Movements and habitat use of the invasive species Lithobates catesbeianus in the valley of the Grote Nete (Belgium)

Authors

  • Sarah Descamps PXL-Bio Research, Agoralaan Building H , BE-3590 Diepenbeek
  • Alain De Vocht Hasselt University - Centre for Environmental Sciences, Agoralaan Building D, BE-3590 Diepenbeek

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.26496/bjz.2016.44

Keywords:

invasive species, SAC, radio telemetry, American bullfrog, Rana catesbeiana

Abstract

Nine adult American bullfrogs (Lithobates catesbeianus) were tagged with an internal radio transmitter and tracked during one year in the valley of the Grote Nete (Belgium). The mean ± SD core range area (KDE50) was 15.00 ± 22.41m2. The home range area (KDE95) had a mean ± SD of 429.78 ± 510.97m2. Shores of larger eutrophic ponds and small temporary pools in alluvial forest were chosen as habitat. The total area used (MCP95) had a mean of 11,086.73 ± 12,239.00m2. The study revealed a mean action radius of 270.78 ± 199.17m and individuals moved up to 742m in a single displacement. These results show that the dispersion of the American bullfrog in a valley system such as the Grote Nete can proceed very rapidly. A positive correlation between weight and distance covered within one movement was found, which could suggest that dominant individuals are capable of covering greater distances in search of optimal habitat for reproduction, foraging or hibernation.

References

Adams JM & Pearl CA (2007). Problems and opportunities managing invasive Bullfrogs: is there any hope? In: Gherardi F (eds), Biological invaders in inland waters: profiles, distribution and threats, Springer, The Netherlands: 679-693.

Agentschap voor Natuur en Bos (2012): Instandhoudingsdoelstellingen voor speciale beschermingszones - Bovenloop van de Grote Nete met Zammels broek, Langdonken en Goor, vol BE2100040 p. 254.

Austin JD, Davilla JA, Lougheed SC & Boag PT (2003). Genetic evidence for female-biased dispersal in the bullfrog, Rana catesbeiana (Ranidae). Molecular Ecology, 12: 3165-3172.

Baras E (1998). Selection of optimal positioning intervals in fish tracking: an experimental study on Barbus barbus. Hydrobiologia, 371/372: 19-28.

Bergstedt RA, McDonald RB, Twohey MB, Mullet KM, Young BA & Heinrich JW (2003). Reduction in sea lamprey hatching success due to release of sterilized males. Journal of Great Lakes Research, 29: 435-444.

Bergstedt RA & Twohey MB (2007). Research to support sterile-male-release and genetic alteration techniques for sea lamprey control. Journal of Great Lakes Research, 33: 48-69.

Berroneau M, Détaint M & Coïc C (2007). Premiers résultats du suivi radio télémétrique de la Grenouille taureau en Gironde (septembre 2004–juin 2005). Bulletin de la Société Herpétologique de France, 121: 21-33.

Bruneau M & Magnin E (1980). Croissance, nutrition et reproduction des ouaouarons Rana catesbeiana Shaw (Amphibia Anura) des Laurentides au nord de Montréal. Canadian Journal of Zoology, 58: 175-183.

Clavero M & Garcia-Berthou E (2005). Invasive species are a leading cause of animal extinctions. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 20: 110.

Currie W & Bellis ED (1969). Home range and movements of the bullfrog, Rana catesbeiana Shaw, in a Ontario Pond. Copeia, 4: 688-692.

D’Amore A (2012). Rana (Lithobates) catesbeiana Shaw (American bullfrog). In: Francis R A (eds), A handbook of global freshwater invasive species, Earthscan, Taylor & Francis Group, Abingdon, USA: 321-330.

Emlen ST (1976). Lek organisation and mating strategies in the bullfrog. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 1: 283-313.

Emlen ST & Oring L (1977). Ecology, sexual selection, and the evolution of mating systems. Science, 197: 215-233.

Fuller TE, Pope KL, Ashton DT & Welsh HHJ (2010). Linking the distribution of an invasive amphibian (Rana catesbeiana) to habitat conditions in a managed river system in Northern California. Restoration Ecology, 19: 204-213.

Gahl MK, Calhoun AJK & Graves R (2009). Facultative use of seasonal pools by American bullfrogs (Rana catesbeiana). Wetlands, 29: 697-703.

Graves BM & Anderson SH (1987): Habitat suitability index models: bullfrog, vol Biological Report 82.

Ingram WM & Raney EC (1943). Additional studies on the movement of tagged bullfrogs, Rana catesbeiana Shaw. The American Midland Naturalist, 29: 239-241.

Jennings MR & Hayes MP (1985). Pre-1900 overharvest of California Red-legged frogs (Rana aurora draytonii): the inducement for Bullfrog (Rana catesbeiana) introduction. Herpetologica, 41: 94-103.

Leivas PT, Leivas FWT & Moura MO (2012). Diet and trophic nice of Lithobates catesbeianus (Amphibia: Anura). Zoologia, 29: 405-412.

Louette G, Devisscher S & Adriaens T (2013). Controle of invasive American bullfrog Lithobates catesbeianus in small shallow waterbodies. European Journal of Wildlife, 59: 105-114.

Lowe S, Browne M, Boudjelas S & De Poorter M (2000). 100 of the world’s worst invasive alien species. A selection from the global invasive species database. Aliens, 12: 1-12.

Miaud C, Sanuy D & Avrillier J (2000). Terrestrial movements of the natterjack toad Bufo calamita (Amphibia, Anura) in a semi-arid, agricultural landscape. Amphibia-Reptilia, 21: 357-369.

Natuurpunt vzw (eds). 2006. Waarnemingen. (Internet address: http://www.waarnemingen.be).

Pasmans F & Martel A (2012). Schimmel- en virusonderzoek, pathologie. In: INBO (eds), Beheer van Stierkikker in Vlaanderen en Nederland, Instituut voor Natuur en Bosonderzoek, Brussel: 93-94.

Patterson RS, Lofgren CS & Boston MD (1968). The sterile-male technique for control of mosquitos: a field cage study with Anopheles quadrimaculatus. The Florida Entomologist, 51: 77-82.

Peterson AC, Richgels KLD, Johnson PTJ & McKenzie VJ (2013). Investigating the dispersal route used by an invasive amphibian, Lithobates catesbeianus, in human-dominated landscapes. Biological Invasions, 15: 2179-2191.

Raney EC (1940). Summer movements of the bullfrog, Rana catesbeiana Shaw, as determined bij the jaw-tag method. American Midland Naturalist, 23: 733-745.

Richards SJ, Sinsch U & Alford RA (1994). Radio Tracking. In: Heyer W R, Donnelly M A, McDiarmid R W, Hayek L C, Foster M S (eds), Measuring and Monitoring Biological Diversity: Standard Methods for Amphibians, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington: 155-157.

Rodgers AR, Carr AP, Beyer HL, Smith L & Kie JG (2007): HRT: Home Range Tools for ArcGIS, Version 1.1. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Centre for Northern Forest Ecosystem Research, Thunder Bay, Ontario, Canada.

Ryan MJ (1980). The reproductive behavior of the bullfrog (Rana catesbeiana). Copeia, 1: 108-114.

Schloegel LM, Ferreira CM, James TY, Hipolito M, Longcore JE, Hyatt AD, Yabsley M, Martins AMCRPF, Mazzoni R, Davies AJ & Daszak P (2010). The North American bullfrog as a reservoir for the spread of Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis in Brazil. Animal Conservation, 13: 53-61.

Stinner J, Zarlinga N & Orcutt S (1994). Overwintering behavior of adult bullfrogs, Rana catesbeiana, in Northeastern Ohio. Ohio Journal of Science, 94: 8-13.

Willis YL, Moyle DL & Baskett TS (1956). Emergence, breeding, hibernation, movements and transformation of the bullfrog, Rana catesbeiana, in Missouri. Copeia, 1: 30-41.

Downloads

Published

2020-01-13

How to Cite

Descamps, S., & De Vocht, A. (2020). Movements and habitat use of the invasive species Lithobates catesbeianus in the valley of the Grote Nete (Belgium). Belgian Journal of Zoology, 146(2). https://doi.org/10.26496/bjz.2016.44

Issue

Vol. 146 No. 2 (2016)

Section

Articles

License

All published papers will be put on-line as high resolution PDF’s. Copyright thus remains with the authors. All manuscripts will be licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.