Overview

Distribution

endemic to a single nation

Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial 3.0 (CC BY-NC 3.0)

© NatureServe

Source: NatureServe

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Average rating: 2.5 of 5

National Distribution

United States

Origin: Native

Regularity: Regularly occurring

Currently: Present

Confidence: Confident

Type of Residency: Year-round

Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial 3.0 (CC BY-NC 3.0)

© NatureServe

Source: NatureServe

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Average rating: 2.5 of 5

Global Range: (5000-200,000 square km (about 2000-80,000 square miles)) Disjunct populations in west-central and southwestern Illinois, southeastern Missouri and adjacent Arkansas (Conant and Collins 1991). See Brown and Rose (1988) for information on distribution in Illinois. See Figg (1991) for a brief account of recent survey results from southeastern Missouri.

Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial 3.0 (CC BY-NC 3.0)

© NatureServe

Source: NatureServe

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Average rating: 2.5 of 5

Physical Description

Size

Length: 4 cm

Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial 3.0 (CC BY-NC 3.0)

© NatureServe

Source: NatureServe

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Average rating: 2.5 of 5

Type Information

Paratype for Pseudacris streckeri illinoensis
Catalog Number: USNM 134273
Collection: Smithsonian Institution, National Museum of Natural History, Department of Vertebrate Zoology, Division of Amphibians & Reptiles
Preparation: Ethanol
Year Collected: 1951
Locality: Beardstown, 3 mi E of, Cass, Illinois, United States, North America
  • Paratype: Smith, P. W. 1951. Bulletin of the Chicago Academy of Sciences. 9 (10): 190, plate 1.
Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 (CC BY 3.0)

© Smithsonian Institution, National Museum of Natural History, Department of Vertebrate Zoology, Division of Amphibians & Reptiles

Source: National Museum of Natural History Collections

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Average rating: 2.5 of 5

Ecology

Habitat

Comments: Basically terrestrial. Sand prairies and cultivated fields, open sandy areas of river lowlands. Burrows into soil using forelimbs (Tucker et al., 1995, Herpetological Review 26:32-33). Eggs and larvae develop in flooded fields, ditches, sloughs, small ponds, or other temporary bodies of water.

Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial 3.0 (CC BY-NC 3.0)

© NatureServe

Source: NatureServe

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Average rating: 2.5 of 5

Migration

Non-Migrant: Yes. At least some populations of this species do not make significant seasonal migrations. Juvenile dispersal is not considered a migration.

Locally Migrant: Yes. At least some populations of this species make local extended movements (generally less than 200 km) at particular times of the year (e.g., to breeding or wintering grounds, to hibernation sites).

Locally Migrant: No. No populations of this species make annual migrations of over 200 km.

Migrates between breeding pools and nonbreeding terrestrial habitats.

Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial 3.0 (CC BY-NC 3.0)

© NatureServe

Source: NatureServe

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Average rating: 2.5 of 5

Trophic Strategy

Comments: Metamorphosed frogs eat small terrestrial arthropods obtained from ground surface or in soil. Larvae eat suspended matter, organic debris, algae, and plant tissue.

Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial 3.0 (CC BY-NC 3.0)

© NatureServe

Source: NatureServe

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Average rating: 2.5 of 5

Population Biology

Number of Occurrences

Note: For many non-migratory species, occurrences are roughly equivalent to populations.

Estimated Number of Occurrences: 21 - 80

Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial 3.0 (CC BY-NC 3.0)

© NatureServe

Source: NatureServe

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Average rating: 2.5 of 5

Global Abundance

Unknown

Comments: Taubert et al. (no date) estimated about 394 individuals (mostly males) in their survey of 26 breeding sites in Illinois. Most populations include fewer than 20 males (Brown and Rose 1988, Herkert 1992). Locally abundant in undisturbed sand prairies in Cass and Morgan counties, Illinois (Phillips et al. 1999).

Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial 3.0 (CC BY-NC 3.0)

© NatureServe

Source: NatureServe

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Average rating: 2.5 of 5

Life History and Behavior

Cyclicity

Comments: Seldom seen except during winter-spring breeding season.

Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial 3.0 (CC BY-NC 3.0)

© NatureServe

Source: NatureServe

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Average rating: 2.5 of 5

Reproduction

Lays clutch of up to several hundred eggs divided among many clusters. Breeds in late winter or early spring in Midwest, from as early as late January through mid-April in Arkansas. In Missouri, breeding begins in late February or early March, continues into early April (Johnson 1987). Breeds in March in Illinois (Smith 1961). Aquatic larvae metamorphose into terrestrial form in about 2 months (late spring in Illinois).

Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial 3.0 (CC BY-NC 3.0)

© NatureServe

Source: NatureServe

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Average rating: 2.5 of 5

Conservation

Conservation Status

National NatureServe Conservation Status

United States

Rounded National Status Rank: N3 - Vulnerable

Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial 3.0 (CC BY-NC 3.0)

© NatureServe

Source: NatureServe

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Average rating: 2.5 of 5

NatureServe Conservation Status

Rounded Global Status Rank: T3 - Vulnerable

Reasons: Restricted to Illinois, Missouri, and Arkansas; most local populations are small; suffering declines from habitat loss due largely to agricultural practices.

Intrinsic Vulnerability: Moderately vulnerable

Environmental Specificity: Narrow to moderate.

Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial 3.0 (CC BY-NC 3.0)

© NatureServe

Source: NatureServe

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Average rating: 2.5 of 5

Global Short Term Trend: Decline of 10-30%

Comments: Populations likely are declining because of loss of breeding habitat.

Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial 3.0 (CC BY-NC 3.0)

© NatureServe

Source: NatureServe

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Average rating: 2.5 of 5

Threats

Degree of Threat: Medium

Comments: Continued draining and clearing of bottomlands, and housing developments and other land uses, have greatly reduced the habitat in southeastern Missouri, where there also is concern over the effects of pesticides in the environment (Johnson 1987, 2000). In Illinois, habitat has been lost to drainage of breeding sites and cultivation (Brown and Rose 1988, Herkert 1992, Phillips et al. 1999). Possible threats include highway construction, water contamination, and chemical spills (Beltz 1991). Bullfrogs and fish are also threats to breeding ponds (Taubert et al., no date)

Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial 3.0 (CC BY-NC 3.0)

© NatureServe

Source: NatureServe

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Average rating: 2.5 of 5

Management

Global Protection: Few (1-3) occurrences appropriately protected and managed

Comments: Some state lands protect breeding sites in Illinois; however this protection is limited.

Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial 3.0 (CC BY-NC 3.0)

© NatureServe

Source: NatureServe

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Average rating: 2.5 of 5

Wikipedia

Illinois chorus frog

The Illinois chorus frog, Pseudacris streckeri illinoensis, is a subspecies of chorus frog that lives in scattered, restricted habitat ecosystems in the states of Arkansas, Illinois, and Missouri. It was published by Smith in 1951. Its lifecycle is little known, its isolated populations are increasingly restricted by agricultural drainage, and it is listed as a threatened subspecies.[1]

Contents

Description

The Illinois chorus frog, a wetland amphibian, grows to a maximum length of 1.5 inches (3.7 cm). Its range is restricted to isolated sandy wetlands along the banks of the Mississippi River and a major tributary, the Illinois River.[1]

Its lifecycle begins with the mating season beginning in late February and continuing until late April, when the small amphibian signals its aptitude with a version of the distinctive cry that gives its genus its name. The breeding call can be heard at a distance of up to 1 mile (1.6 km). The pools of spring meltwater, where they live and eat, begin to dry up as early as mid-May, and the frogs disappear into hibernation below the winter frost line. Herpetologists say that the subspecies' unique anatomy makes its members ideal candidates for a life cycle that centers on hibernation. With unusually strong forelegs for its size, the Illinois chorus frog is described as the only frog that uses a breast stroke motion to dig its sandy burrows.[1]

Threats

The Illinois chorus frogs' preferred habitat in Arkansas includes the patch of sandy wetland soil surrounding Stuttgart where rice is grown. However, the invention of laser land-levelling, and its use by rice paddy operators, has eliminated 61% of the subspecies' range in this southern state.[1]

The Strecker's chorus frog, the species of which P. streckeri illinoensis is a subspecies, is not endangered and lives in large numbers throughout warmer latitudes of the eastern and central United States.

Current events

The Illinois Department of Natural Resources carried out a field study of the Illinois chorus frog's habitat in Mason County, Illinois, in March 2011. The study hoped to develop a methodological protocol to monitor the Illinois chorus frog's threatened population.[2]

References

  1. ^ a b c d Jeanne Townsend Handy, "The Secret Life of the Illinois Chorus Frog", Outdoor Illinois XIX:3 (March 2011), pages 9-11.
  2. ^ Chris Young, "Researchers listen for chorus frogs", The State Journal-Register (March 28, 2011), pages 8, 12.
Creative Commons Attribution Share Alike 3.0 (CC BY-SA 3.0)

Source: Wikipedia

Unreviewed

Article rating from 0 people

Average rating: 2.5 of 5

Names and Taxonomy

Taxonomy

Comments: Subspecies illinoensis was proposed as a distinct species by Collins (1991) and Collins and Taggart (2002) (without supporting data), but this taxon was listed as a subspecies of P. streckeri by Phillips et al. (1999), Johnson (2000), and Crother et al. (2000, 2003). Based on molecular data, Moriarty and Cannnatella (2004) concluded that "the question of whether streckeri and illinoensis have differentiated sufficiently in allopatry to merit status as different species deserves further study." Crother (2008) cited Moriarty and Cannatella (2004) in listing illinoensis as a species. Trauth et al. (2007) found morphological evidence of geographic (clinal) variation within P. streckeri; these data did not provide support for the taxonomic elevation of illinoensis as a distinct species. Based on these studies, Collins and Taggart (2009) regarded illinoensis as a synonym of streckeri, whereas Frost (2011) listed illinoensis as a species.

Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial 3.0 (CC BY-NC 3.0)

© NatureServe

Source: NatureServe

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Average rating: 2.5 of 5

Disclaimer

EOL content is automatically assembled from many different content providers. As a result, from time to time you may find pages on EOL that are confusing.

To request an improvement, please leave a comment on the page. Thank you!