Moroti, Matheus de Toledo

Pedrozo, Mariana

Santana, Diego José

Sestito, Guilherme

English

Cadernos Espinosanos (E-Journal)

283Phyllomedusa - 16(2), December 2017Received 31 May 2017Accepted 25 October 2017Distributed December 2017Short CommuniCationFirst record of visual displays in Scinax cardosoi (Anura: Hylidae)Matheus de Toledo Moroti,1 Mariana Pedrozo,2 Guilherme Sestito,1 and Diego José Santana11 .CDQTCVÎTKQFG<QQNQIKC+PUVKVWVQFG$KQEKÄPEKCU7PKXGTUKFCFG(GFGTCNFG/CVQ)TQUUQFQ5WN%KFCFG7PKXGTUKV¶TKC970, Campo Grande, MS, Brazil. E-mail: mmoroti@gmail.com.2 +PUVKVWVQFG%KÄPEKCU'ZCVCUG$KQNÎIKECU7PKXGTUKFCFG(GFGTCNFG1WTQ2TGVQ4WC3WCVTQ1WTQ2TGVQ/)Brazil.Keywords: Atlantic Forest, ethology, territorial defense, treefrog, visual communication.Palavras-chave: comunicação visual, defesa de território, etologia, Mata Atlântica, perereca.Anurans have a variety of social behaviors (Wells 1977). Acoustic communication is the best documented, occurring in most anuran species (Hartmann GV CN 2005). Anuran visual communication has received more attention HQNNQYKPI VJG TGXKGYU D[ *ÑFN CPF #OÃ\SWKVC(2001) and Hartmann GVCN (2005). Several types of visual signals have been described in anuran species (e.g., Bertoluci 2002, Hartmann GV CN 2005, Giasson and Haddad 2006, Toledo GV CN 2007, Caldwell GV CN 2010, Barros and Feio 2011, Lipinski GV CN 2012, Caldart GV CN 2014, Furtado GVCN 2017).Visual signaling is a complementary or alternate form of communication in most anurans FGRGPFKPIQPVJGUQEKCNEQPVGZV#OÃ\SWKVCCPF*ÑFN  +V KU RTKOCTKN[ CUUQEKCVGF YKVJelements of reproductive behavior, such as courtship and aggressive interactions between EQPURGEKſE OCNGU *ÑFN CPF #OÃ\SWKVC Thus, anuran visual communication may have an important social function that probably is more UKIPKſECPV VJCPEWTTGPVN[ TGEQIPK\GF %CNFCTVGVCN 2014).Visual signals in anurans are present in a number of species and families (Furtado GV CN 2017), suggesting that this communication system may have evolved independently on OWNVKRNGQEECUKQPU*ÑFNCPF#OÃ\SWKVCWithin 5EKPCZ Wagler, 1830, visual signals are recorded for four species—5EKPCZ GWT[FKEG (Bokermann, 1968), 5 HWUEQOCTIKPCVWU (Lutz, 1925), 5OCTCEC[C (Cardoso and Sazima, 1980), and 5PCUKEWU (Cope, 1862). Two types of visual displays occur in the genus. Limb-lifting is documented for the four species (5GWT[FKEG5HWUEQOCTIKPCVWU 5 OCTCEC[C 5 PCUKEWU) and leg-kicking  only for one species (5 GWT[FKEGHartmann GVCN 2005, Toledo and Haddad 2005, Barros and Feio 2011, Furtado GVCN 2017).5EKPCZ ECTFQUQK (Carvalho-e-Silva and Peixoto, 1991) occurs in Atlantic Forest fragments in the states of Minas Gerais, Espírito Santo, Rio de Janeiro, and São Paulo (Moroti GVCN 2017), southeastern Brazil. This nocturnal Phyllomedusa 16(2):283–287, 2017© 2017 Universidade de São Paulo - ESALQ ISSN 1519-1397 (print) / ISSN 2316-9079 (online)doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.11606/issn.2316-9079.v16i2p283-287284Phyllomedusa - 16(2), December 2017species uses temporary ponds along the forest edge for breeding. Males vocalize next to one another from perches on shrub vegetation (~ 20–30 cm above ground) (Moroti GV CN 2017). Despite its range over an enormous area in southeastern Brazil, the records of its populations are disjunct, and there is little information on the ecology and behavior of 5 ECTFQUQK Here, we describe the visual displays observed in a population of 5 ECTFQUQK in an Atlantic Forest fragment in southeastern Brazil.The observations were carried out at the Parque Natural Municipal Augusto Ruschi 20/#4 OWPKEKRCNKV[ QH 5ºQ ,QUÃ FQUCampos, state of São Paulo, Brazil, on 17 January 2016. The adult 5EKPCZ ECTFQUQK were found calling from a temporary pond in an area of secondary forest (23.0714° S, 45.9313° W, WGS-84). Several males were vocalizing from scattered, shrubby vegetation in the same ephemeral pond. A total of 1:30 hr of observations was made before the sunrise, between 5:00 h and 6:30 h. The air temperature and air humidity were measured with a thermohygrometer (Instrutemp ITHT 2250) during the observations. The average temperature varied from 19.7–21.8°C and the relative air humidity from 90–94%.Our observations followed the CF NKDKVWOmethod (Lehner 1996). The same observer (MTM) used a white-light lantern and was always at least 2 m away from the focal individuals; this distance did not seem to interfere in the interactions between the frogs. We observed nine individuals (7 males, 2 females), each for 10 min. The visual behavior of three males was recorded YKVJCFKIKVCNECOGTC0KMQP2CPFENCUUKſGFaccording to Hartmann GVCN (2005). Two males were collected as voucher specimens (collection permits SISBio 54493-2) and deposited in the herpetological collection of the Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso do Sul (ZUFMS-AMP 5627–5628).Neither of the two females displayed any visual behavior. The males engaged in two kinds QH XKUWCN FKURNC[U 6JG ſTUV NKODNKHVKPI YCUobserved in all male frogs; four of the frogs were KP VJG RTGUGPEG QH EQPURGEKſE OCNGU YJGTGCUthree were not. This signal consists of moving one or more of the hind or forelimbs rapidly up and down without extending the limbs. In both EQPVGZVU KGYKVJQTYKVJQWV EQPURGEKſEU VJGfrogs touched the substrate with limbs (Figure 1). The second behavior, leg-kicking, was observed in two males when there was another male frog nearby. The male that was calling stretched his right hind limb back to hit its EQPURGEKſE $GECWUG QPN[ QPG KPFKXKFWCNvocalized, it seems likely that the male that was kicked might have been a satellite male (Figure 2). The presumed satellite male maintained his position for a minute, and then jumped to other vegetation right. Leg-kicking behavior only occurred in the presence of another male, thereby suggesting that it is an aggressive behavior.Visual signals are more commonly associated with diurnal anurans, owing mainly to their UKIPCNVTCPUOKUUKQPHCEKNKV[CPFRGTEGRVKQP*ÑFNCPF #OÃ\SWKVC  *QYGXGT QRVKOCNillumination may vary among species; many anurans are active only at low light intensities (Hartmann GVCN 2005). When the white light of our lantern was focused on individual frogs, the males performing visual displays ceased this behavior, but did not stop calling. When the light was not focused on individuals, they resumed their visual behavior displays. We found that anuran visual displays were inversely correlated with the light intensity. It will be important to test whether the rate of visual signaling in anurans with nocturnal habits decreases with increasing light, or whether this is only in response to intense white light.The use of visual cues in anurans usually QEEWTU YJGP C TGUKFGPV OCNG UGGU C EQPURGEKſE(Lindquist and Hetherington 1998). In an experiment using mirrors, Furtado and Nomura (2014) observed that $QCPCCNDQOCTIKPCVC (Spix, 1824) altered its rate of emission of acoustic signals in the presence of a possible intruder male, but did not change the rate of visual displays, thereby this suggesting that the latter is not involved in communication and is a “displaced /QTQVKet al.285Phyllomedusa - 16(2), December 2017Figure 1. (A) A male Scinax cardosoi in the Parque Natural Municipal Augusto Ruschi, municipality of São José dos Campos, state of São Paulo, southeastern Brazil. (B) Limb-lifting observed in individuals of S. cardosoi. The signal consisted of rapid up and down movements of one or more limbs that are not extended.A BFigure 2. (A) Two male Scinax cardosoi (ZUFMS 5627-5628); the left male displayed “leg kicking” to push the other male away. The latter did not vocalize, whereas the former did; thus, the silent male may have been a satellite. (B) The most active male stretched his right leg back to hit other male, which remained in the same position for a minute, jumping to other vegetation right after. In our observations, the leg kicking behavior was only displayed in the imminence of another male, suggesting aggressive behavior.A BCEVKXKV[Œ KP VJKU URGEKGU (WTVCFQ CPF 0QOWTC2014). Anurans also use seismic signals to communicate; in some cases, this may establish patterns of spacing in the chorus of the males (Narins 1990), as suggested in a study of an aboreal frog, #ICN[EJPKUECNNKFT[CU (Cope, 1862) by Caldwell GVCN (2010). Combined, visual and vibrational signaling compose a bimodal signal, (KTUVTGEQTFQHXKUWCNFKURNC[UKPScinax cardosoi286Phyllomedusa - 16(2), December 2017because male # ECNNKFT[CU do not respond to visual stimuli only (Caldwell GVCN 2010).Furtado GVCN (2017) observed visual displays associated with agonistic interactions in three hylid species [$QCPC TCPKEGRU (Cope, 1862), &GPFTQRUQRJWU PCPWU (Boulenger, 1889), and .[UCRUWU NKOGNNWOCope, 1862] and found that the visual stimulus of an intruder male in the territory of the resident male does not affect the rate of visual signaling. In our study, limb-lifting behavior in 5EKPCZECTFQUQK was reported in both VJG RTGUGPEG CPF CDUGPEG QH QVJGT EQPURGEKſEmales, as observed in other studies (Furtado and Nomura 2014 Furtado GV CN 2017). However, Hartmann GV CN  XGTKſGF VJCV KP VJGabsence of another vocalizing male, individual 8KVTGQTCPC WTCPQUEQRC (Müller, 1924) ceased limb-lifting behavior but continued to vocalize. Possibly, behavior differs among species depending on the type of habitat they use, their evolutionary history, the availability of light, and the noise of the environment.The visual displays observed in 5EKPCZECTFQUQK (limb-lifting and leg-kicking) are documented in some of its congeners (Hartmann GV CN 2005, Toledo and Haddad 2005, Barros and Feio 2011, R. Furtado pers. obs.). However, our study shows that leg-kicking may be used in KPVTCURGEKſE CIITGUUKXG KPVGTCEVKQPU KP VJKUspecies. We documented that display of visual signals in 5 ECTFQUQK changes with light intensity, because such displays cease when the lantern light is focused directly on an individual; nevertheless, the frog continues to vocalize. Thus, our study provides new insights on visual communication in 5EKPCZwhile raising further research questions to explore.#EMPQYNGFIOGPVU.ōWe are grateful to 5GETGVCTKC FQ /GKQ #ODKGPVG FG 5ºQ ,QUÃ FQUCampos for the study permit in the area of Parque Natural Municipal Augusto Ruschi. We thank Linda Trueb, Rafaela Granzotti and anonymous referees for critical discussions of the ideas presented in this manuscript. MTM and GAS were supported by CAPES for this research.  References#OÃ\SWKVC#CPF9*ÑFN*QYYJGPCPFYJGTGVQperform visual displays: the case of the Amazonian frog *[NCRCTXKEGRU. *GTRGVQNQIKEC 420–429.Barros, A. B. and R. N. Feio. 2011. Visual communication in 5EKPCZ OCTCEC[C (Cardoso & Sazima, 1980) (Anura: Hylidae) at the Serra da Canastra National Park, southeastern Brazil. *GTRGVQNQI[ 0QVGU  103–104.Bertoluci, J. 2002. Pedal luring in the leaf-frog 2J[NNQOGFWUCDWTOGKUVGTK (Anura, Hylidae, Phyllomedusinae). 2J[NNQOGFWUC 93–95.Caldart, V. M., S. Iop, and S. Z. Cechin. 2014. Social interactions in a Neotropical stream frog reveal a complex repertoire of visual signals and the use of multimodal communication. $GJCXKQWT 719–739.Caldwell, M. S., G. R. Johnston, J. G. McDaniel, and K. M. Warkentin. 2010. Vibrational signaling in the agonistic interactions of red-eyed treefrogs. %WTTGPV $KQNQI[ 1012–1017.Furtado, R. and F. Nomura. 2014. Visual signals or displacement activities? The function of visual displays in agonistic interactions in nocturnal tree frogs. #EVC'VJQNQIKEC 9–14.Furtado R., R. Márquez, and S. M. Hartz. 2017. In front of a mirror: visual displays may not be aggressive signals in nocturnal tree frogs. ,QWTPCN QH 0CVWTCN *KUVQT[ 443–454.Giasson, L. O. M. and C. F. B. Haddad. 2006. Social interactions in *[RUKDQCU CNDQOCTIKPCVWU #PWTC *[NKFCG CPF VJG UKIPKſECPEG QH CEQWUVKE CPFvisual signals. ,QWTPCNQH*GTRGVQNQI[ 171–180.Hartmann, M. T., L. O. M. Giasson, P. A. Hartmann, and C. F. B. Haddad. 2005. Visual communication in Brazilian species of anurans from the Atlantic forest. ,QWTPCN QH0CVWTCN*KUVQT[ 1675–1685.*ÑFN 9 CPF # #OÃ\SWKVC  8KUWCN UKIPCNKPI KPanuran amphibians. Pp. 121–141 KP M. J. Ryan (ed.), #PWTCP %QOOWPKECVKQP. Washington. Smithsonian Institution Press.Lehner, P. N. (ed). 1996. *CPFDQQMQH'VJQNQIKECN/GVJQFU Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.694 pp.Lindquist, E. D. and T. E. Hetherington. 1998. Semaphoring in an earless frog: the origin of a novel visual signal. #PKOCN%QIPKVKQP 83–87./QTQVKet al.287Phyllomedusa - 16(2), December 2017Lipinski, V. M., V. M. Caldart, and S. Iop. 2012. Visual communication in *[RUKDQCU EWTWRK (Anura: Hylidae) at Parque Estadual do Turvo, southern Brazil. 2J[NNQOGFWUC 71–74.Moroti, M. T., J. A. Ferreira Neto, A. C. Santos, C. P. Soares, and I. F. Machado. 2017. Amphibia, Anura, Hylidae, 5EKPCZ ECTFQUQK (Carvalho-e-Silva & Peixoto, 1991): distribution extension and new state record for São Paulo, Brazil. %JGEM.KUV 2042.Narins, P. M. 1990. Seismic communication in anuran amphibians.$KQUEKGPEG 268–274.Toledo, L. F. and C. F. B. Haddad. 2005. Reproductive biology of 5EKPCZ HWUEQOCTIKPCVWU (Anura, Hylidae) in south-eastern Brazil. ,QWTPCN QH 0CVWTCN *KUVQT[ 3029–3037.Toledo, L. F., O. G. S. Araújo, L. D. Guimarães, R. Lingnau, and C. F. B. Haddad. 2007. Visual and acoustic signaling in three species of Brazilian nocturnal tree frogs (Anura, Hylidae). 2J[NNQOGFWUC 61–68.Wells, K. D. 1977. The social behavior of anuran amphibians. #PKOCN$GJCXKQWT 666–693.'FKVQT ,CKOG$GTVQNWEK(KTUVTGEQTFQHXKUWCNFKURNC[UKPScinax cardosoi

First record of visual displays in Scinax cardosoi (Anura: Hylidae)

https://www.revistas.usp.br/phyllo/article/download/141882/136971

First record of visual displays in Scinax cardosoi (Anura: Hylidae)

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Cadernos Espinosanos (E-Journal)