Trophic Ecology of a Tropical Anuran Assemblage

I examined the diets of 867 anurans of 58 species from Cuzco Amaz6nico, Peru. A total of 6393 prey items in 62 prey categories was identified from the 610 anurans (70%) with prey in their gastrointestinal tracts-4316 (77%) from the stomach, 2077 from the intestines. Anuran species differ greatly in average number of prey per individual and the relative size of prey consumed. Bufonids, microhylids, and dendrobatids eat large numbers of relatively small prey (a high percentage of ants). Most hylids eat a few large prey, and leptodactylids are intermediate in number and size of prey eaten. Larger hylid species eat primarily orthopterans, roaches, and moths, whereas smaller hylids eat primarily spiders, beetles, and larvae. Most leptodactylids have large niche breadths and eat a great diversity of prey. Beetles, orthopterans, and millipedes are important prey items volumetrically, and ants and beetles are most important numerically. Most morphological variation (corrected for size) among species (71 % ) was accounted for by two principal component axes and seems to be associated with phylogeny, and to a lesser extent, diet. The two hylids that differ most from other members of their family, Sphaenorhynchus lacteus (differs in diet), and Phyllomedusa atelopoides (differs in microhabitat and diet) differ in morphology as well. Microhylids and dendrobatids have narrower heads and shorter jaws than hylids or leptodactylids. Maximum, and to a lesser extent, minimum prey size is correlated with frog size, but different families exhibit different relationships. Head shape is important in the number and size of prey consumed regardless of overall size; anurans with narrower heads and shorter jaws eat more, and smaller prey items. Most diet overlaps are low and terrestrial species have lower diet overlap values than arboreal species. The anurans exhibit guild structure in their diet. The terrestrial species are distributed in two distinctive feeding guilds-an ant/termite guild and a larger-prey guild. The arboreal community has only one ant specialist; many of the other species of hylids do not include ants in their diets

A Key to the Eggs and Nests of Iowa Turtles

Biologists often need to identify destroyed turtle nests where a predator has excavated and eaten the eggs. We present a dichotomous key to the eggs and nests of Iowa\u27s turtles based on egg or nest morphology and known range of the species. Egg and nest morphology clearly separated most nests of the families Chelydridae and Kinosternidae and many of the Emydidae. However, egg morphology must be combined with known range to distinguish wood turtles (Glyptemys insculpta) from other emydids. These factors will also separate most false map turtles (Graptemys pseudogeographica) from other species. Similarities among egg morphologies, nest morphologies, and ranges make the map turtles (Graptemys spp.) and red-eared sliders (Trachemys scripta) difficult to separate in southeastern Iowa

Development and validation of an index of musculoskeletal functional limitations

BACKGROUND: While musculoskeletal problems are leading sources of disability, there has been little research on measuring the number of functionally limiting musculoskeletal problems for use as predictor of outcome in studies of chronic disease. This paper reports on the development and preliminary validation of a self administered musculoskeletal functional limitations index. METHODS: We developed a summary musculoskeletal functional limitations index based upon a six-item self administered questionnaire in which subjects indicate whether they are limited a lot, a little or not at all because of problems in six anatomic regions (knees, hips, ankles and feet, back, neck, upper extremities). Responses are summed into an index score. The index was completed by a sample of total knee replacement recipients from four US states. Our analyses examined convergent validity at the item and at the index level as well as discriminant validity and the independence of the index from other correlates of quality of life. RESULTS: 782 subjects completed all items of the musculoskeletal functional limitations index and were included in the analyses. The mean age of the sample was 75 years and 64% were female. The index demonstrated anticipated associations with self-reported quality of life, activities of daily living, WOMAC functional status score, use of walking support, frequency of usual exercise, frequency of falls and dependence upon another person for assistance with chores. The index was strongly and independently associated with self-reported overall health. CONCLUSION: The self-reported musculoskeletal functional limitations index appears to be a valid measure of musculoskeletal functional limitations, in the aspects of validity assessed in this study. It is useful for outcome studies following TKR and shows promise as a covariate in studies of chronic disease outcomes.National Institutes of Health (NIH P60 AR 47782; NIH K24 AR 02123

Trophic ecology of a tropical anuran assemblage /

no.1

Appendix D. A table of model-averaged predictor weights for predictor variables in agricultural ponds in Houston and Winona Counties, Minnesota, 2000–2001.

A table of model-averaged predictor weights for predictor variables in agricultural ponds in Houston and Winona Counties, Minnesota, 2000–2001

Appendix A. A figure showing the amphibian species present in 40 ponds and four types of surrounding land uses in Houston and Winona Counties, Minnesota, 2000–2001.

A figure showing the amphibian species present in 40 ponds and four types of surrounding land uses in Houston and Winona Counties, Minnesota, 2000–2001

Appendix B. A table of summary statistics for the top predictor variables for agricultural ponds in Houston and Winona Counties, Minnesota, 2000.

A table of summary statistics for the top predictor variables for agricultural ponds in Houston and Winona Counties, Minnesota, 2000

Appendix E. Color versions of the two photographs in Plate 1 (a natural wetland and an agricultural constructed pond in Winona County, Minnesota).

Color versions of the two photographs in Plate 1 (a natural wetland and an agricultural constructed pond in Winona County, Minnesota)