• Login
    View Item 
    •   Home
    • Massey Documents by Type
    • Theses and Dissertations
    • View Item
    •   Home
    • Massey Documents by Type
    • Theses and Dissertations
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Morphology, ecology and development of leiopelmatid frogs (Leiopelma spp.), in Whareorino Forest, New Zealand : a thesis presented in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Masters of Science in Ecology at Massey University

    Icon
    View/Open Full Text
    01_front.pdf (921.3Kb)
    02_whole.pdf (44.99Mb)
    Export to EndNote
    Abstract
    Leiopelma archeyi, L. hochstetteri and a previously unrecognised leiopelmatid frog, Type A, occurred sympatrically in a small area of Whareorino forest when this was intensively surveyed between June 1996 and July 1997. L. archeyi was found predominantly along ridges. Large specimens were mostly under rocks whereas small ones were in grasses. This association was shown to be significant using canonical variate analysis. All L. hochstetteri were under rocks, logs or grasses and were associated with streams. Type A frogs were in small rock piles on ridges. Type A frogs were shown to be distinct from both L. archeyi and L. hochstetteri by canonical variate analysis. They could also be distinguished by morphological features. Overall they resemble L. hochstetteri but have less webbing between the toes, a distinct paratoid gland and a stouter body. These differences, together with their sympatry with L. archeyi and L. hochstetteri, indicate that the Type A frog is possibly a new species. It appears to be closest to the extinct L. markhami. Two clutches of L. archeyi eggs were reared artificially at 11°C and 15°C. Ten hatched but one died 10 days later. The tails took 48-75 days to be absorbed. Parentage and temperature significantly affected the rate of tail reduction. The gut contents of 8 frogs indicated that they eat a wider range of invertebrates than previously recorded. Their diet includes, in order of frequency of occurrence, Acari, insect larvae, Collembola, Amphipoda, Coleoptera, Araneae and Diptera. Unusual items were two diplopods, one ant and one gastropod. Large frogs with teeth ate a larger proportion of sclerotized prey. Small frogs lacked teeth and ate mostly small soft bodied invertebrates. However, they also took a wider range of prey. Potential prey was sampled using pitfall traps. Examples of all of the prey were caught but too few frog guts were analysed to indicate any relationship between pitfall trap catches and frog diet.
    Date
    1998
    Author
    Eggers, Karen E
    Rights
    The Author
    Publisher
    Massey University
    URI
    http://hdl.handle.net/10179/6647
    Collections
    • Theses and Dissertations
    Metadata
    Show full item record

    Copyright © Massey University
    Contact Us | Send Feedback | Copyright Take Down Request | Massey University Privacy Statement
    DSpace software copyright © Duraspace
    v5.7-2020.1
     

     

    Tweets by @Massey_Research
    Information PagesContent PolicyDepositing content to MROCopyright and Access InformationDeposit LicenseDeposit License SummaryTheses FAQFile FormatsDoctoral Thesis Deposit

    Browse

    All of MROCommunities & CollectionsBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsThis CollectionBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjects

    My Account

    LoginRegister

    Statistics

    View Usage Statistics

    Copyright © Massey University
    Contact Us | Send Feedback | Copyright Take Down Request | Massey University Privacy Statement
    DSpace software copyright © Duraspace
    v5.7-2020.1