Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-cfpbc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T02:49:39.264Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The value of remnant trees in pastures for a neotropical poison frog

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 July 2013

Darvé Robinson ,
Adrienne Warmsley ,
A. Justin Nowakowski ,
Kelsey E. Reider  and
Maureen A. Donnelly
Darvé Robinson
Affiliation:
Department of Geology and Planetary Science, 200 SRCC, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA 15260, USA
Adrienne Warmsley
Affiliation:
College of Natural Resources and Sciences, Humboldt State University, Arcata, CA, 95521, USA
A. Justin Nowakowski*
Affiliation:
Department of Biological Sciences, Florida International University, 11200 SW 8th Street, Miami, FL 33199, USA
Kelsey E. Reider
Affiliation:
Department of Biological Sciences, Florida International University, 11200 SW 8th Street, Miami, FL 33199, USA
Maureen A. Donnelly
Affiliation:
Department of Biological Sciences, Florida International University, 11200 SW 8th Street, Miami, FL 33199, USA College of Arts and Sciences, Florida International University, Miami, FL, 33199, USA
*
1Corresponding author. Email: anowa001@fiu.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract:

Conversion of natural habitats to anthropogenic land uses is a primary cause of amphibian declines in species-rich tropical regions. However, agricultural lands are frequently used by a subset of forest-associated species, and the habitat value of a given land use is likely modified by the presence and characteristics of remnant trees. Here we used mark–recapture methods to examine abundances and movement probability of the poison frog, Oophaga pumilio, at individual trees in forest-fragment edges and adjacent pastures in north-eastern Costa Rica. One hundred and forty-seven trees were surveyed at three replicate sites that each included a forest fragment and adjacent pasture. Trees were sampled at distances of ≤30 m into forest and ≤150 m into pastures for Oophaga pumilio, and local environmental characteristics were measured at each tree. We also measured indices of physical condition (size and endurance) of frogs captured in forest edges and in nearby pastures. Analyses of 167 marked individuals showed no difference in per-tree abundances or sex ratios between pasture and forest edges. We found significant interactions between habitat type and leaf-litter cover, tree dbh and number of logs, indicating greater influence of local variables on abundances in pastures. Movement among trees was infrequent and not predicted by sex, size, habitat type or environmental variables. While results of endurance tests did not differ for individuals from the two habitats, frogs captured in pastures were, on average, larger than frogs captured in forest edges. These data indicate that remnant trees are important habitat features for O. pumilio in pastures and corroborate research in other systems that suggests that large relictual trees should be retained to maximize the potential for altered landscapes to provide habitat for native species.

Keywords

amphibiankeystone structuresland useOophaga pumiliopastureremnant trees
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Tropical Ecology , Volume 29 , Issue 4 , July 2013 , pp. 345 - 352
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

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

LITERATURE CITED

BECKER, C. G. & ZAMUDIO, K. R. 2011. Tropical amphibian populations experience higher disease risk in natural habitats. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 108:9893–9898.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
BUTTERFIELD, R. P. 1994. The regional context: land colonization and conservation in Sarapiquí. Pp. 299–306 in McDade, L. A., Bawa, K. S., Hespenheide, H. A. & Hartshorn, G. S. (eds.). La Selva: ecology and natural history of a neotropical rainforest. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
CHAN-MCLEOD, A. C. A. & MOY, A. 2007. Evaluating residual tree patches as stepping stones and short-term refugia for red-legged frogs. Journal of Wildlife Management 71:1836–1844.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DONNELLY, M. 1989a. Demographic effects of reproductive resource supplementation in a territorial frog, Dendrobates pumilio. Ecological Monographs 59:207–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DONNELLY, M. 1989b. Effects of reproductive resource supplementation on space-use patterns in Dendrobates pumilio. Oecologia 81:212–218.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
DONNELLY, M. 1989c. Reproductive phenology and age structure of Dendrobates pumilio in northeastern Costa Rica. Journal of Herpetology 23:362–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DONNELLY, M. 1991. Feeding patterns of the strawberry poison frog, Dendrobates pumilio (Anura: Dendrobatidae). Copeia 1991:723–730.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DONNELLY, M.,GUYER, C.,JUTERBOCK, E. J. & ALFORD, R. 1994. Techniques for marking amphibians. Pp. 277–284 in Heyer, W. R., Donnelly, M. A., McDiarmid, R. W., Hayek, L. A. & Foster, M. S. (eds.). Measuring and monitoring biological diversity: standard methods for amphibians. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
FELTON, A.,KNIGHT, E.,WOOD, J.,ZAMMIT, C. & LINDENMAYER, D. 2010. A meta-analysis of fauna and flora species richness and abundance in plantations and pasture lands. Biological Conservation 143:545–554.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
FISCHER, J.,STOTT, J.,ZERGER, A.,WARREN, G.,SHERREN, K. & FORRESTER, R. 2009. Reversing a tree regeneration crisis in an endangered ecoregion. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 106:10386–10391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
FISCHER, J., STOTT, J. & LAW, B. S. 2010. The disproportionate value of scattered trees. Biological Conservation 143:1564–1567.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
GARDNER, E. A. & GRAVES, B. M. 2005. Responses of resident male Dendrobates pumilio to territory intruders. Journal of Herpetology 39:248–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
GARDNER, T., BARLOW, J. & PERES, C. 2007. Paradox, presumption and pitfalls in conservation biology: the importance of habitat change for amphibians and reptiles. Biological Conservation 138:166–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
HARVEY, C. A., MEDINA, A., SÁNCHEZ, D. M., VÍLCHEZ, S., HERNÁNDEZ, B., SAENZ, J. C., MAES, J. M., CASANOVES, F. & SINCLAIR, F. L. 2006. Patterns of animal diversity in different forms of tree cover in agricultural landscapes. Ecological Applications 16:1986–1999.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
HITCHINGS, S. P. & BEEBEE, T. J. C. 1997. Genetic substructuring as a result of barriers to gene flow in urban Rana temporaria (common frog) populations: implications for biodiversity conservation. Heredity 79:117–127.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
KARP, D. S.,ROMINGER, A. J.,ZOOK, J.,RANGANATHAN, J.,EHRLICH, P. R. & DAILY, G. C. 2012. Intensive agriculture erodes β-diversity at large scales. Ecology Letters 15:963–970.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
KERBY, J. I.,HART, A. J. & STORFER, A. 2011. Combined effects of virus, pesticide, and predator cue on the larval tiger salamander (Ambystoma tigrinum). EcoHealth 8:46–54.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
LUMSDEN, L. & BENNET, A. F. 2005. Scattered trees in rural landscapes: foraging habitat for insectivorous bats in south-eastern Australia. Biological Conservation 122:205–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MAHOOD, S. P., LEES, A. C. & PERES, C. A. 2012. Amazonian countryside habitats provide limited avian conservation value. Biodiversity and Conservation 21:385–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MANNING, A. D., FISCHER, J. & LINDENMAYER, D. B. 2006. Scattered trees are keystone structures – implications for conservation. Biological Conservation 132:311–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MCKENZIE, V. 2007. Human land use and patterns of parasitism in tropical amphibian hosts. Biological Conservation 137:102–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MEUCHE, I., LINSENMAIR, D. & PRÖHL, H. 2011. Female territoriality in the strawberry poison frog (Oophaga pumilio). Copeia 2011:351–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MEUCHE, I.,LINSENMAIR, D. & PRÖHL, H. 2012. Intrasexual competition, territoriality and acoustic communication in male strawberry poison frogs (Oophaga pumilio). Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 66:613–621.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
NECKEL-OLIVEIRA, S. & GASCON, C. 2006. Abundance, body size and movement patterns of a tropical treefrog in continuous and fragmented forest in the Brazilian Amazon. Biological Conservation 128:308–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
NOWAKOWSKI, A. J., OTERO-JIMENEZ, B., ALLEN, M., DIAZ-ESCOBAR, M. & DONNELLY, M. A. 2013. Landscape resistance to movement of the poison frog, Oophaga pumilio, in the lowlands of northeastern Costa Rica. Animal Conservation 16:188–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
PRÖHL, H. & BERKE, O. 2001. Spatial distributions of male and female strawberry poison frogs and their relation to female reproductive resources. Oecologia 129:534–542.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
PULLIAM, H. R. 1988. Sources, sinks, and population regulation. American Naturalist 132:652–661.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ROTHERMEL, B. B. & LUHRING, T. M. 2005. Burrow availability and desiccation risk of mole salamanders (Ambystoma talpoideum) in harvested versus unharvested forest stands. Journal of Herpetology 39:619–626.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SANFORD, R. L., PAABY, P., LUVALL, J. C. & PHILLIPS, E. 1994. Climate, geomorphology, and aquatic systems. Pp. 19–33 in McDade, L. A., Bawa, K. S., Hespenheide, H. A. & Hartshorn, G. S. (eds.). La Selva: ecology and natural history of a neotropical rainforest. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
SAVAGE, J. M. 2002. The amphibians and reptiles of Costa Rica: a herpetofauna between two continents, between two seas. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago. 934 pp.Google Scholar
SCHEDLBAUER, J. L., FINEGAN, B. & KAVANAGH, K. L. 2007. Rain forest structure at forest-pasture edges in northeastern Costa Rica. Biotopica 39:578–584.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SEKERCIOGLU, C. H., LOARIE, S. R., BRENES, F. O., EHRLICH, P. R., & DAILY, G. C. 2007. Persistence of forest birds in the Costa Rican agricultural countryside. Conservation Biology 21:482–494.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
SESNIE, S. E., GESSLER, P. E., FINEGAN, B. & THESSLER, S. 2008. Integrating Landsat TM and SRTM-DEM derived variables with decision trees for habitat classification and change detection in complex neotropical environments. Remote Sensing of Environment 112:2145–2159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SLOCUM, M. G. 2001. How tree species differ as recruitment foci in a tropical pasture. Ecology 82:2547–2559.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SUNDAY, J. M., BATES, A. E. & DULVY, N. K. 2011. Global analysis of thermal tolerance and latitude in ectotherms. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 278:1823–1830.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
VIÉ, J. C., HILTON-TAYLOR, C. & STUART, S. N (eds.). 2009. Wildlife in a changing world – an analysis of the 2008 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. IUCN, Gland. 180 pp.Google Scholar
WELLS, K. D. 2007. The ecology and behavior of amphibians. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago. 1148 pp.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
WHITFIELD, S. M.,KERBY, J.,GENTRY, L. R. & DONNELLY, M. A. 2012. Temporal variation in infection prevalence by the amphibian chytrid fungus in three species of frogs at La Selva, Costa Rica. Biotropica 44:779–784.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ZUUR, A. F., IENO, E. N., WALKER, N. J., SAVELIEV, A. Z. & SMITH, G. M. 2009. Mixed effects models and extensions in ecology with R. Springer, New York. 574 pp.CrossRefGoogle Scholar