The University of Dublin | Trinity College -- Ollscoil Átha Cliath | Coláiste na Tríonóide
Trinity's Access to Research Archive
Home :: Log In :: Submit :: Alerts ::

School of Natural Science >
Zoology >
Zoology (Scholarly Publications) >

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

Title: Macroecology and extinction risk correlates of frogs
Author's Homepage:
Keywords: extinction risk
independent contrasts
spatial autocorrelation
geographic range size
body size
clutch size
Issue Date: 2008
Publisher: Blackwell Publishing
Citation: Cooper, N, Bielby, J, Thomas, GH, Purvis, A, Macroecology and extinction risk correlates of frogs, GLOBAL ECOLOGY AND BIOGEOGRAPHY, 17, 2008
Abstract: Aim Our aim was to test whether extinction risk in frogs could be predicted from their body size, fecundity or geographic range size. Because small geographic range size is a correlate of extinction risk in many taxa, we also tested hypotheses about correlates of range size in frogs. Methods Using a large comparative dataset (n = 527 species) compiled from the literature we performed bivariate and multiple regressions through the origin of independent contrasts, to test proposed macroecological patterns and correlates of extinction risk in frogs. We also created minimum adequate models to predict snout-vent length, clutch size, geographic range size and IUCN Red List status in frogs. Parallel non-phylogenetic analyses were also conducted. We verified the results of the phylogenetic analyses using gridded data accounting for spatial autocorrelation. Results The most threatened frogs tend to have small geographic ranges although the relationship between range and extinction risk is not linear. In addition, tropical frogs with small clutches have the smallest ranges. Clutch size was strongly positively correlated with geographic range size (r2 = 0.22) and body size (r2 = 0.28). Main conclusions Our results suggest that body size and fecundity only affect extinction risk indirectly through their effect on geographic range size. Thus, although large frogs with small clutches tend to be endangered, there is no comparative evidence that this relationship is direct. If correct, this inference has consequences for conservation strategy: it would be inefficient to allocate conservation resources on the basis of low fecundity or large body size; instead it would be better to protect areas which contain many, small geographic range frog species.
Description: PUBLISHED
Appears in Collections:Zoology (Scholarly Publications)

Files in This Item:

File Description SizeFormat
Cooper et al 2008 GEB.docAccepted for publication (author's copy) - Peer Reviewed152 kBMicrosoft WordView/Open

This item is protected by original copyright

Please note: There is a known bug in some browsers that causes an error when a user tries to view large pdf file within the browser window. If you receive the message "The file is damaged and could not be repaired", please try one of the solutions linked below based on the browser you are using.

Items in TARA are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.


Valid XHTML 1.0! DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2010  Duraspace - Feedback