1999
DOI: 10.2307/1565538
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Use and Sharing of Calling and Retreat Sites by Phyllodytes luteolus in a Modified Environment

Paula Cabral Eterovick

Abstract: JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.. Society for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of Herpetology. FRILLNECK LIZARD BEHAVIOR FRILL… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
18
1
1

Year Published

2001
2001
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 31 publications
(22 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
2
18
1
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The hypothesis most frequently adopted to explain the difference in use of bromeliads by amphibians is the ability of individuals to use those plants which present better characteristics in terms of the structural architecture of the plant Teixeira 2001, Silva et al 2011) such as leaf number, shape, size of bromeliad (Oliveira and Rocha 1997a, b) or reserve capacity of water (Cogliatti-Carvalho et al 2010). Thus, amphibians should select different features in bromeliad species that are more favourable and complementary to their needs, so that the set of morphological and physiological characteristics must interact to determine the association degree between anuran and bromeliad in the restinga (Eterovick 1999;Silva et al 2011). The fact that amphibian species with larger sizes (for example, Aparasphenodon brunoi) generally use larger plants, such as Aechmea lingulata, for shelter during the day (Teixeira et al 2002) supports this idea.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…The hypothesis most frequently adopted to explain the difference in use of bromeliads by amphibians is the ability of individuals to use those plants which present better characteristics in terms of the structural architecture of the plant Teixeira 2001, Silva et al 2011) such as leaf number, shape, size of bromeliad (Oliveira and Rocha 1997a, b) or reserve capacity of water (Cogliatti-Carvalho et al 2010). Thus, amphibians should select different features in bromeliad species that are more favourable and complementary to their needs, so that the set of morphological and physiological characteristics must interact to determine the association degree between anuran and bromeliad in the restinga (Eterovick 1999;Silva et al 2011). The fact that amphibian species with larger sizes (for example, Aparasphenodon brunoi) generally use larger plants, such as Aechmea lingulata, for shelter during the day (Teixeira et al 2002) supports this idea.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Bokermannohyla circumdata group and B. nanuzae, for instance, frequently used arboreal and terrestrial bromeliads, respectively. Other studies already pointed to the importance of bromeliads as microhabitats for many hylids (Bastazini et al, 2007;Eterovick, 1999;Giaretta, 1996;Schineider et al, 2001). Decreased predation risk, as well as high moisture of phytotelmata within leaves, may be factors that favored use of this microhabitat by species at our study site.…”
Section: Niche Breadth Vs Microhabitat Diversitymentioning
confidence: 95%
“…In frogs breeding in phytotelmata it is common for males to select oviposition sites to which they attract females (Eterovick 1999;Jungfer 2000;Bourne et al 2001;Heying 2001). In our study, the model of male presence at possible spawning sites included the same abiotic parameters as the model for oviposition except maximal possible water depth, suggesting that P. guineensis males select breeding sites with respect to abiotic habitat characteristics similar to those shown by female preferences.…”
Section: The Interaction Of Males and Femalesmentioning
confidence: 99%