dcsimg

Description

provided by AmphibiaWeb articles
This moderately large North American frog is a wide-ranging species. The males are usually slightly smaller than the females. A pointed snout and flat head possessing two transverse rows of vomerine teeth are also observed. The toe pads on Hyla cinerea are large. The hind feet display extensive webbing and have two metatarsal tubercles between the toes. Some populations have individuals that lack lateral stripes, but normally H. cinerea exhibits a lateral white or yellow stripe from the jaw to the thigh on either side of the body. White or yellow spots are often scattered on the back. The external, subgular vocal sac is mostly white or yellow in males when not inflated. During breeding season, the sides of the sac may turn green. The size of tadpoles ranges from 4.5-5.5 mm from hatching and may grow to 60 mm before metamorphosis in a 28-44 day span. Until tadpoles reach stage 25 or 26, they display continuous ontogenetic color changes. After this period, the body turns green and the venter turns yellow. The tail may have distinct yellow orbitonasal stripes, and dark mottling or reticulations. Large tadpoles sometimes retain the yellow interorbital stripe. A long tail, bulging lateral eyes, dextral anus and sinistral spiracle are other morphological features of the tadpole from this species. Adults of this species normally turn to an ashen gray color when in preservative. The normally unobserved dorsolateral stripes in living species also appear over the subcutaneous insertions of lymph-sac septa. After months in preservation, H. cinerea displays a mostly dark green or brownish color (Conant and Collins 1998).This species was featured as News of the Week on 10 September 2018:Langowski et al. (2018) revealed new insights on the biomechanics of how frogs attach to (and detach from) surfaces by examining the toe pads of the American Green treefrog (Hyla cinerea) with new technologies. Using a combination of histology, immunohistochemistry, and synchrotron micro-computer-tomography (l-CT), the researchers obtained an extremely detailed 3-D characterization of tree frog toe pads. All toe pads examined shared a general layout with a ventral collagen layer, collateral ligaments, a septum compartmentalizing the subcutaneous volume into a distal lymph space and a proximal gland space, and muscular structures. Perhaps most interestingly, the collagen layer can withstand a shear load of up to 6.5 N! Furthermore, the researchers hypothesize that the septum facilitates proximal peeling of the pad and detachment from surfaces. With this new knowledge, researchers can better explain the mechanics and physics behind frog climbing and expect that frog toe pads will help design biomimetic adhesives (Written by Molly Womack). This species was featured as News of the Week on 5 August 2019:The permeable skin of amphibians makes them particularly vulnerable to chemicals in their environments, including salt, which can slow down development or even cause death at high enough levels. However, a few amphibians lay their eggs in brackish water, begging the question of how these critters survive salt exposure. In a recent study, Albecker and McCoy (2019) found that coastal populations of Hyla cinerea, the American Green Treefrog, survive better and grow faster in salty environments than their inland counterparts. The authors suggest that Green Treefrogs have evolved to tolerate high salt levels in part by shortening their larval period and reducing the length of time the tadpoles are exposed to high salt levels. Future studies may reveal how these coastal frogs process higher levels of salt with specialized physiology (Written by Rebecca Tarvin).

References

  • Bancroft, G.T., Godley, J. S., Godley, D.T., Gross, N. N., Rojas, D. A., Sutphen, and McDiarmid, R. W. (1983). Large-scale operations management test of use of the white amur for control of problem aquatic plants; Report 1, Baseline studies; Volume V: The herpetofauna of Lake Conway. Technical Report A-78-2; N. U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi.
  • Barrass, A. N. (1986). The effects of highway traffic noise on the phonotactic and associated reproduction behavior of selected anurans. Ph.D. dissertation. Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennesse.
  • Conant, R. (1977). ''The Florida Water Snake (Reptilia, Serpentes, Colubridae) established at Brownsville, Texas, with comments on other herpetological introductions in the area.'' Journal of Herpetology, 11(2), 217-220.
  • Hanlin, H. G., Martin, F. D, Wike, L. D., and Bennett, S. H. (2000). ''Terrestrial activity, abundance and species richness of amphibians in managed forests in South Carolina.'' The American Midland Naturalist, 143(1), 70-83.
  • Hedges, S. B. (1996). ''The origin of West Indian amphibians and reptiles.'' Contributions to West Indian Herpetology: A Tribute to Albert Schwartz. R., Powell and R. W., Henderson, eds., Ithaca, New York, 95-128.
  • Phelps, J. P. and Lancia, R. A. (1995). ''Effects of a clearcut on the herpetofauna of a South Carolina bottomland swamp.'' Brimleyana, 22, 31-45.
  • Platt, S.G., Russell, K.R., Snyder, W.E., Fontenot, L.W., and Miller, S. (1999). ''Distribution and conservation status of selected amphibians and reptiles in the Piedmont of South Carolina.'' Journal of the Elisha Mitchell Scientific Society, 115, 8-19.
  • Powell, R., Henderson, R. W., Adler, K., and Dundee, H. (1996). ''An annotated checklist of West Indian amphibians and reptiles.'' Contributions to West Indian Herpetology: A Tribute to Albert Schwartz. R. Powell and R. W. Henderson, eds., Ithaca, New York.
  • Redmer, M., Brown, L. E., and Brandon, R. A. (1999). ''Natural history of the Birdvoiced Treefrog (Hyla avivoca) and Green Treefrog (Hyla cinerea) in southern Illinois.'' Natural History Survey Bulletin, 36(2), 37-67.
  • Smith, L. L., Franz, R., and Dodd, C.K. Jr. (1993). ''Additions to the herpetofauna of Edgemont Key, Hillsborough County, Florida.'' Florida Scientist, 4(56), 231-234.
  • Thomas, A. E. (1975). ''Marking anurans with silver nitrate.'' Herpetological Review, 6, 12.

license
cc-by-3.0
author
Kevin Gin
original
visit source
partner site
AmphibiaWeb articles

Distribution and Habitat

provided by AmphibiaWeb articles
The habitats most likely to house H. cinerea are swamps, sloughs and weedy margins of lakes and ponds. The lower Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plains and the lower Mississippi River drainage are ideal locations of the species' environment (Connant and Collins 1998) . The range in the Mississippi River extends from Louisiana and Mississippi to the floodplains of southern and eastern Arkansas, western Tennessee and Kentucky. Southeastern Missouri and southern Illinois are also in this range. The Atlantic/Gulf Coastal range extends from the Chesapeake Bay and Virginia to the Carolinas, Georgia, and Florida. Most of Alabama, Mississippi and all of Louisiana complete the range. Introduced populations of this frog have been documented in Puerto Rico (Hedges 1996; 1999; Powell et al. 1996; Rivero 1998; Schwartz and Thomas 1975; Schwartz and Henderson 1985; 1991) , central Missouri (Johnson 2000) , a coastal island in Florida (Smith et al. 1993), and in Brownsville, Texas (Conant 1977; Smith and Kohler 1977). A population in east central Kansas that was once introduced to a fish farm has most likely been extirpated (Collins 1993).
license
cc-by-3.0
author
Kevin Gin
original
visit source
partner site
AmphibiaWeb articles

Life History, Abundance, Activity, and Special Behaviors

provided by AmphibiaWeb articles
Many human activities negatively impact the populations and habitat of this species. Among the activities are the creation of artificial lakes/ponds (Platt et al. 1999; Redmer et al. 1999), fish introductions (Bancroft et al. 1983; Redmer et al. 1999), highway traffic noise (Barrass 1986), silver nitrate used in marking individuals (Thomas 1975), timber harvest (Hanlin et al. 2000; Phelps and Lancia 1995) and the introduction of the Cuban Treefrog (Wilson and Porras 1983).
license
cc-by-3.0
author
Kevin Gin
original
visit source
partner site
AmphibiaWeb articles

Life History, Abundance, Activity, and Special Behaviors

provided by AmphibiaWeb articles
A series of nasal barks described as sounding like "frank frank frank" or "quonk quonk quonk" have been observed as breeding vocalizations. A complete reference of breeding vocalizations may be found in the Catalogue of American Amphibians and Reptiles.
license
cc-by-3.0
author
Kevin Gin
original
visit source
partner site
AmphibiaWeb articles

Life Expectancy

provided by Animal Diversity Web

Lifespans in the wild are unknown, but captives can live 6 years with proper care.

Typical lifespan
Status: captivity:
6 (high) years.

license
cc-by-nc-sa-3.0
copyright
The Regents of the University of Michigan and its licensors
bibliographic citation
Nichols, M. 2008. "Hyla cinerea" (On-line), Animal Diversity Web. Accessed April 27, 2013 at http://animaldiversity.ummz.umich.edu/site/accounts/information/Hyla_cinerea.html
author
Matthew Nichols, Radford University
editor
Karen Francl, Radford University
editor
Tanya Dewey, Animal Diversity Web
original
visit source
partner site
Animal Diversity Web

Associations

provided by Animal Diversity Web

Adult green treefrogs are subject to predation by a wide variety of organisms. Snakes, birds, large fish, and even other frogs may prey on Hyla cinerea. Green treefrogs are one of the only species in the genus Hyla in the southeastern United States that typically breeds in areas with large predatory fish. Tadpoles are at even more risk than adults because they have few defensive mechanisms and are easily caught. Predatory aquatic insects such as giant water bugs (Belastomatidae) frequently feed on tadpoles in their early stages as well as smaller fish such as pumpkinseed sunfish (Lepomis gibbosus) and bluegill sunfish (Lepomis macrochirus). Green treefrog adults are exceptionally good at hiding on grasses and other vegetation. When they tuck in their legs and close their eyes they blend in with the color of leaves.

Known Predators:

  • many birds that hunt in aquatic systems (Aves)
  • bluegill sunfish (Lepomis macrochirus)
  • pumpkinseed sunfish (Lepomis gibbosus)
  • other species of predatory fish (Actinopterygii)
  • larger frogs (Rana)
  • snakes (Serpentes)

Anti-predator Adaptations: cryptic

license
cc-by-nc-sa-3.0
copyright
The Regents of the University of Michigan and its licensors
bibliographic citation
Nichols, M. 2008. "Hyla cinerea" (On-line), Animal Diversity Web. Accessed April 27, 2013 at http://animaldiversity.ummz.umich.edu/site/accounts/information/Hyla_cinerea.html
author
Matthew Nichols, Radford University
editor
Karen Francl, Radford University
editor
Tanya Dewey, Animal Diversity Web
original
visit source
partner site
Animal Diversity Web

Morphology

provided by Animal Diversity Web

Green treefrogs are long-legged and smooth-skinned treefrogs. Most individuals have a bright yellow-green dorsum, but individuals that are reddish-brown to green are also common. Their dorsum frequently has small golden spots which overlay the green color. Ventrally, they are white to cream and have a similarly-colored prominent lateral stripe on each side. Total length ranges from 34 to 62 mm, females tend to be larger than males.

Range length: 32 to 64 mm.

Other Physical Features: ectothermic ; heterothermic ; bilateral symmetry

Sexual Dimorphism: female larger

license
cc-by-nc-sa-3.0
copyright
The Regents of the University of Michigan and its licensors
bibliographic citation
Nichols, M. 2008. "Hyla cinerea" (On-line), Animal Diversity Web. Accessed April 27, 2013 at http://animaldiversity.ummz.umich.edu/site/accounts/information/Hyla_cinerea.html
author
Matthew Nichols, Radford University
editor
Karen Francl, Radford University
editor
Tanya Dewey, Animal Diversity Web
original
visit source
partner site
Animal Diversity Web

Behavior

provided by Animal Diversity Web

Green treefrogs use a variety of calls to communicate. Males attract females through a specific mating call. Alarm calls are used to broadcast that there is an immediate threat or predator around. There is also a noticeably different rain call, which is vocalized when frogs sense that there will soon be rain. Green treefrogs have well developed hearing and can sense vibrations through the ground. The parietal organ, located on the top of the head between the eyes, has been implicated in compass orientation and thermoregulation.

Communication Channels: visual ; acoustic

Perception Channels: visual ; tactile ; acoustic ; vibrations ; chemical

license
cc-by-nc-sa-3.0
copyright
The Regents of the University of Michigan and its licensors
bibliographic citation
Nichols, M. 2008. "Hyla cinerea" (On-line), Animal Diversity Web. Accessed April 27, 2013 at http://animaldiversity.ummz.umich.edu/site/accounts/information/Hyla_cinerea.html
author
Matthew Nichols, Radford University
editor
Karen Francl, Radford University
editor
Tanya Dewey, Animal Diversity Web
original
visit source
partner site
Animal Diversity Web

Habitat

provided by Animal Diversity Web

Green treefrogs are frequently found in small ponds, large lakes, marshes, and streams. They prefer habitats with plentiful floating vegetation, grasses, and cattails. One study suggested that, in an artificial hardwood forest setting, the abundance of Hyla cinerea is related to the openness of the forest canopy. The study noted that 88% of 331 individuals were found in areas of the forest where the canopy was open. The presence of green treefrogs in the open canopy areas was interpreted as a method for finding prey, which concentrate in sunny areas with dense ground vegetation.

Habitat Regions: temperate ; terrestrial ; freshwater

Terrestrial Biomes: forest

Aquatic Biomes: lakes and ponds; rivers and streams

Wetlands: marsh ; swamp

Other Habitat Features: riparian

license
cc-by-nc-sa-3.0
copyright
The Regents of the University of Michigan and its licensors
bibliographic citation
Nichols, M. 2008. "Hyla cinerea" (On-line), Animal Diversity Web. Accessed April 27, 2013 at http://animaldiversity.ummz.umich.edu/site/accounts/information/Hyla_cinerea.html
author
Matthew Nichols, Radford University
editor
Karen Francl, Radford University
editor
Tanya Dewey, Animal Diversity Web
original
visit source
partner site
Animal Diversity Web

Distribution

provided by Animal Diversity Web

Hyla cinerea is commonly found in the central to southeastern United States. Its geographic range stretches from Virginia's eastern shore to the southeast tip of Florida and as far west as central Texas. Green treefrogs can be found as far north as Maryland and Delaware. Despite being considered monotypic, clinal variation of Hyla cinerea has been observed from Florida north along the Atlantic Coastal Plain as a possible result of strong selection and/or drift.

Biogeographic Regions: nearctic (Native )

license
cc-by-nc-sa-3.0
copyright
The Regents of the University of Michigan and its licensors
bibliographic citation
Nichols, M. 2008. "Hyla cinerea" (On-line), Animal Diversity Web. Accessed April 27, 2013 at http://animaldiversity.ummz.umich.edu/site/accounts/information/Hyla_cinerea.html
author
Matthew Nichols, Radford University
editor
Karen Francl, Radford University
editor
Tanya Dewey, Animal Diversity Web
original
visit source
partner site
Animal Diversity Web

Trophic Strategy

provided by Animal Diversity Web

Green treefrogs are insectivores that commonly consume flies, mosquitoes, and other small insects. Freed (1980) suggested that prey were not selected by size, but according to their activity; the most active prey were the most frequently eaten. According to Freed, nearly 90% of Hyla cinerea prey were actively pursued, the other 10% were insects walking or close enough to be snatched up by the frog's tongue.

Animal Foods: insects

Primary Diet: carnivore (Insectivore )

license
cc-by-nc-sa-3.0
copyright
The Regents of the University of Michigan and its licensors
bibliographic citation
Nichols, M. 2008. "Hyla cinerea" (On-line), Animal Diversity Web. Accessed April 27, 2013 at http://animaldiversity.ummz.umich.edu/site/accounts/information/Hyla_cinerea.html
author
Matthew Nichols, Radford University
editor
Karen Francl, Radford University
editor
Tanya Dewey, Animal Diversity Web
original
visit source
partner site
Animal Diversity Web

Associations

provided by Animal Diversity Web

Although green treefrogs are not considered a keystone species, they play a vital role ecosystems they inhabit. They are prey to large predatory fish, snakes, and their other predators and green treefrog adults consume large quantities of insects.

Green treefrog parasites in a Florida population include the nematode Cosmocercella haberi (23% of individuals), a protozoan in the genus Opalina (47% of individuals), a trematode Clinostomum attenuatum (2% of frogs), and a nematode in the genus Rhabdias (5%). Another study found that Agamascaris enopla is an internal nemaode parasite.

Commensal/Parasitic Species:

  • Cosmocercella haberi
  • Opalina
  • Clinostomum attenuatum
  • Rhabdias
  • Agamascaris enopla
license
cc-by-nc-sa-3.0
copyright
The Regents of the University of Michigan and its licensors
bibliographic citation
Nichols, M. 2008. "Hyla cinerea" (On-line), Animal Diversity Web. Accessed April 27, 2013 at http://animaldiversity.ummz.umich.edu/site/accounts/information/Hyla_cinerea.html
author
Matthew Nichols, Radford University
editor
Karen Francl, Radford University
editor
Tanya Dewey, Animal Diversity Web
original
visit source
partner site
Animal Diversity Web

Benefits

provided by Animal Diversity Web

Green treefrogs and other anurans impact populations of mosquitoes and other small insects through predation. They can also be bioindicators of aquatic contamination, including contamination by many synthetic compounds used in pesticides, herbicides, and medications. For example, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) have a high affinity for fat and are easily introduced through the digestive system. PCBs continue to accumulate with repeated exposure and should increase with organisms that have more fat. The thin, permeable skin of anurans puts them at a higher risk because compounds are so easily absorbed. Tadpoles and metamorphs are considered to be good indicators of PCB accumulation in sediment because they are usually in more direct contact with contaminated sediment. Adults are considered to be general indicators of contaminated areas but not specific conditions.

Positive Impacts: research and education; controls pest population

license
cc-by-nc-sa-3.0
copyright
The Regents of the University of Michigan and its licensors
bibliographic citation
Nichols, M. 2008. "Hyla cinerea" (On-line), Animal Diversity Web. Accessed April 27, 2013 at http://animaldiversity.ummz.umich.edu/site/accounts/information/Hyla_cinerea.html
author
Matthew Nichols, Radford University
editor
Karen Francl, Radford University
editor
Tanya Dewey, Animal Diversity Web
original
visit source
partner site
Animal Diversity Web

Benefits

provided by Animal Diversity Web

These treefrogs have no known negative economic impacts.

license
cc-by-nc-sa-3.0
copyright
The Regents of the University of Michigan and its licensors
bibliographic citation
Nichols, M. 2008. "Hyla cinerea" (On-line), Animal Diversity Web. Accessed April 27, 2013 at http://animaldiversity.ummz.umich.edu/site/accounts/information/Hyla_cinerea.html
author
Matthew Nichols, Radford University
editor
Karen Francl, Radford University
editor
Tanya Dewey, Animal Diversity Web
original
visit source
partner site
Animal Diversity Web

Life Cycle

provided by Animal Diversity Web

Green treefrogs develop similarly to other anuran species. Eggs hatch at about 5 days post-fertilization. The first tadpole stage occurs directly after hatching. During this stage, tadpoles are very small and feed on the remainder of their yolk. Several days after hatching external gills become functional and they begin to graze on microscopic vegetation. Soon after external gills become functional they begin to disappear as the operculum develops and covers over them. Three weeks after hatching external gills have disappeared and internal gills become the primary mode of respiration. Eight to ten weeks after hatching, the front and rear legs begin development. Tadpoles also transition to a carnivorous diet at this point. In the final weeks of development the front and rear legs become fully functional and the tail starts to shorten. At this time green treefrogs are ready to leave the water and venture onto land.

Development - Life Cycle: metamorphosis

license
cc-by-nc-sa-3.0
copyright
The Regents of the University of Michigan and its licensors
bibliographic citation
Nichols, M. 2008. "Hyla cinerea" (On-line), Animal Diversity Web. Accessed April 27, 2013 at http://animaldiversity.ummz.umich.edu/site/accounts/information/Hyla_cinerea.html
author
Matthew Nichols, Radford University
editor
Karen Francl, Radford University
editor
Tanya Dewey, Animal Diversity Web
original
visit source
partner site
Animal Diversity Web

Conservation Status

provided by Animal Diversity Web

Green treefrogs are common throughout their geographic range. Populations are relatively large and stable at this time. Although, like all frog species, they are reliant on aquatic habitats that are frequently destroyed by human activities. They are listed as a species of Least Concern on the IUCN list.

US Federal List: no special status

CITES: no special status

State of Michigan List: no special status

IUCN Red List of Threatened Species: least concern

license
cc-by-nc-sa-3.0
copyright
The Regents of the University of Michigan and its licensors
bibliographic citation
Nichols, M. 2008. "Hyla cinerea" (On-line), Animal Diversity Web. Accessed April 27, 2013 at http://animaldiversity.ummz.umich.edu/site/accounts/information/Hyla_cinerea.html
author
Matthew Nichols, Radford University
editor
Karen Francl, Radford University
editor
Tanya Dewey, Animal Diversity Web
original
visit source
partner site
Animal Diversity Web

Reproduction

provided by Animal Diversity Web

Breeding is strongly influenced by day length, temperature, and precipitation. These relative influence of these factors is not well understood, but these frogs generally breed following rainfall. Males tend to call more frequently as temperature and day length increases. To attract mates, males use a distinct advertisement call which is noticeably different than release or warning calls. Once the male has attracted an appropriate mate they begin amplexus, with the male tightly grasping onto the female to bring their cloacal openings close together for fertilization. Males generally try to mate with as many females as they can attract.

Mating System: polygynous

Average clutch size in a Florida population of green treefrogs was observed to be approximately 400 eggs. Although many females may only lay a single clutch in a season, some have been known to lay multiple clutches. Female size was positively correlated with clutch size, but after the initial clutch the number of eggs nearly always decreased. In the Florida population, advertisement calls of males were documented between March and September and pairs in amplexus were observed between April and August. There is some evidence to suggest that breeding season length is correlated with latitude; breeding season length decreases as latitude increases because of temperature limitations.

Breeding interval: Most females breed once yearly, although some have several clutches during the breeding season.

Breeding season: Breeding occurs from March to September.

Average number of offspring: 400.

Range time to hatching: 4 to 14 days.

Average time to hatching: 5 days.

Key Reproductive Features: iteroparous ; seasonal breeding ; gonochoric/gonochoristic/dioecious (sexes separate); sexual ; fertilization (External ); oviparous

There is no parental investment beyond the efforts of mating and egg-laying.

Parental Investment: no parental involvement; pre-fertilization (Provisioning, Protecting: Female)

license
cc-by-nc-sa-3.0
copyright
The Regents of the University of Michigan and its licensors
bibliographic citation
Nichols, M. 2008. "Hyla cinerea" (On-line), Animal Diversity Web. Accessed April 27, 2013 at http://animaldiversity.ummz.umich.edu/site/accounts/information/Hyla_cinerea.html
author
Matthew Nichols, Radford University
editor
Karen Francl, Radford University
editor
Tanya Dewey, Animal Diversity Web
original
visit source
partner site
Animal Diversity Web

American green tree frog

provided by wikipedia EN

The American green tree frog (Dryophytes cinereus or Hyla cinerea) is a common arboreal species of New World tree frog belonging to the family Hylidae. This nocturnal insectivore is moderately sized and has a bright green to reddish-brown coloration.[2] Commonly found in the central and southeastern United States, the frog lives in open canopy forests and permanent waters with abundant vegetation.[3][4] When defending territory, the frog either emits aggressive call signals or grapples with intruders.[5] To avoid predation, the frog hides in its aquatic habitat.[6]

Females are larger than males and breed through amplexus.[4] In contrast, males emit low frequency advertisement calls to attract females.[7] During mating competition, males will eavesdrop on neighboring rivals and either adjust their signal timing or remain silent to intercept call signals and mate with approaching females.[7][8] Androgens energize males to vocalize.[5]

Description

With distended vocal sac

Many individuals of the American green tree frog are bright green and are of a streamlined and slender build. The American green tree frog is moderately sized. They have long legs, smooth skin, and bilateral symmetry. The size of the American green tree frog ranges from 3.2 to 6.4 centimetres (1+14 to 2+12 in) in length. Their dorsum can range in color from bright green to reddish-brown. Such a range in coloration accounts for false encounters of the frog by other species.[2][9] Some evidence suggests that green tree frogs can exhibit a color change in response to their background and/or temperature.[10]

The dorsum is peppered with small golden spots, and the frogs have a white to cream coloration on their ventral side. American green tree frogs also contain white prominent lateral stripes and are normally ectothermic and heterothermic amphibians. [4]

The American green tree frog weighs on average 3.76g in mass with a range between 2.15g - 5.11g. Female frogs are usually larger than males. Larger males tend to have an upper hand in attracting females than smaller males either through increased physical strength in duels or more pronounced call signals during mating competition.[7]

Distribution and habitat

The American green tree frog is found in the central and southeastern United States with a geographic range from the Eastern Shore of Maryland to southeast Florida with populations as far west as central Texas and as far north as Delaware and southern New Jersey. The American green tree frog is considered monotypic, but clinal variation has beven observed from Florida north along the Atlantic coastal plain. This may be attributed to the result of strong selection and/or drift.[4]

American green tree frogs prefer to live in open canopy forests and permanent waters filled with plentiful vegetation. The species is found in natural and settled environments. The species commonly resides in cypress ponds, water lily prairies, and marshes. They are often found perched on twigs, low branches, and grasses.[3]

Conservation

A growing number of American green tree frogs have experienced severe habitat loss primarily due to urbanization and destructive wildfires that can destroy forest canopy cover. Since most amphibians have narrow habitat tolerances and migration constraints, American green tree frogs urgently need alternative shelters for survival as forest canopies recover. In a study from Central Texas, scientists have tried to combat wildfire habitat loss by creating artificial shelters using PVC pipes.[3]Wetlands that the American green tree frogs occupy for breeding have had an increase in salinity and an increase in pesticide concentration in recent years due to urbanization. This has proven to have a negative effect on sperm mobility and has reduced reproductive success[11]

Population structure, speciation, and phylogeny

One study finds that there are at least 31 tree frog species of the genus Hyla (or Dryophytes) in North America, Central America, and Eurasia. Examples include both the H. gratiosa and H. walkeri. While many tree frogs reside in the New World, a notable number of frogs inhabit the Eurasia continent and display unique biogeographic patterns based on an analysis of nuclear and mitochondrial DNA sequences.[12]

Home range and territoriality

American green tree frogs will defend their mate calling sites against foreign rivals and invaders using aggressive interactions. Such behaviors include a combination of aggressive call signals and wrestling from males.[5]

Diet

American green tree frogs are insectivores, primarily consuming flies, mosquitoes, grasshoppers, cockroaches, spiders, beetles, and other small insects such as crickets and ants.[13] One study suggested frogs select prey not by their size, but according to their activity levels, with the most active prey being the most frequently eaten. The same study showed "nearly 90% of Hyla cinerea prey were actively pursued", with the other 10% being "insects walking or close enough to be snatched up by the frog's tongue".[4] Another study showed that it is not uncommon for American green tree frogs to ingest plant material.[14]

Behavior

Male Dryophytes cinereus calling

Because the species is small and easily frightened, they often does not do well with frequent handling. Some specimens do seem to tolerate it occasionally, so handling frequency should be determined on an individual basis. The American green tree frog tends to be nocturnal, so they will be most active once the lights are off. Males call most of the year, especially after being misted in their tank.[15]

Breeding

Pair breeding
Tadpole
Metamorph
American green tree frogs vary in color.

Most American green tree frog females breed once per year, but some have multiple clutches in a single mating season. In a Florida population, "advertisement calls of males were documented between March and September and pairs in amplexus were observed between April and August". The average number of eggs in a single clutch was observed to be about 400 for this specific population. Eggs take between four and 14 days to hatch, with an average of five days. According to the Animal Diversity Web at the University of Michigan Museum of Zoology, "Female size was positively correlated with clutch size, but after the initial clutch, the number of eggs nearly always decreased".[4]

Tadpoles are green with a yellow or white stripe extending from each nostril to the eye and may have mottled tail fins.[16] American green tree frogs show only the parental investment of mating and egg-laying.[4]

Breeding is known to be strongly influenced by day length, temperature, and precipitation. While the influence of these factors with respect to breeding is not well understood, it is well documented, as the frogs generally breed following rainfall and males call more frequently as temperature and day length increase. Some evidence demonstrates that the length of the breeding season is correlated with latitude; seasonal length decreases as latitude increases due to temperature limitations.[4]

Mating calls

To attract mates, the male American green tree frog uses a distinctive advertisement call which is noticeably different from its release or warning calls. This is important for reproductive isolation in areas where different species share breeding areas.[17]

Once a mate has been attracted, the pair begins amplexus in which the male frog grasps onto the female to initiate fertilization. The species is polygynous, with the male generally seeking to mate with as many females as it can attract.[4] Eggs are attached to substrates such as emergent vegetation, and unlike other frog species, these egg masses are typically laid in permanent bodies of water rather than vernal pools.[18] 

When male frogs aggregate, choruses will form and establish a cacophony of numerous unique advertisement calls. Consequently, male individuals experience intraspecific mating competition and often encounter immense pressure to produce unique call signals that are both attractive and audible to a limited number of available females. Such challenges are further complicated by the rapid fluctuation of males within a chorus, the potential risk of increased exposure to predators, and sexual selection of specific call signals through female choice.[19]

These factors give rise to a social plasticity in the calling behavior of the American green tree frog. In order to maintain competition, male individuals will either modify their signal features, such as the temporal and spectral properties of calls or their signal timing, to reduce signal interference with other neighboring males. Temporal and spectral properties include call duration and call frequency. Changes in signal timing include initiation of advertisement calls during different times of the night. It has been found that male green tree frogs will more often alter their signal timing to attract females due to physiological constraints in the frog’s call production mechanism and female choice against increased call duration and period in favor of precise call timing. Modifying signal behavior towards every frog within a chorus is extremely costly and inefficient. However, forcing male individuals to engage in selective attention of advertisement calls from only a few of their closest rivals.[19]

Satellite males

Some male American green tree frogs will not emit or alter their advertisement calls and instead choose to remain silent. Labeled as 'satellites', these frogs will wait to intercept the signals of nearby calling males and mate with approaching sexually active females through amplexus. Such sexual parasitism and call avoidance occur mainly to conserve the frog’s energy and avoid predation during mate competition.[8]

Androgens are used for energy during call signal production. As a satellite male green tree frog engages in non-calling mating behavior, androgen quantities are found to decrease to lower levels compared to calling behavior, suggesting a causal relationship between sex hormones and mate calling tactics.[5]

In order to help decide whether to engage in satellite non-calling behavior, male green tree frogs will eavesdrop on other nearby male competitors and adjust their mating responses based on the qualities of their call signals. If given with the choice, females prefer large males with advertisement calls of lower frequencies. Other notable features include the latency to call and male focal size. When eavesdropping male competitors with low call frequencies, large male green tree frogs are found to reduce their latency to call and raise call rates. Small males in contrast will only reduce their latency to call in response to competitors with average call frequencies.[7]

Interspecific competition

American green tree frogs are also able to undergo interspecific mating competition. In southern Florida, the Cuban tree frog (Osteopilus septentrionalis) is an invasive species that has a similar call to the American green tree frog with respect to timing and pitch. A study found that their calls compete acoustically with each other due to their similarity which limits communication space. In order to compete with the Cuban tree frog, American green tree frogs modified their calls to be shorter, louder, and more frequent so that potential mates would have a better chance of detecting the call.[20][21]

Threats

As a tadpole, the American green tree frog is easily predated by sunfish, bass, and dragonflies, including both aeshnidae and libellulidae odonate naiads. The species is especially vulnerable to predation when living in temporary ponds compared to permanent waters. To combat predation, green tree frog tadpoles may increase hiding behavior while in water to avoid capture.[6][22]

The American green tree frog is also prone to a few parasites, including nematodes, protozoans, and trematodes.[23]

Contrary to most amphibians, the American green tree frog is not easily susceptible to the Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis (Bd) pathogen and the disease chytridiomycosis. Reasons explaining why are relatively unknown, but one study hypothesizes that variances in climate, frog immunity, and frog habitat are potential factors.[24]

Physiology

Androgens

Androgens, such as dihydrotestosterone and testosterone, are the primary energy resource for American green tree frogs when engaging in acoustic signal calling. When a male frog engages in vocalization either for aggression or mate attraction, androgen energy stores are used and become depleted. Interestingly, glucocorticoids, such as corticosterones, also appear to change during calling behavior. According to the Energetics-Hormone Vocalization model, glucocorticoid levels in males will rise as androgen levels decrease following vocalization. When observing hormonal levels in both calling and satellite non-calling males, reduced androgen levels and elevated glucocorticoid levels are found among satellite non-calling males compared to calling males. These observations suggest a possible mechanism dictating vocalization and the alternation between calling and non-calling behavior in the green tree frog. Further study is required however on the relationship between glucocorticoids and male vocalization to consider causality.[5]

The causality of vocalization by androgens is also limited by the American green tree frog’s social environment. According to one study, androgens themselves were not sufficient to initiate call signals in male frogs when in the presence of social stimuli such as other frog choruses. This suggests that androgens on their own may provide males with enough motivation to call, but they may also require additional social context to produce various call signals during situations such as mating.[25]

As pets

American green tree frogs are popular pets because of their small size, appearance, and the undemanding conditions needed to take care of them. Unlike many amphibians, they do not require artificial heating unless household temperatures drop below 21 °C (70 °F). They need a large (at least ten-gallon) terrarium and do best with a substrate that will hold some humidity, such as commercial shredded bark or coconut husk bedding, or untreated topsoil on the floor of the terrarium. Tree frogs are arboreal, so the height of the tank is more important than the length. A variety of things for climbing, such as plants or branches, should be in the habitat. A shallow water dish should be included. Captive frogs should not be handled more than necessary; when necessary, clean gloves should be worn.[26]

As state symbols and bioindicators

The American green tree frog became the state amphibian of Louisiana in 1997[27] and of Georgia in 2005.[28][29]

American green tree frogs can also be used as bioindicators for aquatic contamination. Synthetic compounds such as polychlorinated biphenyls are found in many pesticides and pollute the green tree frog’s aquatic habitats. Because the frog’s skin is thin and permeable, synthetic compounds absorb easily upon contact, making the species a viable variable to measure contamination.[30]

References

  1. ^ IUCN SSC Amphibian Specialist Group (2021). "Dryophytes cinereus". IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. 2021: e.T55449A118978218. doi:10.2305/IUCN.UK.2021-3.RLTS.T55449A118978218.en. Retrieved 2 December 2022.
  2. ^ a b Pham, Lanminh; Boudreaux, Seth; Karhbet, Sam; Price, Becky; Ackleh, Azmy S.; Carter, Jacoby; Pal, Nabendu (June 2007). "Population Estimates of Hyla cinerea (Schneider) (Green Tree Frog) in an Urban Environment". Southeastern Naturalist. 6 (2): 203–216. doi:10.1656/1528-7092(2007)6[203:PEOHCS]2.0.CO;2. ISSN 1528-7092. S2CID 53476627.
  3. ^ a b c Suriyamongkol, Thanchira; Forks, Kaitlyn; Villamizar-Gomez, Andrea; Wang, Hsiao-Hsuan; Grant, William E.; Forstner, Michael R. J.; Mali, Ivana (December 2021). "A Simple Conservation Tool to Aid Restoration of Amphibians following High-Severity Wildfires: Use of PVC Pipes by Green Tree Frogs (Hyla cinerea) in Central Texas, USA". Diversity. 13 (12): 649. doi:10.3390/d13120649. ISSN 1424-2818.
  4. ^ a b c d e f g h i Nichols, Matthew (2008), "Hyla cinerea (green treefrog)]", University of Michigan Museum of Zoology, archived from the original on 2022-09-29, retrieved 2022-09-29
  5. ^ a b c d e Leary, Christopher J.; Harris, Samuel (2013-01-01). "Steroid hormone levels in calling males and males practicing alternative non-calling mating tactics in the green treefrog, Hyla cinerea". Hormones and Behavior. 63 (1): 20–24. doi:10.1016/j.yhbeh.2012.11.006. ISSN 0018-506X. PMID 23160001. S2CID 13405895.
  6. ^ a b Gunzburger, Margaret S. (December 2005). "Differential Predation on Tadpoles Influences the Potential Effects of Hybridization between Hyla cinerea and Hyla gratiosa". Journal of Herpetology. 39 (4): 682–687. doi:10.1670/226-04N.1. ISSN 0022-1511. S2CID 86062872.
  7. ^ a b c d Garcia, Mark J.; Cronin, Andrew; Bowling, Tyler; Bushera, Hakeem; Hunter, Kimberly L.; Taylor, Ryan C. (2019-01-25). "Dueling frogs: do male green tree frogs (Hyla cinerea) eavesdrop on and assess nearby calling competitors?". Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology. 73 (2): 21. doi:10.1007/s00265-018-2632-1. ISSN 1432-0762. S2CID 59259839.
  8. ^ a b Perrill, S. A., Gerhardt, H. C., & Daniel, R. (1978). Sexual Parasitism in the Green Tree Frog (Hyla cinerea). Science, 200(4346), 1179–1180.
  9. ^ Lodato, M. J., Engbrecht, N. J., Klueh-Mundy, S., & Walker, Z. (2014). The Green Treefrog, Hyla cinerea (Schneider), in Indiana. Proceedings of the Indiana Academy of Science, 123(2), Article 2.
  10. ^ King, Richard B.; Hauff, Scott; Phillips, John B. (1994). "Physiological Color Change in the Green Treefrog: Responses to Background Brightness and Temperature". Copeia. 1994 (2): 422–432. doi:10.2307/1446990. ISSN 0045-8511.
  11. ^ Wilder, Anneke; Welch, Allison (19 Nov 2014). "Effects of Salinity and Pesticide on Sperm Activity and Oviposition Site Selection in Green Treefrogs, Hyla cinerea". Copeia. 2014 (4) – via American Society for Ichthyologists & Herpetologists.
  12. ^ Hua, X., Fu, C., Li, J., de Oca, A. N. M., & Wiens, J. J. (2009). A Revised Phylogeny of Holarctic Treefrogs (Genus Hyla) Based on Nuclear and Mitochondrial DNA Sequences. Herpetologica, 65(3), 246–259.
  13. ^ Leavitt, D. J., & Fitzgerald, L. A. (2009). Diet of Nonnative Hyla cinerea in a Chihuahuan Desert Wetland. Journal of Herpetology, 43(3), 541–545.
  14. ^ Thigpen, C.; Dodson, H.; Trauth, S. (2016-01-01). "Food Habits of Green Tree Frogs (Hyla cinerea) from Arkansas". Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science. 70 (1): 232–234. doi:10.54119/jaas.2016.7030. ISSN 2326-0491.
  15. ^ "Green Tree Frog", lllreptile.com, archived from the original on 2015-11-08, retrieved 2016-04-25
  16. ^ Somma, L.A. (2018-05-03), "Dryophytes cinereus (Schneider, 1799)", U.S. Geological Survey, Nonindigenous Aquatic Species Database, Gainesville, FL, USA, archived from the original on 2022-09-29, retrieved 2022-09-29
  17. ^ https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1&type=pdf&doi=2eb4773c535a7745f310115cbfa84c9dbd0361eb. {{cite web}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)
  18. ^ Garton, John S.; Brandon, Ronald A. (1975), "Reproductive Ecology of the Green Treefrog, Hyla cinerea, in Southern Illinois (Anura: Hylidae)", Herpetologica, 31 (2): 150–161, ISSN 0018-0831, JSTOR 3891647
  19. ^ a b Neelon, Daniel P.; Höbel, Gerlinde (2019-08-13). "Staying ahead of the game—plasticity in chorusing behavior allows males to remain attractive in different social environments". Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology. 73 (9): 124. doi:10.1007/s00265-019-2737-1. ISSN 1432-0762. S2CID 202006551.
  20. ^ Bates, Mary (2016-04-25), "Invasive Species Compete With Native Species For Room To Be Heard Archived 2018-04-29 at the Wayback Machine", PLOS Ecology Community
  21. ^ Tennessen, Jennifer B.; Parks, Susan E.; Tennessen, Travis P.; and Langkilde, Tracy (2016), "Raising a Racket: Invasive Species Compete Acoustically with Native Treefrogs", Animal Behaviour 114 (2016): 53–61
  22. ^ Gunzburger, M S; Travis, J (2005-07-01). "Effects of multiple predator species on green treefrog ( Hyla cinerea ) tadpoles". Canadian Journal of Zoology. 83 (7): 996–1002. doi:10.1139/z05-093. ISSN 0008-4301.
  23. ^ Creel, Foster (2000). "Parasites of the Green Treefrog, Hyla cinerea, from Orange Lake, Alachua County, Florida, U.S.A.". Comparative Parasitology. 67 (2): 255–258.
  24. ^ Brannelly, Laura A.; Chatfield, Matthew W. H.; Richards-Zawacki, Corinne L. (2012-06-07). "Field and Laboratory Studies of the Susceptibility of the Green Treefrog (Hyla cinerea) to Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis Infection". PLOS ONE. 7 (6): e38473. Bibcode:2012PLoSO...738473B. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0038473. ISSN 1932-6203. PMC 3369911. PMID 22685572.
  25. ^ Burmeister, Sabrina S.; Wilczynski, Walter (2001-12-01). "Social Context Influences Androgenic Effects on Calling in the Green Treefrog (Hyla cinerea)". Hormones and Behavior. 40 (4): 550–558. doi:10.1006/hbeh.2001.1723. ISSN 0018-506X. PMID 11716585. S2CID 41515965.
  26. ^ McLeod, Lianne, "American Green Tree Frogs as Pets", thesprucepets.com, archived from the original on 2022-09-29, retrieved 2022-09-29
  27. ^ "RS 49:169.1", legis.la.gov, Louisiana State Legislature, retrieved 2019-05-07
  28. ^ "§ 50-3-81—Official amphibian", 2017 Georgia Code, retrieved 2019-05-07
  29. ^ Broady, Arlinda Smith (2015-05-06), "Photo Vault: Push for a state amphibian became life lesson for kids", Atlanta Journal-Constitution, retrieved 2019-05-07
  30. ^ DeGarady, Colette J.; Halbrook, Richard S. (March 2006). "Using Anurans as Bioindicators of PCB Contaminated Streams". Journal of Herpetology. 40 (1): 127–130. doi:10.1670/30-05N.1. ISSN 0022-1511. S2CID 85903085.

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

American green tree frog: Brief Summary

provided by wikipedia EN

The American green tree frog (Dryophytes cinereus or Hyla cinerea) is a common arboreal species of New World tree frog belonging to the family Hylidae. This nocturnal insectivore is moderately sized and has a bright green to reddish-brown coloration. Commonly found in the central and southeastern United States, the frog lives in open canopy forests and permanent waters with abundant vegetation. When defending territory, the frog either emits aggressive call signals or grapples with intruders. To avoid predation, the frog hides in its aquatic habitat.

Females are larger than males and breed through amplexus. In contrast, males emit low frequency advertisement calls to attract females. During mating competition, males will eavesdrop on neighboring rivals and either adjust their signal timing or remain silent to intercept call signals and mate with approaching females. Androgens energize males to vocalize.

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