsky
Affiliation:
Universität Bern, Switzerland
H. Jane Brockmann
Affiliation:
University of Florida
Get access

Summary

CHAPTER SUMMARY

Frogs and salamanders, the two most diverse lineages of amphibians, differ significantly in reproductive mode, morphology, and behavior. We review reproductive tactics in these lineages and consider their distribution among taxa in light of phylogeny, ecology, and organismal traits. Together these groups show a surprising diversity of alternative reproductive phenotypes that can roughly be divided into two classes: those that increase an individual's chance of mate acquisition (e.g., satellite or intercepting males) and those that directly increase fertilization success (e.g., spermatophore capping, clutch piracy, or multimale spawning). Our survey underscores the fact that mode of fertilization (internal or external) and operational sex ratios at breeding aggregations have important implications for the frequency and nature of alternative reproductive tactics. However, our understanding of the evolution of amphibian alternative reproductive tactics is hampered by a lack of detailed information for many species. For example, most alternative tactics have been described in temperate amphibians despite the fact that tropical species account for most of the taxonomic, morphological, behavioral, and ecological diversity in this group. A challenge for future studies will be to further describe and categorize the diversity of reproductive tactics in amphibians to uncover general patterns within and across lineages in the factors that modulate polymorphism in reproductive phenotypes.

INTRODUCTION

In the last few decades, organismal evolutionary biologists have become increasingly aware of inter-individual differences in mate acquisition abilities that may underlie the evolution of alternative strategies or tactics for reproductive success (Shuster and Wade 2003).

Type
Chapter
Information
Alternative Reproductive Tactics
An Integrative Approach
, pp. 300 - 331
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Able, D. J. 1999. Scramble competition selects for greater tailfin size in male red-spotted newts (Amphibia: Salamandridae). Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 46, 423–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arak, A. 1983a. Sexual selection by male–male competition in natterjack toad choruses. Nature 306, 261–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arak, A. 1983b. Male–male competition and mate choice in anuran amphibians. In Bateson, P. (ed.) Mate Choice, pp. 181–210. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Arak, A. 1988. Callers and satellites in the natterjack toad: evolutionary stable decision rules. Animal Behaviour 36, 416–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arnold, S. J. 1972. The evolution of courtship behaviors in salamanders. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
Arnold, S. J. 1976. Sexual behavior, sexual interference, and sexual defense in the salamanders Ambystoma maculatum, Ambystoma tigrinum, and Plethodon jordani. Zeitschrift für Tierpsychologie 41, 247–300.Google Scholar
Arnold, S. J. 1977. The evolution of courtship behavior in New World salamanders with some comments on Old World salamandrids. In Taylor, D. H. and Guttman, S. I. (eds.) The Reproductive Biology of Amphibians, pp. 141–183. New York: Plenum Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arnold, S. J. and Houck, L. D. 1982. Courtship pheromones: evolution by natural and sexual selection. In Nitecki, M. (ed.) Biochemical Aspects of Evolutionary Biology, pp. 173–211. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Bennet, A. F. and Houck, L. D. 1983. The energetic cost of courtship and aggression in a plethodontid salamander. Ecology 64, 979–985.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bishop, S. C. 1941. The salamanders of New York. New York State Museum Bulletin 324, 1–365.Google Scholar
Bishop, S. C. 1943. Handbook of Salamanders: The Salamanders of the United States, of Canada, and of Lower California. Ithaca, NY: Comstock.Google Scholar
Blanchard, F. N. 1934. The relation of the female four-toed salamander to her nest. Copeia, 137–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blouin, M. S. 2003. DNA-based methods for pedigree reconstruction and kinship analysis in natural populations. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 18, 503–511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bokerman, W. C. A. 1974. Observações sobre desenvolvimento precoce em Sphaenorhynchus bromelicola Bok. 1966 (Anura, Hylidae). Revista Brasileira de Biologia 34, 35–41.Google Scholar
Bourne, G. R. 1992. Lekking behavior in the neotropical frog Ololygon rubra. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 31, 173–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bourne, G. R. 1993. Proximate costs and benefits of mate acquisition at leks of the frog Ololygon rubra. Animal Behaviour 45, 1051–1059.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burghardt, G. M. 1997. Amending Tinbergen: a fifth aim for ethology. In Mitchell, R. W., Thompson, N. S., and Miles, H. L. (eds.) Anthropmorphism, Anectclotes, and Animals. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Byrne, P. G. 2002. Climatic correlates of breeding, simultaneous polyandry and potential for sperm competition in the frog Crinia georgiana. Journal of Herpetology 36, 124–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Byrne, P. G. and Roberts, J. D. 1999. Simultaneous mating with multiple males reduces fertilization success in the myobatrichid frog Crinia georgiana. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 266, 717–721.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Byrne, P. G. and Roberts, J. D. 2004. Intrasexual selection and group spawning in quacking frogs (Crinia georgiana). Behavioral Ecology 15, 872–882.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Byrne, P. G., Roberts, J. D., and Simmons, L. W. 2002. Sperm competition selects for increased testis mass in Australian frogs. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 15, 347–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coe, M. 1974. Observations on the ecology and breeding biology of the genus Chiromantis (Amphibia: Rhacophoridae). Journal of Zoology 172, 13–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cordoba, A. A., Uhia, E., and Rivera, A. C. 2003. Sperm competition in Odonata (Insecta): the evolution of female sperm storage and rivals' sperm displacement. Journal of Zoology (London) 261, 381–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Danielsson, I. 2001. Antagonistic pre- and post-copulatory sexual selection on male body size in a water strider (Gerris lacustris). Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 268, 77–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davies, N. B. and Halliday, T. R. 1977. Optimal mate selection in the toad Bufo bufo. Nature 269, 56–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davies, N. B. and Halliday, T. R. 1979. Competitive mate searching in male common toads, Bufo bufo. Animal Behaviour 27, 1253–1267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Denoël, M. 2002. Paedomorphosis in the alpine newt (Triturus alpestris): decoupling behavioural and morphological change. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 52, 394–399.Google Scholar
Denoël, M. 2003. Effect of rival males on the courtship of paedomorphic and metamorphic Triturus alpestris (Amphibia: Salamandridae). Copeia, 618–623.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Denoël, M. and Poncin, P. 2001. The effect of food on growth and metamorphosis of paedomorphs in Triturus alpestris apuanus. Archiv für Hydrobiologie 152, 661–670.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Denoël, M., Poncin, P., and Ruwet, J.-C. 2001. Alternative mating tactics in the alpine newt, Triturus alpestris alpestris. Journal of Herpetology 35, 62–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Denton, J. S. and Beebee, T. J. C. 1993. Reproductive strategies in a female-biased population of natterjack toads, Bufo calamita. Animal Behaviour 46, 1169–1175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dewsbury, D. A. 1992. On the problems studied in ethology, comparative psychology, and animal behavior. Ethology 92, 89–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
D'Orgeix, C. A. and Turner, B. J. 1995. Multiple paternity in the red-eyed treefrog Agalychnis callidryas (Cope). Molecular Ecology 4, 505–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Douglas, M. E. 1979. Migration and sexual selection in Ambystoma jeffersonianum. Canadian Journal of Zoology 57, 2303–2310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duellman, W. E. 2003. An overview of anuran phylogeny, classification, and reproductive modes. In Jamieson, B. G. M. (ed.) Reproductive Biology and Phylogeny of Anura, pp. 1–18. Enfield, UK: Science Publishers.Google Scholar
Duellman, W. E. and Trueb, L. 1994. Biology of Amphibians. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Eberhard, W. G. 1996. Female Control: Sexual Selection by Cryptic Female Choice. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Emlen, S. T. 1968. Territoriality in the bullfrog, Rana catesbeiana. Copeia, 240–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Emlen, S. T. and Oring, L. W. 1977. Ecology, sexual selection, and the evolution of mating systems. Science 197, 215–223.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fairchild, L. 1984. Male reproductive tactics in an explosive breeding toad population. American Zoologist 24, 407–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faria, M. M. 1993. Sexual behavior of Bosca's newt, Triturus boscai. Amphibia–Reptilia 14, 169–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faria, M. M. 1995. A field study of reproductive interactions in Bosca's newt, Triturus boscai. Amphibia–Reptilia 16, 357–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feller, A. E. and Hedges, S. B. 1998. Molecular evidence for the early history of living amphibians. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 9, 509–516.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fellers, G. M. 1979. Aggression, territoriality, and mating behaviour in North American treefrogs. Animal Behaviour 27, 107–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feng, A. S. and Narins, P. M. 1991. Unusual mating behavior of Malaysian treefrogs, Polypedates leucomystax. Naturwissenschaften 78, 364–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fiumera, A. C., DeWoody, Y. D., DeWoody, J. A., Asmussen, M. A., and Avise, J. C. 2001. Accuracy and precision of methods to estimate the number of parents contri-buting to a half-sib progeny array. Journal of Heredity 92, 120–126.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Forester, D. C. and Lykens, D. V. 1986. Significance of satellite males in a population of spring peepers (Hyla crucifer). Copeia, 719–724.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forester, D. C. and Thompson, K. J. 1998. Gauntlet behaviour as a male sexual tactic in the American toad (Amphibia: Bufonidae). Behavior 135, 99–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frost, D. R. 2004. Amphibian Species of the World: An Online Reference, version 3.0 (22 Aug. 2004). Available online at http://research.amnh.org/herpetology/amphibia/index.html.
Fukuyama, K. 1991. Spawning behaviour and male mating tactics of a foam-nesting treefrog, Rhacophorus schlegelii. Animal Behaviour 42, 193–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gabor, C. R. 1995. Resource quality affects the agonistic behaviour of terrestrial salamanders. Animal Behaviour 49, 71–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gabor, C. R., Krenz, J. D., and Jaeger, R. G. 2000. Female choice, male interference, and sperm precedence in the red-spotted newt. Behavioral Ecology 11, 115–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giacoma, C. and Crusco, N. 1987. Courtship and male interference in the Italian newt: a field study. Monitore Zoologico Italiano 21, 190–191.Google Scholar
Gillette, J. R., Jaeger, R. G., and Peterson, M. G. 2000. Social monogamy in a territorial salamander. Animal Behaviour 59, 1241–1250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Given, M. F. 1988. Territoriality and aggressive interactions of male carpenter frogs, Rana virgatipes. Copeia, 411–421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, A. J. 1989. The sexual behavior of the great crested newt, Triturus cristatus (Amphibia: Urodela: Salamandridae). Ethology 83, 129–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gross, M. R. 1996. Alternative reproductive strategies and tactics: diversity within sexes. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 11, 92–98.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Guffey, C. A., MaKinster, J. G., and Jaeger, R. G. 1998. Familiarity affects interactions between potentially courting territorial salamanders. Copeia, 205–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haddad, C. F. B. 1991. Satellite behavior in the neotropical treefrog Hyla minuta. Journal of Herpetology 25, 226–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haddad, C. F. B. and Bastos, R. P. 1997. Predation on the toad Bufo crucifer during reproduction (Anura: Bufonidae). Amphibia Reptilia 18, 295–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haddad, C. F. B. and Prado, C. P. A. 2005. Reproductive modes in frogs and their unexpected diversity in the Atlantic forest of Brazil. BioScience 55, 207–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haddad, C. F. B. and Sawaya, R. J. 2000. Reproductive modes of Atlantic forest hylid frogs: a general overview and the description of a new mode. Biotropica 32, 862–871.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haddad, C. F. B.et al. 1990. Natural hybridization between Bufo ictericus and Bufo crucifer. Revista Brasileira de Biologia 50, 739–744.Google Scholar
Halliday, T. R. 1974. Sexual behavior of the smooth newt, Triturus vulgaris (Urodela: Salamandridae). Journal of Herpetology 8, 277–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halliday, T. R. 1975. An observational and experimental study of sexual behaviour in the smooth newt, Triturus vulgaris (Amphibia, Salamandridae). Animal Behaviour 23, 291–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halliday, T. R. 1977. The courtship of European newts: an evolutionary perspective. In Taylor, D. H. and Guttman, S. I. (eds.) The Reproductive Biology of Amphibians, pp. 185–232. New York: Plenum Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halliday, T. R. 1990. The evolution of courtship behavior in newts and salamanders. Advances in the Study of Behavior 19, 137–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halliday, T. R. and Tejedo, M. 1995. Intrasexual selection and alternative mating behaviour. In Heatwole, H. and Sullivan, B. K. (eds.) Amphibian Biology, vol. 2, Social Behaviour, pp. 419–468. Chipping Norton, NSW: Surrey Beatty and Sons.Google Scholar
Harris, R. N. 1987. Density-dependent paedomorphosis in the salamander Notophthalmus viridescens dorsalis. Ecology 68, 705–712.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harris, R. N. and Gill, D. E. 1980. Communal nesting, brooding behavior, and embryonic survival of the four-toed salamander Hemidactylium scutatum. Herpetologica 36, 141–144.Google Scholar
Harris, R. N. and Ludwig, P. M. 2004. Resource level and reproductive frequency in female four-toed salamanders, Hemidactylium scutatum (Caudata: Plethodontidae). Ecology 85, 1585–1590.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harris, R. N., Semlitsch, R. D., Wilbur, H. M., and Fauth, J. E. 1990. Local variation in the genetic basis of paedomorphosis in the salamander Ambystoma talpoideum. Evolution 44, 1588–1603.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harris, R. N., Hames, W. W., Knight, I. T., Carreno, C. A., and Vess, T. J. 1995. An experimental analysis of joint nesting in the salamander Hemidactylium scutatum (Caudata: Plethodontidae): the effects of population density. Animal Behaviour 50, 1309–1316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hasumi, M. 1994. Reproductive behavior of the salamander Hynobius nigrescens: monopoly of egg sacs during scramble competition. Journal of Herpetology 28, 264–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hasumi, M. 2001. Sexual behavior in female-biased operational sex ratios in the salamander Hynobius nigrescens. Herpetologica 57, 396–406.Google Scholar
Houck, L. D. 1988. The effect of body size on male courtship success in a plethodontid salamander. Animal Behaviour 36, 837–842.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Houck, L. D. and Arnold, S. J. 2003. Courtship and mating behavior. In Jamieson, B. G. M. (ed.) Reproductive Biology and Phylogeny of Urodela, pp. 383–424. Enfield, UK: Science Publishers.Google Scholar
Howard, R. D. 1978. The evolution of mating strategies in bullfrogs, Rana catesbeiana. Evolution 32, 850–871.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Howard, R. D., Moorman, R. S., and Whiteman, H. H. 1997. Differential effects of mate competition and mate choice on eastern tiger salamanders. Animal Behaviour 53, 1345–1356.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jaeger, R. G. and Forester, D. C. 1993. Social behavior of plethodontid salamanders. Herpetologica 49, 163–175.Google Scholar
Jaeger, R. G., Wicknick, J. A., Griffis, M. R., and Anthony, C. D. 1995. Socioecology of a terrestrial salamander: juveniles enter adult territories during stressful foraging periods. Ecology 76, 533–543.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jaeger, R. G., Peterson, M. G., and Gillette, J. R. 2000. A model of alternative mating strategies in the redback salamander, Plethodon cinereus. In Bruce, R. C., Jaeger, R. G., and Houck, L. D. (eds.) The Biology of Plethodontid Salamanders, pp. 441–450. New York: Plenum Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jaeger, R. G., Gillette, J. R., and Cooper, R. C. 2002. Sexual coercion in a territorial salamander: males punish socially polyandrous female partners. Animal Behaviour 63, 871–877.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Janzen, F. J. and Brodie, E. D. III. 1989. Tall tails and sexy males: sexual behavior of the rough-skinned newts (Taricha granulosa) in a natural breeding pond. Copeia, 1068–1071.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jennions, M. D. and Passmore, N. I. 1993. Sperm competition in frogs: testis size and a “sterile male” experiment on Chiromantis xerampelina (Rhacophoridae). Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 50, 211–220.Google Scholar
Jennions, M. D., Backwell, P. R. Y., and Passmore, N. I. 1992. Breeding behaviour of the African frog, Chiromantis xerampelina: multiple spawning and polyandry. Animal Behaviour 44, 1091–1100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, A. G., Adams, E. M., and Arnold, S. J. 2002. Topping off: a mechanism of first-male sperm precedence in a vertebrate. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 99, 2078–2081.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kalezic, M. L., Cvetkovic, D., Djorovic, A., and Dzukic, G. 1996. Alternative life-history pathways: paedomorphosis and adult fitness in European newts (Triturus vulgaris and T. alpestris). Journal of Zoological Systematics and Evolutionary Research 34, 1–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaminsky, S. K. 1997. Bufo americanus reproduction. Herpetological Review 28, 84.Google Scholar
Kasuya, E., Hirota, M., and Shigehara, H. 1996. Reproductive behavior of the Japanese treefrog, Rhacophorus arboreus (Anura: Rhacophoridae). Researches on Population Ecology 38, 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kato, K. 1956. Ecological notes on the green frogs during the breeding season. 2. Breeding habit and others. Japanese Journal of Ecology 6, 57–61.Google Scholar
Kawamichi, T. and Ueda, H. 1998. Spawning at nests of extra-large males in the giant salamander Andrias japonicus. Journal of Herpetology 32, 133–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krenz, J. D. and Sever, D. M. 1995. Mating and oviposition in paedomorphic Ambystoma talpoideum precedes the arrival of terrestrial males. Herpetologica 51, 387–393.Google Scholar
Krupa, J. L. 1989. Alternative mating tactics in the Great Plains toad. Animal Behaviour 37, 1035–1043.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kusano, T., Toda, M., and Fukuyama, K. 1991. Testes size and breeding systems in Japanese anurans with special reference to large testes in the treefrog, Rhacophorus arboreus (Amphibia: Rhacophoridae). Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 29, 27–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lank, D. B., Smith, C. M., Hanotte, O., Burke, T., and Cooke, F. 1995. Genetic polymorphism for alternative mating behaviour in lekking male ruff, Philomachus pugnax. Nature 378, 59–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larson, A., Weisrock, D. W., and Kozak, K. 2003. Phylogenetic systematics of salamanders (Amphibia: Urodela): a review. In Jamieson, B. G. M. (ed.) Reproductive Biology and Phylogeny of Urodela, pp. 31–108. Enfield, UK: Science Publishers.Google Scholar
Laurila, A. and Seppä, P. 1998. Multiple paternity in the common frog (Rana temporaria): genetic evidence from tadpole kin groups. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 63, 221–232.Google Scholar
Laurin, M. and Reisz, R. 1997. A new perspective on tetrapod phylogeny. In Suemida, S. S. and Martin, K. L. (eds.) Amniote Origins, pp. 9–59. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Leary, C. J., Jessop, T. S., Garcia, A. M., and Knapp, R. 2004. Steroid hormone profiles and relative body condition of calling and satellite toads: implications for proximate regulation of behavior in anurans. Behavioral Ecology 15, 313–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lehtinen, R. M. and Nussbaum, R. A. 2003. Parental care: a phylogenetic perspective. In Jamieson, B. G. M. (ed.) Reproductive Biology and Phylogeny of Anura, pp. 343–386. Enfield, UK: Science Publishers.Google Scholar
Lodé, T. and Lesbarrères, D. 2004. Multiple paternity in Rana dalmatina, a monogamous territorial breeding anuran. Naturwissenschaften 91, 44–47.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Loman, J. and Madsen, T. 1986. Reproductive tactics of large and small Bufo bufo. Oikos 46, 57–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lucas, J. R. and Howard, R. D. 1995. On alternative reproductive tactics in anurans: dynamic games with density and frequency dependence. American Naturalist 146, 365–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lucas, J. R., Howard, R. D., and Palmer, J. G. 1996. Caller and satellites: chorus behaviour in anurans as a stochastic dynamic game. Animal Behaviour 51, 501–518.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martins, M. 1988. Reproductive biology of Leptodactylus fuscus in Boa Vista, Roraima (Amphibia: Anura). Revista Brasileira de Biologia 48, 969–977.Google Scholar
Massey, A. 1988. Sexual interactions in red-spotted newt populations. Animal Behaviour 36, 205–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mathis, A. 1989. Do seasonal spatial distributions in a tewestrial salamander reflect reproductive behavior or territoriality?Copeia, 788–791.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mathis, A. 1991a. Territories of male and female terrestrial salamanders: costs, benefits, and intersexual spatial associations. Oecologia 86, 433–440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mathis, A. 1991b. Large male advantage for access to females: evidence of male–male competition and female discrimination in a terrestrial salamander. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 29, 133–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCauley, S. J., Bouchard, S. S., Farina, B. J., et al. 2000. Energetic dynamics and anuran breeding phenology: insights from a dynamic game. Behavioral Ecology 11, 429–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McWilliams, S. R. 1992. Courtship behavior of the small-mouthed salamander (Ambystoma texanum): the effects of conspecific males on male mating tactics. Behavior 121, 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miyamoto, M. M. and Cane, J. H. 1980. Behavioral observations of noncalling males in Costa Rican Hyla ebraccata. Biotropica 12, 225–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moore, F. L., McCormack, C., and Swanson, L. 1979. Induced ovulation: effects of sexual behavior and insemination on ovulation and progesterone levels in Taricha granulosa. General and Comparative Endocrinology 39, 262–269.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Myers, E. M. and Zamudio, K. R. 2004. Multiple paternity in an aggregate breeding amphibian: the effect of reproductive skew on estimates of male reproductive success. Molecular Ecology 13, 1951–1963.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nickerson, M. A. and Mays, C. E. 1973a. The hellbenders: North American “Giant Salamanders.”Milwaukee Public Museum Publications in Biology and Geology 1, 1–106.Google Scholar
Nickerson, M. A. and Mays, C. E. 1973b. A study of the Ozark hellbender Cryptobranchus alleganiensis bishopi Grobman. Ecology 54, 1164–1165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nickerson, M. A. and Tohulka, M. D. 1986. The nests and nest site selection by Ozark hellbenders, Cryptobranchus alleganiensis bishopi Grobman. Transactions of the Kansas Academy of Science 89, 66–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Noble, G. K. and Brady, M. K. 1933. Observations on the life history of the marbled salamander, Ambystoma opacum Gravenhorst. Zoologica 11, 89–132.Google Scholar
Organ, J. A. 1958. Courtship and spermatophore of Plethodon jordani metcalfi. Copeia 1958, 251–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Organ, J. A. 1960. The courtship and spermatophore of the salamander Plethodon glutinosus. Copeia 1960, 34–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Organ, J. A. and Organ, D. J. 1968. Courtship behavior of the red salamander Pseudotriton ruber. Copeia, 217–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ovaska, K. and Hunte, W. 1992. Male mating behavior of the frog Eleutherodactylus johnstonei (Leptodactylidae) in Barbados, West Indies. Herpetologica 48, 40–49.Google Scholar
Park, D. and Park, S. R. 2000. Multiple insemination and reproductive biology of Hynobius leechii. Journal of Herpetology 34, 594–598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Park, S. R., Park, D. S., and Yang, S. Y. 1996. Courtship, fighting behaviors, and sexual dimorphism of the salamander, Hynobius leechi. Korean Journal of Zoology 39, 437–446.Google Scholar
Parker, G. A. 1984. Evolutionary stable strategies. In Krebs, J. R. and Davies, N. B. (eds.) Behavioral Ecology: An Evolutionary Approach, pp. 30–61. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates.Google Scholar
Perrill, S. A. 1984. Male mating behavior in Hyla regilla. Copeia 1984, 727–732.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perrill, S. A. and Magier, M. 1988. Male mating behavior in Acris crepitans. Copeia 1988, 245–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perrill, S. A., Gerhardt, H. C., and Daniel, R. E. 1978. Sexual parasitism in the green tree frog (Hyla cinerea). Science 200, 1179–1180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perrill, S. A., Gerhardt, H. C., and Daniel, R. E. 1982. Mating strategy shifts in male green treefrogs (Hyla cinerea): an experimental study. Animal Behaviour 30, 43–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petranka, J. W. 1982. Courtship behavior of the small-mouthed salamander (Ambystoma texanum) in central Kentucky. Herpetologica 38, 333–336.Google Scholar
Prado, C. P. A. and Haddad, C. F. B. 2003. Testes size in leptodactylid frogs and occurrence of multimale spawning in the genus Leptodactylus in Brazil. Journal of Herpetology 37, 354–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prado, C. P. A., Uetanabaro, M., and Lopes, F. S. 2000. Reproductive strategies of Leptodactylus chaquensis and L. podicipinus in the Pantanal, Brazil. Journal of Herpetology 34, 135–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Propper, C. R. 1991. Courtship in the rough-skinned newt Taricha granulosa. Animal Behaviour 41, 547–557.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pyburn, W. F. 1970. Breeding behavior of the leaf-frogs Phyllomedusa callidryas and Phyllomedusa dacnicolor in Mexico. Copeia, 209–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rafinski, J. and Pecio, A. 1992. The courtship behaviour of the Bosca's newt, Triturus boscai (Amphibia: Salamandridae). Folia Biologica 40, 155–165.Google Scholar
Roberts, J. D., Standish, R. J., Byrne, P. G., and Doughty, P. 1999. Synchronous polyandry and multiple paternity in the frog Crinia georgiana (Anura: Myobatrachidae). Animal Behaviour 57, 721–726.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, W. E. 1994. Explosive breeding aggregations and parachuting in a neotropical frog, Agalychnis saltator (Hylidae). Journal of Herpetology 28, 193–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robertson, J. G. M. 1986a. Female choice, mating strategies and the role of vocalizations in the Australian frog Uperoleia rugosa. Animal Behaviour 34, 773–784.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robertson, J. G. M. 1986b. Male territoriality, fighting and assessment of fighting ability in the Australian frog Uperoleia rugosa. Animal Behaviour 34, 763–772.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roble, S. M. 1985. Observations on satellite males in Hyla chrysoscelis, Hyla picta, and Pseudacris triseriata. Journal of Herpetology 19, 432–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ryan, M. J., Pease, C. M., and Morris, M. R. 1992. A genetic polymorphism in the swordtail Xiphiphorus nigrensis: testing the prediction of equal fitness. American Naturalist 139, 21–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ryan, T. J. and Plague, G. R. 2004. Hatching asynchrony, survival, and the fitness of alternative adult morphs in Ambystoma talpoideum. Oecologia 140, 46–51.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Salthe, S. E. 1967. Courtship patterns and the phylogeny of urodeles. Copeia, 100–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sasaki, M. 1924. On a Japanese salamander in Lake Kuttarush which propagates like the axolotl. Journal of the College of Agriculture Hokkaido Imperial University 15, 12–23.Google Scholar
Sato, T. 1992. Reproductive behavior in the Japanese salamander Hynobius retardatus. Japanese Journal of Herpetology 14, 184–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scheltinga, D. M. and Jamieson, B. G. M. 2003a. The mature spermatozoon. In Jamieson, B. G. M. (ed.) Reproductive Biology and Phylogeny of Urodela, pp. 203–274. Enfield, UK: Science Publishers.Google Scholar
Scheltinga, D. M. and Jamieson, B. G. M. 2003b. Spermatogenesis and the mature spermatozoon: form, function, and phylogenetic implications. In Jamieson, B. G. M. (ed.) Reproductive Biology and Phylogeny of Anura, pp. 343–386. Enfield: Science Publishers.Google Scholar
Semlitsch, R. D. 1985. Reproductive strategy of a facultatively paedomorphic salamander Ambystoma talpoideum. Oecologia 65, 305–313.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Semlitsch, R. D. 1987. Paedomorphosis in Ambystoma talpoideum: effects of density, food and pond-drying. Ecology 68, 994–1002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Semlitsch, R. D. and Gibbons, J. W. 1985. Phenotypic variation in metamorphosis and paedomorphosis in the salamander Ambystoma talpoideum. Ecology 66, 1123–1130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shuster, S. M. and Wade, M. J. 1991. Equal mating success among male reproductive strategies in a marine isopod. Nature 350, 608–610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shuster, S. M. and Wade, M. J. 2003. Mating Systems and Strategies. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Sinervo, B. and Zamudio, K. R. 2001. The evolution of alternative reproductive strategies: fitness differential, heritability, and genetic correlation between the sexes. Journal of Heredity 92, 198–205.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Smith, B. G. 1907. The life history and habits of Cryptobranchus alleghaniensis. Biological Bulletin 13, 5–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, M. J. and Roberts, J. D. 2003. Call structure may affect male mating success in the quacking frog Crinia georgiana (Anura: Myobatrachidae). Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 53, 221–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sparreboom, M. 1994. On the sexual behavior of the sword-tailed newt, Cynops ensicauda (Hallowell, 1860). Abhandlungen und Berichte für Naturkunde 17, 151–161.Google Scholar
Spotila, J. R. and Beumer, R. J. 1970. The breeding habits of the ringed salamander, Ambystoma annulatum (Cope), in northeastern Arkansas. American Midland Naturalist 84, 77–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stebbins, R. C. 1949. Courtship of the plethodontid salamander Ensatina eschscholtzii. Copeia, 274–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sullivan, B. K. 1982. Male mating behaviour in the Great Plains toad (Bufo cognatus). Animal Behaviour 30, 939–940.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sullivan, B. K. 1989. Mating system variation in Woodhouse's toad (Bufo woodhousii). Ethology 83, 60–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tennessen, J. A. and Zamudio, K. R. 2003. Early male reproductive advantage, multiple paternity and sperm storage in an amphibian aggregate breeder. Molecular Ecology 12, 1567–1576.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teyssedre, C. and Halliday, T. R. 1986. Cumulative effect of male's display in the sexual behavior of the smooth newt, Triturus vulgaris (Urodela, Salamandridae). Ethology 71, 89–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, J. S. 1989. Courtship, male–male competition, and male aggressive behavior of the salamander Eurycea bislineata. M.S. thesis, University of Southwestern Louisiana, Lafayette, LA.
Thorn, R. 1962. Protection of a brood by a male salamander, Hynobius nebulosus. Copeia, 638–640.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tinbergen, N. 1951. The Study of Instinct. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Tinbergen, N. 1963. On aims and methods of ethology. Zeitschrift für Tierpsychologie 20, 410–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Toda, M. 1989. The life history of Japanese forest frog, Rhacophorus arboreus in the Kanazawa Castle. M.S. thesis, Kanazawa University, Japan.
Trueb, L. and Cloutier, R. 1991. A phylogenetic investigation of the inter- and intrarelationships of the Lissamphibia (Amphibia: Temnospondyli). In Schultze, H. P. and Trueb, L. (eds.) Origins of the Major Groups of Tetrapods: Controversies and Consensus, pp. 223–313. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Tyler, M. J. 2003. The gross anatomy of the reproductive system. In Jamieson, B. G. M. (ed.) Reproductive Biology and Phylogeny of Anura, pp. 19–26. Enfield, UK: Science Publishers.Google Scholar
Usuda, H. 1993. Reproductive behavior of Hynobius nigrescens, with special reference to male midwife behavior. Japanese Journal of Herpetology 15, 86–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Usuda, H. 1997. Individual relationship of male aggressive behavior during the reproductive season of Hynobius nigrescens. Japanese Journal of Herpetology 17, 53–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Uzendoski, K., Maksymovitch, E., and Verrell, P. 1993. Do the risks of predation and intermale competition affect courtship behavior in the salamander Desmognathus ochrophaeus?Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 32, 421–427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Uzzell, T. M. 1969. Notes on spermatophore production by salamanders of the Ambystoma jeffersonianum complex (Amphibia, Caudata). Copeia, 602–612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verrell, P. A. 1982. The sexual behavior of the red-spotted newt, Notophthalmus viridescens (Amphibia: Urodela: Salamandridae). Animal Behaviour 30, 1224–1236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verrell, P. A. 1983. The influence of the ambient sex ratio and intermale competition on the sexual behavior of the red spotted newt, Notophthalmus viridescens (Amphibia: Urodela: Salamandridae). Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 13, 307–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verrell, P. A. 1984a. Sexual interference and sexual defense in the smooth newt, Triturus vulgaris (Amphibia: Urodela: Salamandridae). Zeitschrift für Tierpsychologie 66, 242–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verrell, P. A. 1984b. Responses to different densities of males in the smooth newt, Triturus vulgaris: “One at a time, please.”Journal of Herpetology 18, 482–484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verrell, P. A. 1985. Is there an energetic cost to sex? Activity courtship mode and breathing in the red-spotted newt Notophthalmus viridescens. Monitore Zoologico Italiano 19, 121–128.Google Scholar
Verrell, P. A. 1988. Sexual interference in the alpine newt, Triturus alpestris (Amphibia: Urodela: Salamandridae). Zoological Science 5, 159–164.Google Scholar
Verrell, P. A. 1989. The sexual strategies of natural populations of newts and salamanders. Herpetologica 45, 265–282.Google Scholar
Verrell, P. A. and Halliday, T. R. 1985. Reproductive dynamics of a population of smooth newts, Triturus vulgaris, in southern England. Herpetologica 41, 386–395.Google Scholar
Verrell, P. A. and Krenz, J. D. 1998. Competition for mates in the mole salamander, Ambystoma talpoideum: tactics that may maximize male mating success. Behaviour 135, 121–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verrell, P. A. and McCabe, N. R. 1986. Mating balls in the common toad, Bufo bufo. British Herpetological Society Bulletin 16, 28–29.Google Scholar
Verrell, P. A. and McCabe, N. R. 1988. Field observations of the sexual behavior of the smooth newt, Triturus vulgaris vulgaris (Amphibia, Salamandridae). Journal of Zoology (London) 214, 533–545.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verrell, P. A. and Pelton, J. 1996. The sexual strategy of the central long-toed salamander, Ambystoma macrodactylum colombianum, in south-eastern Washington. Journal of Zoology (London) 240, 37–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vieites, D. R., Nieto-Román, S., Barluenga, M., et al. 2004. Post-mating clutch piracy in an amphibian. Nature 431, 305–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waights, V. 1996. Female sexual interference in the smooth newt, Triturus vulgaris vulgaris. Ethology 102, 736–747.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wake, M. H. 1993. Evolution of oviductal gestation in amphibians. Journal of Experimental Zoology 266, 394–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wake, M. H. 1997. Amphibian locomotion in evolutionary time. Zoology 100, 141–151.Google Scholar
Wake, M. H. and Dickie, R. 1998. Oviduct structure and function and reproductive modes in amphibians. Journal of Experimental Zoology 282, 477–506.3.0.CO;2-#>CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wells, K. D. 1977a. The social behaviour of anuran amphibians. Animal Behaviour 25, 666–693.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wells, K. D. 1977b. Territoriality and male mating success in the green frog (Rana clamitans). Ecology 58, 750–762.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wells, K. D. 2001. The energetics of calling in frogs. In Ryan, M. J. (ed.) Anuran Communication, pp. 45–60. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press.Google Scholar
West-Eberhard, M. J. 1991. Sexual selection and social behavior. In M. H. Robinson and Tiger, L. (eds.) Man and Beast Revisited, pp. 159–172. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press.Google Scholar
Whiteman, H. H. 1994. Evolution of facultative paedomorphosis in salamanders. Quarterly Review of Biology 69, 205–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Winne, C. T. and Ryan, T. J. 2001. Aspects of sex-differences in the expression of an alternative life cycle in the salamander Ambystoma talpoideum. Copeia, 143–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wogel, H., Abrunhosa, P. A., and Pombal, J. P. Jr. 2002. Atividade reprodutiva de Physalaemus signifer (Anura, Leptodactylidae) em ambiente temporário. Inheringia 92, 57–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zamudio, K. R. and Sinervo, B. 2000. Polygyny, mate guarding, and posthumous fertilizations as alternative male mating strategies. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 97, 14427–14432.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zamudio, K. R. and Sinervo, B. 2003. Ecological and social contexts for the evolution of alternative mating strategies. In Fox, S. F., McCoy, J. K., and Baird, T. A. (eds.) Lizard Social Behavior, pp. 83–106. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Zardoya, R. and Meyer, A. 2000. Mitochondrial evidence on the phylogenetic position of caecilians (Amphibia: Gymnophiona). Genetics 155, 765–775.Google Scholar
Zimmerer, E. J. and Kallman, K. D. 1989. Genetic basis for alternative reproductive tactics in the pygmy swordtail, Xiphiphorus nigrensis. Evolution 43, 1298–1307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zuiderwijk, A. and Sparreboom, M. 1986. Territorial behavior in crested newt Triturus cristatus and marbled newt T. marmoratus (Amphibia, Urodela). Bijdragen tot de Dierkunde 56, 205–213.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×