dcsimg

Description

provided by AmphibiaWeb articles
The size of the Dendropsophus ebraccatus varies between regional populations. The average snout-vent length of an adult male ranges from 23.63 - 26.75 mm (Ohmer et. al 2009), while females are slightly larger, reaching 36.5 mm (Duellman 1970). The species has a short, truncated snout, and its head is flat and wider than its body (Duellman 1970). The eyes are large compared to the head, and the pupil is horizontal (Leenders 2016). Adults have vomerine teeth (Rivera-Correa and Orrico 2013). There is a thin dermal fold that extends from the back edge of the eye to near the arm. This fold covers the upper edge of the tympanum, which is roughly one-fourth the size of the eye (Savage 2002) and has a distinct ridge on the front edge (Duellman 1970). Adult males have paired vocal slits and a single extensible vocal sac. The skin on the dorsum is smooth, while the skin on the ventrum is granular (Savage 2002).The limbs are relatively short. The front limbs have an extensive axillary membrane and are slightly more robust than the hind limbs. The tips of all the digits have discs, with the discs being larger on the hands than the feet (Duellman 1970). The disc on the third digit of the front limb is larger than the tympanum (Savage 2002). The front foot has webbing covering roughly half the length of the digits. The webbing between the first and second digit is vestigial, and extends from the middle of the penultimate phalanx on the second digit to the base of the penultimate phalanges on the third and fourth digits. The webbing on the hind foot is more extensive, covering roughly three-quarters of the length of the digits. The webbing starts at the base of the toe disc on the first digit, continues to the distal end of the penultimate phalanx on the second digit, then connects to the base of the penultimate phalanx on the third digit. The webbing then connects from the base of the toe disc on the third digit to the distal end of the antepenultimate digit on the fourth digit, and terminates at the toe disc on the fifth digit. The hind foot also has a thin tarsal fold that runs the full length of the tarsus (Duellman 1970).Hatchling tadpoles can range from 6.72 to 7.47 mm long in total length (Gonzalez et al. 2011). Tadpoles at developmental stage 36 average 29 mm in total length (Savage 2002). The tadpoles have a blunt snout, small dorsolateral nostrils, and laterally directed eyes (Duellman 1970). The body is violin-shaped (Rivera-Correa and Orrico 2013) or ovoid with a sinistral spiracle. The small mouth is terminal (Duellman 1970) and has finely serrated upper and lower beaks, though no denticles (Savage 2002). The tail is long with a thin flagellum at the end (Savage 2002) and high fins (Duellman 1970). Dendropsophus ebraccatus is one of at least 97 species in the genus Dendropsophus and is placed within the group of leaf-gluing frogs that includes at least eight other species. Dendropsophus ebraccatus is the only species of the nine that is trans-Andean; the other eight species are cis-Andean. Dendropsophus ebraccatus can be differentiated from similar species by the bands that are usually on the upper side of its dorsum. Dendropsophus ebraccatus has abnormal bands that are disrupted by brown smudges, while its close relatives D. manonergra and D. triangulum have a more consistent pattern. Dendropsophus manonergra does not have disruptions within its bands while D. triangulum has a consistent disruption, if present. Dendropsophus manonergra, D. roassalleni, and D. sarayacuensis have triangle shaped blotches between both of their eyes (Rivera-Correa and Orrico 2013). Dendropsophus ebraccatus is also commonly confused with D. phlebodes and D. microcephala. Both of the latter species lack the hourglass pattern on the dorsum, allowing for easy differentiation when the D. ebraccatus individual has this distinctive pattern. When the hourglass pattern is absent on an individual, D. ebraccatus can be distinguished from both D. microcephala and D. phlebodes by its dark eye mask and pale lip stripe (Leenders 2016), as well as its finger webbing, which is more extensive than the other two species (Savage 2002). Dendropsophus phlebodes also has a grey tint to its dorsum coloration, whereas D. ebraccatus is brightly colored (Guyer and Donnelly 2005). Dendropsophus ebraccatus can be further differentiated from D. microcephala and D. phlebodes by its long primary calling notes. These three species have different pulse rates in their callings, with D. ebraccatus having the slowest pulse rate (Savage 2002). In addition, D. microcephala callings are much higher in frequency than D. ebraccatus (Wilczynski et al. 1993). In life, D. ebraccatus usually has a yellow dorsum with golden-brown blotches forming the shape of an hourglass, giving it the common name “hourglass treefrog.” The dark blotches are sometimes bordered by lighter colors, such as bright yellow, cream, or white (Guyer and Donnelly 2005). While the hourglass pattern is most common, there are 10 different pattern variants that range in the extent of the dark blotches, from completely tan-yellow with no blotches to the actual hourglass-shaped pigmentation (Ohmer et al. 2009). Dendropsophus ebraccatus also has a dark brown eye mask extending as a stripe past the eye and covering the tympanum. Beneath this dark eye mask they often have a pale lip stripe that expands below the eye to form a light spot (Leenders 2016). Dendropsophus ebraccatus generally have banded limbs, with the same coloring as their dorsum (Leenders 2001). The thighs are uniformly bright yellow or orange on both the dorsal and ventral sides (Leenders 2016). The fingers generally have no color (Cope 1874). The iris varies in color from a pale yellow or tan to a dark brownish-red (Guyer and Donnelly 2005). In life, tadpoles have a brown to black dorsum with brightly colored blotches, and a pale ventrum (Savage 2002). The blotches are red, gold, white, or any combination of the three colors (Guyer and Donnelly 2005). The tail is primarily gold with black barring, and the fins are generally red with black barring (Savage 2002). There is a pigmented spot on the tail that varies in color and size depending on the predators in their environment (Touchon and Warkentin 2008 Oikos). The iris is red and bronze (Savage 2002). Dendropsophus ebraccatus lives in a range of elevations. One study shows that D. ebraccatus’ body size throughout all stages of growth correlates with the elevation a population is living at, with populations living at higher elevations (greater than 300 m) in Pacific versant populations being larger than those at lower elevations. The same study also showed that populations on the Pacific side of the Cordillera de Talamanca mountain range have larger body sizes. In addition, there are roughly ten different color variations (Ohmer et al. 2009). The patterning on the dorsum ranges from a clear hourglass shape with or without additional spots surrounding it to a solid yellow dorsum with no blotches, and spans all coloring in between (Savage 2002). Dendropsophus ebraccatus females are slightly larger than males, and males have an easily discernible vocal patch (Guyer and Donnelly 2005).The species authority is: Cope, E. D. (1874). “Description of some species of reptiles obtained by Dr. John F. Bransford, Assistant Surgeon United States Navy, while attached to the Nicaraguan Surveying Expedition in 1873”. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia 26: 64–72. Dendropsophus ebraccatus is a frog in the family Hylidae. In 2005, D. ebraccatus was moved from the genus Hyla to the genus Dendropsophus in accordance with its molecular evidence. The genus Dendropsophus was resurrected to encompass many species that were moved from Hyla due to shared characteristics of mitochondrial evidence and pectoral glands in males and females (Faivovich et al. 2005). Dendropsophus ebraccatus is part of the D. leucophyllatus species group. Based on Maximum Parsimony analysis of 12S rRNA, 16S rRNA, and tRNA Valine genes, D. ebraccatus is sister to the clade composed of D. bifurcus, D. leucophyllatus, D. manoegra, D. saryacuensis, and D. triangulum (Rivera-Correa and Orrico 2013). This analysis supports an earlier Baysian and Maximum Likelihood analysis of 808 base pairs of 12S and 16S rRNA, which had lower confidence scores (Fouquet et al. 2011). Both studies indicate that the clade including D. ebraccatus is sister to a clade including D. salli and D. elegans but disagree on the placement of D. miyatai in relation to D. ebraccatus (Fouquet et al. 2011, Rivera-Correa and Orrico 2013).The species epithet, ebraccatus is latin for “without trousers” (Smithsonian Tropical Institute: Amphibians of Panama, accessed 2018); the name is thought to reference the lack of patterning on the species’ thighs (Leenders 2001). Dendropsophus ebraccatus was first named Hyla ebraccata in 1874 (Cope 1874). In 1954, its name was changed to Hyla weyerae. In 2005, the species was changed from the genus Hyla to the genus Dendropsophus, which gave rise to the scientific name used today, Dendropsophus ebraccatus (Faivovich et al. 2005). Dendropsophus ebraccata has 30 diploid chromosomes, or a karyotype of 2n = 30 (Savage 2002).

References

  • Belden, L. K., Hughey, M. C., Rebollar, E. A., Umile, T. P., Loftus, S. C., Burzynski, E. A., Minbiole, K. P. C., House, L. L., Jensen, R. V., Becker, M. H., Walke, J. B., Medina, D., Ibáñez, R., Harris, R. N. (2015). ''Panamanian frog species host unique skin bacterial communities.'' Frontiers in Microbiology, 6(1171), 1-21.
  • Bursey, C. R., Brooks, D. R. (2010). ''Nematode Parasites of 41 Anuran Species from the Area de Conservación Guanacaste, Costa Rica.'' Comparative Parasitology, 77(2), 221-231.
  • Cohen, K. L., Piacentino, M. L., Warkentin, K. M. (2018). ''The hatching process and mechanisms of adaptive hatching acceleration in hourglass treefrogs, Dendropsophus ebraccatus.'' Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology Part A: Molecular & Integrative Physiolog, 217, 63-74.
  • Cope, E. D. (1874). ''Description of some species of reptiles obtained by Dr. John F. Bransford, Assistant Surgeon United States Navy, while attached to the Nicaraguan surveying expedition in 1873.'' Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, 26(1), 64-72.
  • Fouquet, A., Noonan, B.P., Blanc, M., Orrico, V.G.D. (2011). ''Phylogenetic position of Dendropsophus gaucheri (Lescure and Marty 2000) highlights the need for an in-depth investigation of the phylogenetic relationships of Dendropsophus (Anura: Hylidae).'' Zootaxa, 3035, 59-67.
  • Gonzalez, S. C., Touchon, J. C., Vonesh, J. R. (2011). ''Interactions Between Competition and Predation Shape Early Growth and Survival of Two Neotropical Hylid Tadpoles.'' Biotropica, 43(5), 633-639.
  • Jiménez, R., Bolainos, F. (2012). ''Use of food and spatial resources by two frogs of the genus Dendropsophus (Anura: Hylidae) from la selva, Costa Rica.'' Phyllomedusa: Journal of Herpetology, 11(1), 51-62.
  • Jungfer, K.-H., Lynch, J., Morales, M., Solís, F., Ibáñez, R., Santos-Barrera, G., Chaves, G., Bolaños, F., Sunyer, J. (2010). “Dendropsophus ebraccatus.” The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2010: e.T55470A11316147. http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2010-2.RLTS.T55470A11316147.en. Downloaded on 15 February 2018.
  • Leenders, T. (2016). Amphibians of Costa Rica: a Field Guide. Comstock Publishing Associates, a division of Cornell University Press, Ithaca, New York.
  • Matias, N., Escalante, P. (2015). ''Size, body condition, and limb asymmetry in two hylid frogs at different habitat disturbance levels in Veracruz, México.'' The Herpetological Journal, 25, 169-176.
  • Miyamoto M. M., Cane. J. H. (1980). ''Behavioral observations of noncalling males in Costa Rican Hyla ebraccata.'' Biotropica, 12(3), 225-227.
  • Miyamoto M. M., Cane. J. H. (1980). ''Notes on the Reproductive Behavior of a Costa Rican Population of Hyla ebraccata.'' Copeia, 1980(4), 928-930.
  • Ohmer, M. E., Robertson, J. M., Zamudio, K. R. (2009). ''Discordance in body size, colour Pattern, and advertisement call across genetically distinct populations in a neotropical anuran (Dendropsophus ebraccatus).'' Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 97(2), 298–313.
  • Reichert, M. (2011). ''Effects of multiple-speaker playbacks on aggressive calling behavior in the treefrog Dendropsophus ebraccatus.'' Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 65(9), 1739-1751.
  • Rivera-Correa, M., Orrico, V. G. (2013). ''Description and phylogenetic relationships of a new species of treefrog of the Dendropsophus leucophyllatus group (Anura: Hylidae) from the Amazon basin of Colombia and with an exceptional color pattern.'' Zootaxa, 3686(4), 447-460.
  • Smithsonian Tropical Institute: Amphibians of Panama. Accessed 15 February, 2018 from http://biogeodb.stri.si.edu/amphibians/en/species/81/.
  • Spangler, M. (2015). ''Conservation of a Neotropical Herpetofauna: An Introduction to the Crisis of Amphibians and Reptiles in Central America and Beyond.'' Central American Biodiversity. Huettmann F., eds., Springer, New York, NY, 323-349.
  • Touchon, C. T., Wakertin, K. M. (2008). ''Fish and dragonfly nymph predators induce opposite shifts in color and morphology of tadpoles.'' Oikos, 117(4), 634-640.
  • Touchon, C. T., Wakertin, K. M. (2008). ''Reproductive mode plasticity: Aquatic and terrestrial oviposition in a treefrog.'' PNAS, 105(21), 7495-7499.
  • Touchon, C. T., Wakertin, K. M. (2015). ''Oviposition site choice under conflicting risks demonstrates that aquatic predators drive terrestrial egg-laying.'' Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 282(1808), 20150376.
  • Wells, K.D., Schwartz, J.J. (1984). ''Vocal communication in a neotropical treefrog, Hyla ebraccata: Aggressive calls.'' Behaviour, 91(1/3), 128-145.
  • Wilczynski, W., McClelland, B. E., Rand, A. S. (1993). ''Acoustic, auditory, and morphological divergence in three species of neotropical frog.'' Journal of Comparative Physiology A, 172(4), 425-438.

license
cc-by-3.0
author
Amanda Burns
author
Sarai Acosta
author
Alexandra Presher
original
visit source
partner site
AmphibiaWeb articles

Distribution and Habitat

provided by AmphibiaWeb articles
Dendropsophus ebraccatus lives in Central America from southern Mexico to Ecuador (Karl-Heinz et al. 2010) at elevational ranges of 0 - 1600 m. Populations are isolated in some areas by the mountain range, Cordillera de Talamanca (Ohmer et al. 2009), and are not as prevalent in Ecuador (Karl-Heinz et al. 2010). Dendropsophus ebraccatus is most commonly found in humid lowland forests (Leenders 2016), but they have also been found in habitat edges, orchards, pastures, and secondary vegetation indicating a tolerance of human disturbances. Dendropsophus ebraccatus is typically found on vegetation that hangs above both permanent and temporary pools of water (Matias and Escalante 2015).
license
cc-by-3.0
author
Amanda Burns
author
Sarai Acosta
author
Alexandra Presher
original
visit source
partner site
AmphibiaWeb articles

Life History, Abundance, Activity, and Special Behaviors

provided by AmphibiaWeb articles
Dendropsophus ebraccatus is a nocturnal, arboreal frog that is abundant throughout its range (Gonzalez et al 2011). Dendropsophus ebraccatus has been found to cohabitate with closely related frogs that utilize the same spatial and food resources. The species preys on terrestrial invertebrates and has been found to have little to no competition with its close relative D. phlebodes, the San Carlos treefrog. Due to D. ebraccatus’ larger size, it eats larger prey animals while D. phlebodes eats smaller invertebrates. Regardless of the predation distribution, empty frog stomachs in the field provide evidence that the majority of their time is allocated to calling. These males have overlapping breeding grounds that are utilized to find mates. It is believed that these frogs can coexist due to the heterogeneity in the environment; they have been found to use various types of foliage with differing heights to call for females, which allows for perch height segregation (Jiménez and Bolainos 2012).Dendropsophus ebraccatus mate from May to November, when its surrounding environment is at its wettest (Ohmer et al. 2009). Hoping to attract a female, males call from 15 cm to 2 m (Miyamoto and Cane 1980 Copiea) above ponds created during the rainy season (Ohmer et al. 2009). Males produce multiple types of calls including defensive and aggressive calls, which they use to compete with males of their own species and neighboring heterospecifics, as well as advertisement calls (Savage 2002). The different types of calls have different pitches. High pitch calls are used for intrasexual competition. However, females show preference for low pitches over high pitches (Reichert 2011). Advertisement calls are composed of buzz-like introductory notes that may be followed a click-like secondary notes or aggressive calls depending on if they are calling alone or in response to other males. Lone males often only call with the first note. The duration of advertisement calls is between 96 – 240 ms, with a pulse rate of 85 - 110 pulses per second and with 54 – 92% of the call spent rising in amplitued. The dominate frequency is around 3 kHz (Wells and Schwartz 1984). Females prefer a swifter call rate that includes multiple notes, rather than a single note (Vitt and Caldwell 2009).Aggressive calls are more variable but are generally longer (120 – 664 ms) than adveritsement calls, have a higher pulse repetition rate (157 – 461 pulses per second) and may include secondary click notes. The proportion of call time spent rising in amplitued also has a greater variation of 11 – 93%. The dominate frequency, like the advertisement call, is around 3 kHz (Wells and Schwartz 1984). Males increase the aggressiveness in their calls when other males are nearby (Reichert 2011). When males are further from each other they have shorter introductory notes which increase in length as distance between males decreases. Additionally, pulse rate is positively correlated to an aggressive response from other males and rising time appears to be an important feature when pulse rates were high (Wells and Schwartz 1984). Males call throughout the night while staying in a vegetative pond area (Touchon and Worley 2015). Non-calling, sneaker, males are also present and position themselves in the space between the calling males and the females. From this position, the silent males remain still so when an allured female makes her way to the calling male he can attempt to mate with her (Miyamoto and Cane 1980 Biotropica).Advertising males call faster as females approach them until the female rotates her body toward the male, at which point he stops calling (Savage 2002). Males position themselves on the females via axillary amplexus (Miyamoto and Cane 1980 Copiea). After external fertilization, a female can lay around 180 to 300 eggs in one night (Touchon and Worley 2015). Females are capable of ovipositing on both land and water. The terrestrial eggs are commonly placed above the water on a plant to allow the tadpoles to fall into the water after hatching, while aquatic eggs are place beneath the surface on vegetation. Their decision of placement depends on environmental cues rather than genetics. For example, less shaded regions would influence the female to oviposit aquatically rather than terrestrially to decrease chances of desiccation (Touchon and Warkentin 2008 PNAS). If aquatic predators are present, D. ebraccatus will lay eggs in overlying vegetation and risk desiccation. Eggs oviposited in the water are able to hatch after forty hours ; the developmental rate for terrestrial eggs is much slower (Touchon and Worley 2015). In order for the species to oviposit on both land and water, the eggs must be able to withstand the either environment. While most amphibians begin releasing a hatching enzyme right before they hatch,D. ebraccatus gradually releases the enzyme as the embryo develops and the vitelline membrane slowly degrades. This process accelerates hatching, enables the tadpole to avoid threats such as predation or desiccation, and allows offspring to take the best course of action for survival (Cohen et al. 2018). Tadpoles graze the shallow waters for algae (Gonzalez et al. 2011), generally hiding in clumps of vegetation (Leenders 2001). One study showed how the presence of dragonflies causes tadpoles to develop a redder pigment on their tail and a larger tail in comparison to the presence of fish, which causes tadpoles to grow smaller tails. These different responses in tail morphology may be evolutionary adaptations to avoid predators. The red spot and large tails on tadpoles subjected to dragonflies may be deterring dragonflies from eating them while the small tails may help propel tadpoles away from fish (Touchon and Warkentin 2008 Oikos). The tadpoles metamorphose into frogs four to six weeks after hatching (Savage 2002).Adult variation in dorsal patterning is explained by both regional genetic drift and environmental pressures. The purpose for the bright coloration in D. ebraccatus is unknown; it is possible the color and patterns are a form of aposematism or a form of crypsis. The toxicity of the poison glands are unknown, and due to the broad range of endemicity, it is difficult to determine the selection pressures acting on the coloration of the species. There is some indication that the variation and frequency in coloration is not due to sexual selection, but rather natural selection (Ohmer et al. 2009). Dendropsophus ebraccatus is highly susceptible to predation and parasitism (Touchon and Warkertin 2008 PNAS). In one study, individuals were found to host the nematode parasite Cosmocerca parva. However, there is no indication that this parasite has a major effect on the species population (Bursey and Brooks 2010). In addition to parasites, large aquatic invertebrates-such as dragonfly larvae and water bugs- and fish have been seen to regularly prey on D. ebraccatus eggs (Touchon and Warketin 2008 PNAS). When aquatic predators are abundant, D. ebraccatus may lay eggs terrestrially to increase the chances of egg survival (Cohen et al. 2018). Terrestrially lain eggs are subject to predation by spiders, wasps, and ants (Touchon and Warketin 2008 PNAS).
license
cc-by-3.0
author
Amanda Burns
author
Sarai Acosta
author
Alexandra Presher
original
visit source
partner site
AmphibiaWeb articles

Life History, Abundance, Activity, and Special Behaviors

provided by AmphibiaWeb articles
Dendropsophus ebraccatus’ population trend is stable, and is listed as “Least Concern” on the IUCN Red List. The hourglass treefrog is an adaptable species that has thus far not been impacted by human disturbances (Karl-Heinz et al. 2010). The ability of females to oviposit on both land and water allows reproduction to be flexible. However, changes in the amount of rainfall due to climate change could make terrestrial egg deposits more susceptible to desiccation (Touchon and Worley 2015). While the environment could lead to egg desiccation, deforestation and contamination from pesticides associated with farming could affect adults because the species is primarily forest dwellers. However, the flexibility of D. ebraccatus' life history allows some populations to live in unforested areas (Karl-Heinz et al. 2010), including parks and agricultural lands (Leenders 2016). However, it was found that the mean size and age was decreased in areas of high human disturbance. It is possible that the difference in size is due to lowered life expectancy; no limb asymmetry was found. (Matias and Escalante 2015).The presence of chytridiomycosis in D. ebraccatus is low. When scientists examined if the root of the low frequency could be due to differences in the environment or differences in their microbiota, it was found that the microbiota of Panamanian treefrogs is in fact different from other frogs, but no conclusive evidence linked the differing microflora to the low rates of chytridiomycosis (Belden et al. 2015).
license
cc-by-3.0
author
Amanda Burns
author
Sarai Acosta
author
Alexandra Presher
original
visit source
partner site
AmphibiaWeb articles

Relation to Humans

provided by AmphibiaWeb articles
Dendropsophus ebraccatus is used for research purposes with special interest surrounding its rapid hatch rate and its ability to oviposit both terrestrially and aquatically, which is found only in a few species. In addition to the research interest, these animals are kept as pets (Karl-Heinz et al. 2010) and used as attractions for ecotourism sites in Central America (Spangler 2015).
license
cc-by-3.0
author
Amanda Burns
author
Sarai Acosta
author
Alexandra Presher
original
visit source
partner site
AmphibiaWeb articles

Dendropsophus ebraccatus

provided by wikipedia EN

Dendropsophus ebraccatus, also known as the hourglass treefrog, referring to the golden-brown hourglass shape seen surrounded by skin yellow on its back.[2][3] Their underbellies are yellow.[3] Their arms and lower legs usually display bold patterns while their upper legs or thighs are light yellow giving them the appearance of wearing no pants. The species name "ebraccata" translates to "without trousers" in Latin.[4]

The hourglass treefrog is throughout Mexico from southern Veracruz and northern Oaxaca, slightly more southern in Chiapas, Tabasco, and the Yucatán Peninsula. The hourglass treefrog also presides south of Mexico in the northern Guatemala and Belize areas. The range of the hourglass treefrog becomes more scarce in Honduras and a few more known locations in Nicaragua, but then has been commonly reported again in Central America spanning from Costa Rica to Panama even venturing into Colombia and northwestern Ecuador.[5]

Taxonomy

Dendropsophus ebraccatus is a member of the wide-ranging tree frog family Hylidae and the genus Dendropsophus. Dendropsophus is a group of small, primarily yellow tree frogs found throughout Central and South America. A unique feature of the genus is that all individuals within the genus have 30 chromosomes. After a large revision to the family Hylidae in 2005, D. ebraccatus was moved from the Hyla genus to the Dendropsophus genus within the Hylidae family.[6][7] The D. ebraccatus can be distinguished from similar species by identifying its the D. ebraccatus dominant dorsal pattern, the hourglass, since it can be confused with close relatives D. manonergra and D. triangulum.[6][8]

Description

"pantsless" thighs and hourglass pattern

D. ebraccatus are smooth, small treefrogs exhibiting sexual dimorphism, with males being significantly smaller than females. Their dorsal coloration consists of blotches and spots that vary in its exact color from yellow, gold, or brown. These blotches can look like an hourglass while the rest of their skin provides a bright yellow background the darker patterned blotches.[9][10] The dorsal color pattern of D. ebraccatus can be characterized as hourglass with spots, hourglass without spots, spots, and plain; however, the hourglass pattern is dominant in most populations.[10] They are also called “pantless frogs” because when their hind legs are extended, their dark patterned blotches do not continue on their thighs and instead display pale-yellow skin on their thighs. This gives them the appearance of having no pants.[3] The hourglass tree frog has relatively large forelimbs compared to the proportion of its body. It also has well developed toe discs for tree climbing. Their toe pads adhere via deformation of the soft epithelial cells. They also have long hind limbs for jumping from tree to tree.[11] As compared to most Anura, most gas exchange occurs through their nostrils but actually release most carbon dioxide through their permeable skin.[12]

Distribution

The hourglass tree frog is native to Mexico in specific areas of Mexico: southern Veracruz, northern Oaxaca, Chiapas, Tabasco, and the Yucatán Peninsula. D. ebraccatus have been commonly seen throughout more southern countries including Guatemala, Belize, Costa Rica, and Panama. There are only a few known populations of D. ebraccatus in Nicaragua and Honduras. They are even seen more frequently throughout the northern Colombia and northwestern Ecuador.[5]

Reproduction

Frog egg clutch, eggs surrounded by jelly like substance
Frog egg clutch, eggs surrounded by jelly like substance

Hourglass tree frogs migrate to freshwater pools in vegetated areas to breed during the rainy seasons of Central and South America, between May and November. Once aggregated around freshwater pools, they utilize chorus as strategies to select mates. Males hide behind foliage around edges of marshes and ponds during the night and produce long mating calls to attract potential female mates. Once a male is selected by a female, he will climb onto her back and release his sperm into her cloaca.[13]

Females reproduce multiple times within the breeding season, with gaps between reproductive spells as short as 10 days. Females will lay between 180 and 300 eggs, separated between up to eight different masses within a single night. Egg clutches are laid either in single layers on the upper surface of leaves overhanging freshwater or in clusters connected to floating vegetation within the water itself. Hourglass tree frogs are unique in their reproductive plasticity, allowing them to produce both aquatic and arboreal eggs. Arboreal eggs are deposited on the upper surfaces of leaves overhanging water, so the tadpoles can roll into the water once hatched, and aquatic eggs are attached to floating vegetation within the water to keep the eggs from sinking.[14]

Mating

Mate Searching Behavior

Research on anuran communication reveals that groups of male frog chorus to attract female frogs to mate. The relative success of these male frogs at attracting females depends on how their advertisement call is able to lead females to their calling space. As male density increases, a male’s advertisement call is confused with the other calls. This confusion leads to females’ inability to find which calling space the advertisement call originated from. The lowest intensity of a neighbor's call that a male frog is tolerant of is known as the aggressive threshold. When this threshold is reached, a male frog will use a different call known as an aggressive call to initiate male-male conflict or intolerance.[15] Advertisement and aggressive calls both consist of an introductory note ending with a wide range of a number of clicks, and multiple notes and patterns.[13]

Hourglass treefrogs mating
Hourglass treefrogs mating

Opposed to advertisement calls, aggression calls are characterized by a higher rate of repetition and longer timed calls.[13]

Male/male Interactions

In opposition to most frog chorus species, D. ebraccatus chorus groups produce far-range aggressive calls more frequently than close-range. The higher proportion and number of far-range aggression calls causes D. ebraccatus males to be influenced by various surrounding calls in chorus groups instead of just calls from individual frogs. This influence from other males forces these male frogs to constantly adjust their calls accordingly.[16] Generally, male frogs will respond to 2–4 Hz calls with synchronous advertisement calls. On the flip side, males will produce alternating advertisement calls or an initial delayed aggressive call when responding to a call that is 100 dB or more.[17]

For aggressive calls, long calls are utilized for close interactions and physical altercations. During close interactions in which a male frog attacks another, they tussle with each other while still exchanging long duration calls. These physical alterations usually only last one minute unless they remain in close contact and will sometimes continue. On the other hand, short calls are utilized during far-range interactions.[18][17]

Female/Male Interactions

Mate Choice

Call timing plays a significant role in female D. ebraccatus mating choice. Simultaneous male advertisement calling produces less reproductive success for males in close proximity. A male that starts its calls later is the preferred mating choice because females seem to prefer calls that end last.[11] Click notes at the end of the late advertisement call may be one reason why females prefer the late call since the clicking of the lead call is blocked by the late call.[13]

Male hourglass tree frog inflating vocal sac to make call
Male inflating vocal sac to make call

The timing of male calls only depends on the call they produce and not the ones they hear. D. ebraccatus males show more synchrony, or overlapping calls, when producing advertisement calls and prefer to alternate with other calls when they produce aggressive calls.[19] Calls with 150 to 200 millisecond introductory note durations produced synchronous response calls the most efficiently.[13] Although females generally prefer the late call, they are more attracted to the late call with the general timing of an advertising call being produced first and last. In cases where the lead male switches to aggressive calling (which is introduced in the courting section), the increased overlap between the lead aggressive call and the late advertisement call can cause females to not prefer the late advertisement call anymore.[19]

Another aspect of male calls that influences mating choice is the number of notes. Many times, a responding advertisement call is synchronized to the first advertisement call as explained before but is also multi-noted. The advertisement calls are only 1-noted if in very dense choruses.[13]

Courting

D. ebraccatus males produce calls in order to attract and court females leading to mating. There are two types of timed calls males produce: lead calls, which start first, and late or lagging calls, which start in the middle of the lead call. The timing of late calling males forces their male competitors to finish calling in the middle of their own advertisement call. This means the late caller finishes the call with its competitor calls being heard at the same time. In response to late male callers, the leading male callers adapted a strategy using aggressive calling. Since aggressive calling is longer than advertisement calling, the lead male switches to an aggressive call while the lagging male uses an advertisement call, which allows the lead male to finish last in more cases and increase their reproductive success. This strategy is an explanation for why D. ebraccatus have high levels of aggressive calls that would be costly for any other species of chorus frog mentioned in the male/male interactions subsection.[11]

Despite this, the late call males cannot lengthen their time delay to decrease overlap and ensure that they finish last. The response time from one male call to another remains around 210 milliseconds no matter what call type they are producing or responding to besides the break increasing when male frogs switch to aggressive calling.[19] There is also evidence that male frogs make many errors in aggressive call detection leading to decreased response time of a threat and decreased attraction by females since the call timing is off.[16][17][18][19] Because females are more attracted to low aggression calls and advertisement calls, this could explain why male frogs are more likely to coordinate their levels of aggression to other calls. This is opposed to simply increasing the intensity of aggression in their call in response to other aggression calls.[16][17][18]

The multi-noted synchronized call has two advantages: multiple notes can hide click notes in the leading call and synchronizing decreases the chance of the leader producing a call response. The decreased chance of a call response happens since many frogs will not answer if a call is produced less than 210 milliseconds after their first call has started. The only time a synchronous advertisement call is not multi-noted is in very dense choruses where advertisement calls are only 1-noted.[17]

Diet

While tadpoles are macrophagous herbivores, they may display cannibalistic behavior in the presence of dead tadpoles.[3] Lepidoptera, Diptera larva, and Araneae are the most important aspects of the adult D. ebraccatus diet when this prey is abundant in the surrounding area. The prey of D. phlebodes and D. ebraccatus diet are the same and are only different in that the D. ebraccatus consumes larger prey.[20]

Parental Care

Oviposition

Undisturbed aquatic eggs develop at a slightly faster rate than arboreal eggs with an average hatch time of 3.5 days after placement. Both egg groups can alter their rate of development in the presence of unfavorable conditions such as weather or predation. Rates of development and hatching time can be altered from 67% faster to 600% slower than undisturbed hatch times. The rate of development is partially controlled by the rate of enzyme secretion by the hatching gland within the egg. The enzymes secreted by the hatching gland control the rate at which the eggs gel membrane is degradation.[16]

D. ebraccatus are special in that they have a reproductive plasticity in where they can lay their eggs. Unlike any other vertebrate, these frogs can lay eggs in water and on land. Most vertebrae species have developed to lay eggs either on land or underwater, but the D. ebraccatus is thought to still be in the process of developing adaptations for success in air and water individually. The many choices of egg laying sites, on land, on leaves about water, on the water’s surface, or fully submerged in water, are chosen based on risk of egg desiccation, the location of predators, and aquatic depth.[21]

Site selection for egg laying

D. ebraccatus with eggs
D. ebraccatus laid eggs on leaf

During drier seasons, D. ebraccatus eggs desiccate far faster than other terrestrial amphibian eggs when on land. On the other hand, D. ebraccatus embryos are more able to develop in aquatic environments unlike other terrestrial amphibian embryos that die before hatching. In habitats with limited shade, the D. ebraccatus females are more likely to lay their eggs under water. D. ebraccatus females will choose to lay their eggs on floating vegetation to hide their eggs from predators. When terrestrial vegetation floods, the eggs are now out in the open for predators they were previously hidden from to attack. When deciding whether to lay their eggs underwater during drier seasons, the D. ebraccatus females must take into account the deepness of the water. If the water is too deep, the eggs do not receive enough oxygen and die. The threat of aquatic predation has been shown to outweigh the risks of desiccation.[21]

Both the quick terrestrial desiccation and ability for eggs to survive in aquatic environments before hatching are due to the smaller size of D. ebraccatus eggs. These eggs usually have a diameter of 1.2-1.4mm, which reduces the amount of oxygen they require and enhances their oxygen diffusion underwater. This reproductive plasticity in the D. ebraccatus is due to being in the intermediate stage of terrestrial reproductive evolution.[21]

Tadpole Transport

Once eggs hatch, tadpoles either emerge in the water or roll off leaves into the pond below.[14] Tadpoles are brown and gold with black eye bands and develop bright red tail colors in the presence of predators. Tadpoles feed on microfauna and scavenge what they can in the water until they mature after 6–8 weeks.[22] Young frogs live near pools of water and only make their way back to the forest canopy when nearing adulthood.[22][21][14]

Social Behavior

Adult Sociality

Male aggressive calling not only is affected by mating and their need to defend their calling space but is also affected by social communication and environment with other aggressive males. In particular, the social environment surrounding a male responding to an intruder will affect the intensity of the responding aggressive calls produced. This idea of a social environment affecting aggressive call output started in this frog species with research examining the relationship between aggressive call intensity in response to an intruder versus their surrounding male competitors. With that being said, the effect of the social environment is much more complicated than that. Aggressive calls between males are not always from one individual to another. [8] In many cases, a call can be received by multiple frogs that must all compete to produce a responding call signal that is heard by the original frog.[23] This finding means that D. ebraccatus males compete on many fronts during chorusing. They compete to find the best territory for producing calls that are heard over their competitors and for space where they themselves can receive calls. However, they can also compete to produce calls that are heard over others by adjusting their own call intensity in respect to surrounding aggressive calls. Males increase the aggressiveness of their calls when they have more competitors and when the aggressiveness of surrounding stimuli increases. Males decrease aggressive call intensity when there are a fewer number of competitors (or stimuli) and when surrounding calls have lower levels of aggressiveness.[16][18][23]

Group Living

The common night call pattern of male chorus frog species is initially high aggressive call levels followed by a “stable chorus” with little to no aggressive calling. This pattern is due to habituation, the increase of aggressive thresholds in response to repeated calls greater than their original threshold. In contrast with most frog chorus species, a large fraction of D. ebraccatus males still make aggressive calls throughout the night with only a slight decrease.[16][15] The continued aggressive calls throughout the night in this species indicates that D. ebraccatus males do not habituate in response to aggressive calls and instead are sensitized. In other words, these frogs initially decrease their aggressive threshold after exposure to repeated calls above threshold. This mechanism leads to more frequent aggressive calls than other chorus frogs. Anuran species that display chorus behaviors use aggressive calls as a mechanism to defend territory from other males, so it was not known for a while why high calling rates that expose male hourglass tree frogs to dangerous situations is maintained.[15]

One possible reason for high aggressive calling levels is that D. ebraccatus aggressive and advertisement thresholds are initially equal, and they need to decrease their aggressive threshold in order to be able to distinguish and respond to these distinct call types.[15] Generally, there is a 210 millisecond response time frame that males take to respond to one call with a call of their own. The only exception to this 210 millisecond time frame is when male frogs are making the decision to switch to aggressive calls. The male frogs seem to respond with their first aggressive call more slowly due to trying to distinguish an advertisement call from an aggressive call.[19] Another reason for the higher aggressive calls in comparison with other chorus frogs is due to lead males adopting an aggressive call as a strategy to increase its attractiveness to females. This strategy is explained more in the mate choice subsection.[11]

Another anomaly seen with D. ebraccatus males compared to other species is that their aggressive calls more often than not have intended recipients spanning far distances. These frequent far range aggressive calls in large chorus groups cause D. ebraccatus males to be influenced by various surrounding calls more often than calls from individual frogs. This influence from other males versus producing calls that attract females forces these male frogs to constantly adjust their calls accordingly.[16]

Protective Coloration

Tadpoles that grow the predator-induced phenotype of having the largest, deep, and reddest tail fins also have the developmental cost of growing to be the smallest in overall size. This can be seen when D. ebraccatus tadpoles develop in the presence of the Pantala flavescens, or the dragonfly nymph. The Dragonfly nymph are smaller fish, can swim through tighter areas to catch their prey, and usually hunt alone. The tadpoles are induced to grow in a way where they can escape an initial attack and usually survive after. Tadpoles develop an opposite phenotype when they encounter a specific type of predator, the Astyanax ruberrimus. When D. ebraccatus tadpoles develop in the presence of these fish, they grow shallow achromatic tails. This is because the Astyanax ruberrimus is a fast fish that can eat prey larger than itself by repeatedly attacking it and then swallowing it whole. This fish also usually hunts in groups and individual tadpoles can be attacked multiple times in a row by many of these fish. They grow smaller instead of bigger as an attempt to avoid these attacks more efficiently.[22]

Conservation

The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species listed the Hourglass Tree Frog as a species of least concern (LC) in 2010 due to wide distribution, stable, large population, and high tolerance to adapt to habitat modifications.[1] This species population is in many protected areas throughout the range. Although it is very adaptable it still faces many threats such as deforestation, agriculture and aquaculture (livestock farming and ranching, annual and perennial non-timber crops), logging, residential and commercial development, the pet industry, and pollution.[1]

Research

The skin of the family Hylidae is vastly studied due to its rich sources of bioactive peptides, which has spiked the interest for drug development.[24] Those in the Hylidae family use the peptides in defense against bacteria, fungi, protozoans, viruses, and desiccation.[25] These peptides are of interest to scientists due to their anti-infective and therapeutic potential. Peptides have been found to stimulate insulin release for Type 2 diabetes mellitus therapy. They are also used for their ability to be the precursor for encoding cDNAs. Pathogenic bacteria and fungi antibiotic resistance constitutes a serious threat to public health worldwide, scientists are looking to frogs skin secretions for further drug advancements.[26][25]

Wikimedia Commons has media related to Dendropsophus ebraccatus.

Notes

  1. ^ a b c IUCN SSC Amphibian Specialist Group (2020). "Dendropsophus ebraccatus". IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. 2020: e.T55470A53954856. doi:10.2305/IUCN.UK.2020-1.RLTS.T55470A53954856.en. Retrieved 14 November 2021.
  2. ^ Lindsay. "Hourglass tree frog | Amphibian Rescue and Conservation Project". Retrieved 2022-12-05.
  3. ^ a b c d Cope, Edward D. (1874). "Description of Some Species of Reptiles Obtained by Dr. John F. Bransford, Assistant Surgeon United States Navy, while Attached to the Nicaraguan Surveying Expedition in 1873". Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia. 26 (1): 64–72. ISSN 0097-3157. JSTOR 4624393.
  4. ^ "Hourglass Tree Frog (Dendropsophus ebraccatus) - The Night Tour - Drake Bay, Costa Rica". www.thenighttour.com. Retrieved 2022-12-05.
  5. ^ a b Treinen-Crespo, Karla T. (January 9, 2019). "First record of the Hourglass Treefrog Dendropsophus ebraccatus (Cope, 1874) (Anura: Hylidae) in Yucatán State, Mexico". Herpetology Notes. 12: 31–33 – via ResearchGate.
  6. ^ a b Orrico, Victor G.D.; Grant, Taran; Faivovich, Julian; Rivera‐Correa, Mauricio; Rada, Marco A.; Lyra, Mariana L.; Cassini, Carla S.; Valdujo, Paula H.; Schargel, Walter E.; Machado, Denis J.; Wheeler, Ward C.; Barrio‐Amorós, Cesar; Loebmann, Daniel; Moravec, Jiří; Zina, Juliana (February 2021). "The phylogeny of Dendropsophini (Anura: Hylidae: Hylinae)". Cladistics. 37 (1): 73–105. doi:10.1111/cla.12429. ISSN 0748-3007. PMID 34478175. S2CID 224993012.
  7. ^ Faivovich, Julián; Haddad, Célio F. B.; Garcia, Paulo C. A.; Frost, Darrel R.; Campbell, Jonathan A.; Wheeler, Ward (2005). "Systematic review of the frog family Hylidae, with special reference to Hylinae : phylogenetic analysis and taxonomic revision. Bulletin of the AMNH ; no. 294". hdl:2246/462. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  8. ^ Teixeira, Bernardo Franco da Veiga; Zaracho, Víctor Hugo; Giaretta, Ariovaldo Antonio (2016-10-17). "Advertisement and courtship calls of Dendropsophus nanus (Boulenger, 1889) (Anura: Hylidae) from its type locality (Resistencia, Argentina)". Biota Neotropica. 16 (4). doi:10.1590/1676-0611-BN-2016-0183. ISSN 1676-0611.
  9. ^ Ohmer, Michele E.; Robertson, Jeanne M.; Zamudio, Kelly R. (26 May 2009). "Discordance in body size, colour pattern, and advertisement call across genetically distinct populations in a Neotropical anuran (Dendropsophus ebraccatus)". Biological Journal of the Linnean Society. 97 (2): 298–313. doi:10.1111/j.1095-8312.2009.01210.x – via Oxford Academic.
  10. ^ a b Robertson, Jeanne Marie (2008-07-07). "GENETIC AND PHENOTYPIC DIVERSITY PATTERNS IN TWO POLYMORPHIC, NEOTROPICAL ANURANS: BIOGEOGRAPHY, GENE FLOW AND SELECTION". {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  11. ^ a b c d Reichert, Michael S. (2011). "Aggressive calls improve leading callers' attractiveness in the treefrog Dendropsophus ebraccatus". Behavioral Ecology. 22 (5): 951–959. doi:10.1093/beheco/arr074. ISSN 1465-7279.
  12. ^ de Silva, Priyanka; Jaramillo, Cesar; Bernal, Ximena E. (2014-05-01). "Feeding Site Selection by Frog-Biting Midges (Diptera: Corethrellidae) on Anuran Hosts". Journal of Insect Behavior. 27 (3): 302–316. doi:10.1007/s10905-013-9428-y. ISSN 1572-8889. S2CID 254702855.
  13. ^ a b c d e f Schwartz, Joshua J.; Wells, Kentwood D. (1984-03-01). "Interspecific acoustic interactions of the neotropical treefrog Hyla ebraccata". Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology. 14 (3): 211–224. doi:10.1007/BF00299621. ISSN 1432-0762. S2CID 33616440.
  14. ^ a b c Worley, Julie (2009). "Oviposition Site Choice in a Neotropical Treefrog, Dendropsophus Ebraccatus" (PDF). PSU McNair Scholars Online Journal. 3 (1): 226–239. doi:10.15760/mcnair.2009.226.
  15. ^ a b c d Reichert, Michael S. (2010-03-01). "Aggressive thresholds in Dendropsophus ebraccatus: habituation and sensitization to different call types". Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology. 64 (4): 529–539. doi:10.1007/s00265-009-0868-5. ISSN 1432-0762. S2CID 12512346.
  16. ^ a b c d e f g Reichert, Michael S. (2011-09-01). "Effects of multiple-speaker playbacks on aggressive calling behavior in the treefrog Dendropsophus ebraccatus". Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology. 65 (9): 1739–1751. doi:10.1007/s00265-011-1182-6. ISSN 1432-0762. S2CID 921448.
  17. ^ a b c d e Bard, Kathleen M.; Wells, Kentwood D. (1987-01-01). "Vocal Communication in a Neotropical Treefrog, Hyla Ebraccata: Responses of Females To Advertisement and Aggressive Calls". Behaviour. 101 (1–3): 200–210. doi:10.1163/156853987X00431. ISSN 0005-7959.
  18. ^ a b c d Wells, Kentwood D.; Schwartz, Joshua J. (1984-01-01). "Vocal Communication in a Neotropical Treefrog, Hyla Ebraccata: Aggressive Calls". Behaviour. 91 (1–3): 128–145. doi:10.1163/156853984X00254. ISSN 0005-7959.
  19. ^ a b c d e Reichert, Michael S. (2012-03-01). "Call timing is determined by response call type, but not by stimulus properties, in the treefrog Dendropsophus ebraccatus". Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology. 66 (3): 433–444. doi:10.1007/s00265-011-1289-9. ISSN 1432-0762. S2CID 253815747.
  20. ^ Jiménez, Randall R.; Bolaños, Federico (June 2012). "Use of food and spatial resources by two frogs of the genus Dendropsophus (Anura: Hylidae) from La Selva, Costa Rica" (PDF). Phyllomedusa. 11 (1): 51–62. doi:10.11606/issn.2316-9079.v11i1p51-62.
  21. ^ a b c d Touchon, Justin Charles; Warkentin, Karen Michelle (2008-05-27). "Reproductive mode plasticity: Aquatic and terrestrial oviposition in a treefrog". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 105 (21): 7495–7499. doi:10.1073/pnas.0711579105. ISSN 0027-8424. PMC 2396680. PMID 18495921.
  22. ^ a b c Touchon, J. C.; Warkentin, K. M. (April 2008). "Fish and dragonfly nymph predators induce opposite shifts in color and morphology of tadpoles". Oikos. 117 (4): 634–640. doi:10.1111/j.0030-1299.2008.16354.x.
  23. ^ a b Wells, Kentwood D.; Schwartz, Joshua J. (1984-05-01). "Vocal communication in a neotropical treefrog, Hyla ebraccata: Advertisement calls". Animal Behaviour. 32 (2): 405–420. doi:10.1016/S0003-3472(84)80277-8. ISSN 0003-3472. S2CID 53191172.
  24. ^ Siano, Alvaro; Húmpola, María Verónica (April 9, 2014). "Antimicrobial Peptides from Skin Secretions of Hypsiboas pulchellus (Anura: Hylidae)". The American Chemical Society and American Society of Pharmacognosy. 77 (4): 831–841. doi:10.1021/np4009317. hdl:11336/30990. PMID 24717080.
  25. ^ a b Conlon, J. Michael; Mechkarska, Milena (June 2014). "A family of antimicrobial and immunomodulatory peptides related to the frenatins from skin secretions of the Orinoco lime frog Sphaenorhynchus lacteus (Hylidae)". Peptides. 56: 132–140. doi:10.1016/j.peptides.2014.03.020. PMID 24704757. S2CID 24364437 – via Science Direct.
  26. ^ Conlon, J. Michael; Mechkarska, Milena (July 2014). "Potential therapeutic applications of multifunctional host-defense peptides from frog skin as anti-cancer, anti-viral, immunomodulatory, and anti-diabetic agents". Peptides. 57: 67–77. doi:10.1016/j.peptides.2014.04.019. PMID 24793775. S2CID 5375579 – via Scient Direct.

References

  1. Castanho L.M. 2001. Moulting Behaviour in Leaf-Frogs of the Genus Phyllomedusa (Anura: Hylidae). Zoologischer Anzeiger - A journal of Comparative ZoologyEcology and Behaviour. 240: 3-6. https://doi.org/10.1078/0044-5231-0000122. Conlon J.M., mechkarsha M., Lukic M.L., Flatt P.R. 2014. Potential therapeutic applications of multifunctional host-defense peptides from frog skin as anti-cancer, anti-viral, immunomodulatory, and anti-diavetic agents. Elsevier: Peptides 57: 67-77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.peptides.2014.04.019.
  2. Cohen, K.L., Piacentino, M.L., Warkentin M.K., 2018. The hatching process and mechanisms of adaptive hatching acceleration in hourglass treefrogs, Dendropsophus ebraccatus: Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology Part A: Molecular & Integrative Physiology. 217: 63-74.
  3. Cope, E.D. 1874. Description of some species of reptiles obtained by Dr. John F. Bransford, Assistant Surgeon United States Navy, while attached to the Nicaraguan surveying expedition in 1873. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia: 69.
  4. Dendropsophus Ebraccatus Code 1874. Amphibians of Panama. 2018. http://biogeodb.stri.si.edu/amphibians/es/species/81/
  5. Duellman, W.E. 2001. The Hylid Frogs of Middle America. Society for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles, Ithaca, New York, USA.
  6. Konig E., Clark V., Shaw C., Bininda-Emonds O.R.P. 2012. Molecular cloning of skin peptide precursor-encoding cDNAs from tibial gland secretion of the Giant Moneky Frog, Phyllomedusa bicolor (Hylidae, Anura). Elsevier: Peptides 38: 371-376. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.peptides.2012.09.010.
  7. OHMER, M.E. & Zamudio K.R., 2009. Discordance in body size, colour pattern, and advertisement call across genetically distinct populations in a Neotropical anuran (Dendropsophus ebraccatus): Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 97, 298–313.
  8. Powell R., Conant R., Collins J.T. 2016. Peterson Field Guide to Reptiles and Amphibians of Eastern and Central North America. Boston (NY): Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. 4: 494.
  9. Touchon, J.C. & Warkentin, K.M., 2008. Reproductive mode plasticity: aquatic and terrestrial oviposition in a treefrog. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 105(21): 7495–9.
  10. Touchon, J.C., & Worley J.L., 2015. Oviposition site choice under conflicting risks demonstrates that aquatic predators drive terrestrial egg-laying: Proceedings of the Royal Society B. 282 (1808): 0962-8452
license
cc-by-sa-3.0
copyright
Wikipedia authors and editors
original
visit source
partner site
wikipedia EN

Dendropsophus ebraccatus: Brief Summary

provided by wikipedia EN

Dendropsophus ebraccatus, also known as the hourglass treefrog, referring to the golden-brown hourglass shape seen surrounded by skin yellow on its back. Their underbellies are yellow. Their arms and lower legs usually display bold patterns while their upper legs or thighs are light yellow giving them the appearance of wearing no pants. The species name "ebraccata" translates to "without trousers" in Latin.

The hourglass treefrog is throughout Mexico from southern Veracruz and northern Oaxaca, slightly more southern in Chiapas, Tabasco, and the Yucatán Peninsula. The hourglass treefrog also presides south of Mexico in the northern Guatemala and Belize areas. The range of the hourglass treefrog becomes more scarce in Honduras and a few more known locations in Nicaragua, but then has been commonly reported again in Central America spanning from Costa Rica to Panama even venturing into Colombia and northwestern Ecuador.

license
cc-by-sa-3.0
copyright
Wikipedia authors and editors
original
visit source
partner site
wikipedia EN