Tadpole ID
- Thread starter Mls285
- Start date
Help Support Aussie Pythons & Snakes Forum:
- Status
GeckPhotographer
Very Well-Known Member
Body shape is similar to that of Litoria peronii, they're definitely a Litoria but there's a whole range of sp. options.
Hard to tell from these photos. To identify tadpoles you need close-up photos of the underside, specifically the mouth area. Also if these are wildcaught, it's illegal, please release them into the pond where you found them.
I agree with Stephen that they look like Litoria sp.
Thyla is spot on about what is needed to ID these tadpoles to species level but incorrect about it being illegal to collect a few. My understanding is that it's OK to collect a few tadpoles (except N.P's/reserves etc.) for the purposes of educating kids (if they're cared for properly), so that they can witness metamorphosis etc. but they must be released where you found them straight afterwards.
Thyla is spot on about what is needed to ID these tadpoles to species level but incorrect about it being illegal to collect a few. My understanding is that it's OK to collect a few tadpoles (except N.P's/reserves etc.) for the purposes of educating kids (if they're cared for properly), so that they can witness metamorphosis etc. but they must be released where you found them straight afterwards.
GeckPhotographer
Very Well-Known Member
I believe specifically the provision is that children under 18 may collect tadpoles from private residences or public areas (parks etc), to view the process of metamorphosis and must return the metamorphosed frogs to exactly where the tadpoles came from. Either way parks does not particularly care to the utmost about anyone keeping tadpoles for a short time to view this process, given they return the metamorphs, even if they are not children.
They are definitely Litoria, the eye space and body shape even confirms them down to several Litoria sp. such as L.peronii, L.tylerii, L.fallax.
If I had them in the hand I'm quite confident I could ID them down to species level quite easily, mouth parts is not really super necessary for most species, though it is of course helpful, and possibly the easiest diagnostic in a photo.
In the hand body shape, colour, tail structure, eye width, head shape are all very good indicators that can often narrow down ID to a species.
Excellent post Stephen. Very informative and insightful.
I can recommend a good book on the subject - Tadpoles of south-eastern Australia : a guide with keys / Marion Anstis ; foreword by Harold G. Cogger. - Version details - Trove
I can recommend a good book on the subject - Tadpoles of south-eastern Australia : a guide with keys / Marion Anstis ; foreword by Harold G. Cogger. - Version details - Trove
Available right here - http://www.herpbooks.com.au/cms/ind...&category_id=3&option=com_virtuemart&Itemid=3
So one of the most threatened groups of animals in Australia (and the world for that matter), amphibians, has a specific provision that allows children to remove wild tadpoles and observe them metamorphosising and then releasing them where they found them. I wonder how many of these children are wearing powder free latex gloves (fresh pair for every location although officially its a fresh pair after handling each individual frog)? And how many are using a product with benzalkonium chloride to disinfect boots and vehicles tyres between sites?
Its fine for common and abundant species but for endangered or rare species it could potentially cause local extinction if a few children were to go to a small emphemeral pond where an endangered frog species laid eggs and removed a few individual tadpoles. Some may not even make it to the adult life stage in captivity. For those that do, they may be released back into the same pond contaminated with chytrid fungus which wipes out those that weren't caught for observation...
My old man always told me stories of when he was little he use to go down to the local creek with his mates and catch frogs and put them in glass jars which he took from the local cemetery. He would take them home and play pranks with family members and eventually they would be released into the wild again.
That's all well and good to be doing these sorts of things 45 years ago when scientists hadn't detected any declines in frog populations but in current times this is unacceptable.
I understand the excitement and joy one can get especially at that age of seeing an egg turn into a tadpole which turns into a frog. It's fantastic that people have an interest in them but to create a law which says its ok without ensuring proper hygiene protocols are met I find quite odd, particularly as amphibians are experiencing extinction globally.
GeckPhotographer
Very Well-Known Member
I don't even know how to start when replying to this.
Lets try and go in order of your concerns. Firstly you concern about spreading the disease. While the protocol of gloves and proper disinfectant is very good for researchers, especially those studying rare or endangered species, it is in all honestly not really effective. Chytrid fungus is already in pretty much every single body of water in can survive in, including most ponds (although not usually ephemeral ones), but in higher loads in streams. Some frogs are able to carry and survive the disease keeping infection loads high and new research shows flying water bugs can transfer it between sites. So, there's little to nothing we can do to stop this happening, and it's basically a precaution for those actually working on these animals. (In a technical side note, anyone doing work swabbing for chytrid prefers Latex Free gloves, as the latex can cause issues in the chytrid PCR.)
Now you talk specifically about people going to an ephemeral pool (somewhere where the frogs may not be exposed to the disease). There are only 3 species listed by the EPBC as endangered in this country I would say fit the level of ephemerality to "maybe" not already be exposed to the disease. They are P.corroboree, P.frosti, and G.alba. All 3 of these species are extremely protected, in National Parks, with their localities mainly kept secret. (The provision does not allow collection from National Parks). Even if you look at other species that may be affected but are not listed as endangered (e.g. P.australis) many of the populations of the species are in National Parks. There is almost no chance that kids will go and collect these species, almost no chance they will expose them to chytrid, especially expose them to chytrid when they are not already exposed.
This provision has little to no impact on species at risk from chytrid, it really is just a way for the goverment to say 'we respect kids should be allowed to go to the pond in their backyard, or down the local park, catch some toadpoles and watch metamorphosis, we respect this is important for education AND THAT EVEN IF IT WAS ILLEGAL WE'RE NOT GOING TO PROSECUTE A 12 YEAR OLD FOR CATCHING TADPOLES'.
Please, I've spent my entire life (literally since I was born) being out in the field participating (ok participating might be a bit strong a word till I was about 5), in mark recapture surveys, swabbing and observing frogs under threat from chytrid fungus. There is a huge threat to many frogs in this country from the disease and I have no doubt some further species will become extinct in the wild, BUT, letting kids catch tadpoles is not going to affect this, even in the slightest.
Well that's great to hear. I had to catch and identify various frogs as part of my honours year at uni so understanding the DECC frog hygene protocol was important at the time. As well as my honours year I have also spent time with Gerry Marantelli who trained me with keeping a high level of hygene whilst working with animals.
I guess the protocols are in place for a reason. I hope your right about this not effecting frog species susceptible to chytrid fungus.
Thanks for those interesting and informative posts Steven and Thyla.
I recommend that people do not handle frogs unless necessary for the sake of the frogs and disease prevention. If you do need to, then make sure you wash your hands thoroughly in between populations or wear disposable gloves as a precaution.
Frog Chytrid fungus | NSW Environment & Heritage
http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/resources/nature/hyprfrog.pdf
I recommend that people do not handle frogs unless necessary for the sake of the frogs and disease prevention. If you do need to, then make sure you wash your hands thoroughly in between populations or wear disposable gloves as a precaution.
Frog Chytrid fungus | NSW Environment & Heritage
http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/resources/nature/hyprfrog.pdf
Last edited:
Thanks Scott. I look forward to getting the new edition of this tremendously useful and comprehensive book.
It's invaluable for identifying local resident amphibians (by looking at tadpoles) during the day when you can't usually locate adults without disturbing fragile habitat.
It's invaluable for identifying local resident amphibians (by looking at tadpoles) during the day when you can't usually locate adults without disturbing fragile habitat.
GeckPhotographer
Very Well-Known Member
Thanks for taking it onboard without being defensive. It's great to hear you worked with frogs in your honours, and for any actual work on species, especially moving around between sites I agree there are reasons the protocols are important.
One of the ones I left out in my 'speel' being that different strains of the disease exist and moving those around could be far worse than just moving the disease around in general.
Keep your high hygiene standard! I am sure it is great, and if it could be enforced to everyone that would be even better, but please rest assured, the extinction of frog species in this country will come about from harder things to stop than kids with tadpole nets. :/
- Status
Similar threads
