Habitat use, density and diet of Phyllobates aurotaenia (Anura: Dendrobatidae) in tropical rainforest areas in the department of Chocó, Colombia
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18636/riutch.v34i2.792Keywords:
Conservation, Items, Population, Relative importance, SubstrateAbstract
Introduction: A study was conducted to analyze the natural history of Phyllobates aurotaenia.
Objective: to recognize aspects such as habitat use, density and diet, in tropical rain forest areas in the department of Chocó.
Materials and methods: The method of survey by visual encounters (SVE), making transepts for the search of indi-viduals in the different microhabitats. Results: The population of P. aurotaenia studied was based on 20 individuals,where the substrates were evaluated, with leaf litter substrate being the best represented (80%), showing significant statistical differences (χ2=3.6667 gl; 3 p=0.05) for the use of habitat; the population density was 1.7 ind/m2 in all the study areas. Regarding diet, a total of 137 dams were recorded, divided into one Phylum, two classes and six orders, with the orders Hymenoptera (105) and Coleoptera (24) being the best represented.
Conclusions: Anthropic actions are one of the main causes that affect this species.
Downloads
References
Arce F, Rengifo JT. 2013. Dieta de Phyllobates aurotaenia y Oo- phaga histrionica (Anura: Dendrobatidae) en el municipio del Alto Baudó, Chocó, Colombia. Acta Zool Mex. 29(2): 255-68. Disponible en: http://www.scielo.org.mx/scielo. php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0065-17372013000200001
Blaustein AR, Wake DB. 1995. The puzzle of declining amphibian populations. Sci Am. 272(4): 52-7. Disponible en: https:// www.researchgate.net/publication/250803756_The_Puz- zle_of_Declining_Amphibian_Populations
Bolívar W, Grant T, Lötters S, Castro F. 2004. Phyllobates au- rotaenia. Lista Roja de especies amenazadas de la UICN 2013.1.
Caldwell JP. 1996. The evolution of myrmecophagy and its correlates in poison frogs (Family Dendrobatidae). J Zool. 240(1): 75-101. Disponible en https://zslpublications.on- linelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1469-7998.1996. tb05487.x
Cook FR. 1965. Collecting and preserving amphibians and rep- tiles. Pp.128-51. In: Anderson R (ed). Methods of calleting and preserving vertebrate animals.
Cuatrecasas J. 1958. Aspectos de la vegetación natural de Co- lombia. Rev Acad Colomb Cien. 10: 221-68.
Demaynadier PG, Hunter ML. 1998. Effects of silvicultural edges on the distribution and abundance of amphibians in Maine. Conserv Biol. 12(2): 340-52. Disponible en: https://doi. org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.1998.96412.x
Duellman WE, Trueb L. 1994. Biology of amphibians. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press; 670 pp.
Dunham AE. 1983. Realized niche overlap, resourse abundance and intensity of interspecific campetition. In: Huey RD, Pianka ER, Schoener T W (eds.) Lizard Ecology. Boston: Harvard University Press; pp. 261-80.
Forero E, Gentry AH. 1989. Lista anotada de las plantas del departamento del Chocó, Colombia. Bogotá: Instituto de Ciencias Naturales, Museo de Historia Natural, Universi- dad Nacional de Colombia.
Galatti U. 1992. Population biology of the frog Leptodactylus pentadactylus in a Central Amazonian rainforest. J Her- petol. 26(1): 23-31. DOI: 10.2307/1565017
Hurtubia J. 1973. Trophic diversity measurement in sympatric predatory species. Ecology. 54: 885-90.
Inger RF. 1980. Densities of floor-dwelling frogs and lizards in lowland forests of southeast Asia and Central America. Am Nat. 115(6): 761-70. Disponible en: https://www.jstor.org/ stable/2460798?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
Martori A. 1991. Alimentación de los adultos de Eoproctus asper (Dugés 1853) en la montaña media del Pirineo catalán. (España). Rev Esp Herp. 5: 23-36.
Myers CW, Daly JW, Malkin B. 1978. A dangerously toxic new frog (Phyllobates) used by Emberá Indians of western Colombia, with discussion of blowgun fabrication and dart poisoning. Bull AMNH. 161:307-66
Ojasti J, Dallmeier F (eds.) 2000. Manejo de fauna silvestre neotropical. SI/MAB Biodiversity Program. SI/MAB Series # 5. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution. Dis- ponible en: https://bibliotecavirtualaserena.files.wordpress. com/2017/11/libro-de-manejo-de-fauna-de-ojasti.pdf
Pinkas L, Oliphant MS, Iverson ILK. 1971. Food habits of albacore, bluefin tuna, and bonito in Califonia waters. California Department of Fish and Game. Fish Bull. 152: 1-105. Disponible en: https://oac.cdlib.org/view?docId=k- t8290062w&brand=oac4&doc.view=entire_text
Poveda G. 2004. La hidroclimatología de Colombia: Una síntesis desde la escala inter-decadal hasta la escala diurna. Revista de la Academia Colombiana de Ciencias Exactas, Físicas y Naturales, 28 (107): 201-22. Disponible en: https:// n9.cl/2DKZ
Rueda-Almnacid JV, Lynch JD, Amézquita A (eds). 2004. Libro rojo de anfibios de Colombia. Serie de Libros rojos de especies amenazadas de Colombia. Bogotá: Conserva- ción Internacional de Colombia, Ministerio del Medio Ambiente; 384 pp. Disponible en: https://es.scribd.com/ doc/237074988/Libro-Rojo-de-Anfibios
Scott NJJr. 1976. The abundance and diversity of the herpetofau- nas of tropical forest litter. Biotropica. 8(1): 41-58. Dispo- nible en: https://www.jstor.org/stable/2387818?seq=1#pa- ge_scan_tab_contents
Simpson EH. 1949. Measurement of diversity. Nature. 163: 688. Sinsch U. 1990. Migration and orientation in anuran amphibians.
Ethol Ecol Evol. 2(1): 65-79.
Stebbins RS, Cohen NW. 1995. A natural history of Amphibians.New Jersey: Princeton University Press; 316 pp.
Stewart MM, Pough FH. 1983. Population density of tropical forest frogs: relation to retreat sites. Science. 221: 570-2. Disponible en: https://www.researchgate.net/publica- tion/6009596_Population_Density_of_Tropical_Forest_Frogs_Relation_to_Retreat_Sites
Stork NE, Blackburn TM. 1993. Abundance, body size and bio- mass of arthropods in tropical forest. Oikos. 67(3): 483-9.
Toft CA, Rand AS, Clark M. 1990. Dinámica de población y reclutamiento estacional de Bufo typhonius y Colostethus nubicola (Anura). En: Leigh EGJr, Rand AS, Windsor DM. Ecología de un bosque tropical: ciclos estacionales y cambios a largo plazo. Panamá: Smithsonian Tropical
Research Institute; pp. 461-8.
UICN SSC. Anfibio grupo especialista. 2016. Phyllobates urotaenia. La Lista Roja de la UICN de Especies Amenazadas:
: e.T55261A85887593.
Zorro JP. 2007. Anuros de piedemonte llanero: diversidad y preferencia de microhábitat. Tesis de pregrado. Bogotá: Carrera de Biología, Facultad de Ciencias, Pontificia Universidad Javeriana; pp. 1-86. Disponible en: https:// repository.javeriana.edu.co/bitstream/handle/10554/8941/ tesis88.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
