The ecological impact of invasive cane toads (Bufo marinus) in Australia

Although invasive species are viewed as major threats to ecosystems worldwide, few such species have been studied in enough detail to identify the pathways, magnitudes, and timescales of their impact on native fauna. One of the most intensively studied invasive taxa in this respect is the cane toad (Bufo marinus), which was introduced to Australia in 1935. A review of these studies suggests that a single pathway-lethal toxic ingestion of toads by frog-eating predators-is the major mechanism of impact, but that the magnitude of impact varies dramatically among predator taxa, as well as through space and time. Populations of large predators (e.g., varanid and scincid lizards, elapid snakes, freshwater crocodiles, and dasyurid marsupials) may be imperilled by toad invasion, but impacts vary spatially even within the same predator species. Some of the taxa severely impacted by toad invasion recover within a few decades, via aversion learning and longer-term adaptive changes. No native species have gone extinct as a result of toad invasion, and many native taxa widely imagined to be at risk are not affected, largely as a result of their physiological ability to tolerate toad toxins (e.g., as found in many birds and rodents), as well as the reluctance of many native anuran-eating predators to consume toads, either innately or as a learned response. Indirect effects of cane toads as mediated through trophic webs are likely as important as direct effects, but they are more difficult to study. Overall, some Australian native species (mostly large predators) have declined due to cane toads; others, especially species formerly consumed by those predators, have benefited. For yet others, effects have been minor or have been mediated indirectly rather than through direct interactions with the invasive toads. Factors that increase a predator's vulnerability to toad invasion include habitat overlap with toads, anurophagy, large body size, inability to develop rapid behavioral aversion to toads as prey items, and physiological vulnerability to bufotoxins as a result of a lack of coevolutionary history of exposure to other bufonid taxa.     

After the crash: How do predators adjust following the invasion of a novel toxic prey type?

The ability of a native predator to adjust to a dangerously toxic invasive species is key to avoiding an ongoing suppression of the predator's population and the trophic cascade of effects that can result. Many species of anurophagous predators have suffered population declines due to the cane toad's (Rhinella marina: Bufonidae) invasion of Australia; these predators can be fatally poisoned from attempting to consume the toxic toad. We studied one such toad‐vulnerable predator, the yellow‐spotted monitor (Varanus panoptes: Varanidae), testing whether changes to the predator's feeding behaviour could explain how the species persists following toad invasion. Wild, free‐roaming lizards from (1) toad‐naïve and (2) toad‐exposed populations were offered non‐toxic native frogs and slightly toxic cane toads (with parotoid glands removed) in standardized feeding trials. Toad‐naïve lizards readily consumed both frogs and toads, with some lizards displaying overt signs of illness after consuming toads. In contrast, lizards from toad‐exposed populations consumed frogs but avoided toads. Repeated encounters with toads did not modify feeding responses by lizards from the toad‐naïve populations, suggesting that aversion learning is limited (but may nonetheless occur). Our results suggest that this vulnerable predator can adjust to toad invasion by developing an aversion to feeding on the toxic invader, but it remains unclear as to whether the lizard's toad‐aversion arises via adaptation or learning.     

School for Skinks: Can Conditioned Taste Aversion Enable Bluetongue Lizards (Tiliqua scincoides) to Avoid Toxic Cane Toads (Rhinella marina) as Prey?

The invasion of cane toads (Rhinella marina) through Australia imperils native predators that are killed if they consume these toxic anurans. The magnitude of impact depends upon the predators’ capacity for aversion learning: toad impact is lower if predators can learn not to attack toads. In laboratory trials, we assessed whether bluetongue lizards (Tiliqua scincoides) – a species under severe threat from toads – are capable of learned taste aversion and whether we can facilitate that learning by exposing lizards to toad tissue combined with a nausea‐inducing chemical (lithium chloride). Captive bluetongues rapidly learned to avoid the ‘unpalatable’ food. Taste aversion also developed (albeit less strongly) in response to meals of minced cane toad alone. Our data suggest that taste aversion learning may help bluetongue lizards survive the onslaught of cane toads, but that many encounters will be fatal because the toxin content of toads is so high relative to lizard tolerance of those toxins. Thus, baiting with nausea‐inducing (but non‐lethal) toad products might provide a feasible management option to reduce the impact of cane toad invasion on these native predators.     

Does intraspecific niche partitioning in a native predator influence its response to an invasion by a toxic prey species?

Abstract The introduced and highly toxic cane toad (Bufo marinus) is rapidly spreading across northern Australia where it may affect populations of large terrestrial vertebrate predators. The ecological impact of cane toads will depend upon the diets, foraging modes and habitat use of native predators, and their feeding responses to cane toads. However, intraspecific niche partitioning may influence the degree of vulnerability of predators to toxic prey, as well as the time course of the impact of alien invaders on native species. We studied the diet of the northern death adder Acanthophis praelongus and their feeding responses to cane toads. In the laboratory, death adders from all size classes and sexes readily consumed frogs and cane toads. Diets of free ranging A. praelongus from the Adelaide River floodplain were more heterogeneous. Juvenile snakes ate mainly frogs (39% of prey items) and small scincid lizards (43%). Both sexes displayed an ontogenetic dietary shift from lizards to mammals, but adult males fed on frogs (49%) and mammals (39%) whereas adult females (which grew larger than males) fed mainly on mammals (91%) and occasionally, frogs (9%). Feeding rates and body condition of adult snakes varied temporally and tracked fluctuations in prey availability. These results suggest that cane toads may negatively affect populations of northern death adders in the Darwin region. However, we predict that different size and sex classes of A. praelongus will experience differential mortality rates over different timescales. The initial invasion of large toads may affect adult males, but juveniles may be unaffected until juvenile toads appear the following year, and major affects on adult female death adders may be delayed until annual rainfall fluctuations reduce the availability of alternative (rodent) prey.     

Population-level declines in Australian predators caused by an invasive species

The cane toad Bufo marinus has been migrating westward across northern Australia since its introduction as a biological control agent in 1935. It has been implicated in the widespread decline of many native frog-eating predators. To investigate the impacts of this invasive species on native predatory reptiles, annual surveys were conducted from 2001 to 2007 to document variation in the relative abundances of three varanid lizards ( Varanus mertensi, Varanus mitchelli and Varanus panoptes ) and one crocodile Crocodylus johnstoni species known to consume toads. In addition, the indirect effects of this variation on one agamid lizard Amphibolurus gilberti , a known prey item of V. panoptes , were also examined. Surveys were performed at two sites in northern Australia before and after the arrival of B. marinus . Significant declines in the relative abundances of all three species of varanid lizard were observed following toad arrival. Declines in the abundance of V. panoptes, V. mitchelli and V. mertensi at the two sites ranged 83–96, 71–97 and 87–93%, respectively. In contrast, A. gilberti increased by 23–26%; whereas there were no significant population-level declines in C. johnstoni despite observations of individual effects (i.e. several dead crocodiles with B. marinus in their stomachs). These findings suggest population-level changes in Australian lizards caused by an invasive species.     

The impact of invasive cane toads on native wildlife in southern Australia

Commonly, invaders have different impacts in different places. The spread of cane toads (Rhinella marina: Bufonidae) has been devastating for native fauna in tropical Australia, but the toads' impact remains unstudied in temperate‐zone Australia. We surveyed habitat characteristics and fauna in campgrounds along the central eastern coast of Australia, in eight sites that have been colonized by cane toads and another eight that have not. The presence of cane toads was associated with lower faunal abundance and species richness, and a difference in species composition. Populations of three species of large lizards (land mullets Bellatorias major, eastern water dragons Intellagama lesueurii, and lace monitors Varanus varius) and a snake (red‐bellied blacksnake Pseudechis porphyriacus) were lower (by 84 to 100%) in areas with toads. The scarcity of scavenging lace monitors in toad‐invaded areas translated into a 52% decrease in rates of carrion removal (based on camera traps at bait stations) and an increase (by 61%) in numbers of brush turkeys (Alectura lathami). The invasion of cane toads through temperate‐zone Australia appears to have reduced populations of at least four anurophagous predators, facilitated other taxa, and decreased rates of scavenging. Our data identify a paradox: The impacts of cane toads are at least as devastating in southern Australia as in the tropics, yet we know far more about toad invasion in the sparsely populated wilderness areas of tropical Australia than in the densely populated southeastern seaboard.     

Behavioural responses of native predators to an invasive toxic prey species

One important impact of invasive species may be to modify the behaviour of native taxa. For example, the invasion of highly toxic cane toads (Bufo marinus) kills many anurophagous native predators, but other predators learn to recognize and avoid the toxic invader. We exposed native fish (northern trout gudgeons, Mogurnda mogurnda) and Dahl's aquatic frogs (Litoria dahlii) to cane toad tadpoles, then monitored the predator's responses during subsequent trials. Both the frogs and fish initially attacked toad tadpoles, but rapidly learned not to do so. Fish and adult frogs retained their aversion for at least a week, whereas recently metamorphosed frogs did not. Clearly, the spread of cane toads through tropical Australia can modify feeding responses of native aquatic predators. For predators capable of rapid avoidance learning, the primary impact of cane toads may be on foraging behaviour rather than mortality.     

Detecting the impact of invasive species on native fauna: Cane toads (Bufo marinus), frillneck lizards (Chlamydosaurus kingii) and the importance of spatial replication

An understanding of which native species are severely impacted by an anthropogenic change (such as the arrival of an invasive species) and which are not is critical to prioritizing conservation efforts. However, it is difficult to detect such impacts if the native taxa exhibit strong stochastic variations in abundance; a ‘natural’ population decline might be wrongly interpreted as an impact of the invader. Frillneck lizards (Chlamydosaurus kingii) are large iconic Australian agamids, and have been reported to decline following the invasion of toxic cane toads. We monitored three populations of the species in the savanna woodland of tropical Australia over a 7‐year period bracketing toad arrival. One population crashed, one remained stable and one increased. Hence, studies on any single population might have inferred that cane toads have negative, negligible or positive effects on frillneck lizards. With the benefit of spatial replication, and in combination with observations of prey choice by captive lizards, our data suggest that invasive cane toads have had little or no effect on frillneck abundance.     

Adaptation or preadaptation: why are keelback snakes (<Emphasis Type="Italic">Tropidonophis mairii</Emphasis>) less vulnerable to invasive cane toads (<Emphasis Type="Italic">Bufo marinus</Emphasis>) than are other Australian snakes?

Biological invasions can expose native predators to novel prey which may be less nutritious or detrimental to predators. The introduction and subsequent spread of cane toads (Bufo marinus) through Australia has killed many anuran-eating snakes unable to survive the toad’s toxins. However, one native species, the keelback snake (Tropidonophis mairii), is relatively resistant to toad toxins and remains common in toad-infested areas. Is the keelback’s ability to coexist with toads a function of its ancestral Asian origins, or a consequence of rapid adaptation since cane toads arrived in Australia? And does the snake’s feeding preference for frogs rather than toads reflect an innate or learned behaviour? We compared keelback populations long sympatric with toads with a population that has encountered toads only recently. Unlike toad-vulnerable snake species, sympatry with toads has not affected keelback toxin tolerances or feeding responses: T. mairii from toad-sympatric and toad-naïve populations show a similar sensitivity to toad toxin, and a similar innate preference for frogs rather than toads. Feeding responses of neonatal keelbacks demonstrate that learning plays little or no role in the snake’s aversion to toads. Thus, behavioural aversion to B. marinus as prey, and physiological tolerance to toad toxins are pre-existing innate characteristics of Australian keelbacks rather than adaptations to the cane toad’s invasion of Australia. Such traits were most likely inherited from ancestral keelbacks that adapted to the presence of bufonids in Asia. Our results suggest that the impact of invasive species on native taxa may be strongly influenced by the biogeographic histories of the species involved.     

Toad’s tongue for breakfast: exploitation of a novel prey type,the invasive cane toad,by scavenging raptors in tropical Australia

Although interest in the ecological impacts of invasive species has largely focused on negative effects, some native taxa may benefit from invader arrival. In tropical Australia, invasive cane toads (Bufo marinus) have fatally poisoned many native predators (e.g., marsupials, crocodiles, lizards) that attempt to ingest the toxic anurans, but birds appear to be more resistant to toad toxins. We quantified offtake of dead (road-killed) cane toads by raptors (black kites (Milvus migrans) and whistling kites (Haliastur sphenurus)) at a site near Darwin, in the Australian wet-dry tropics. Raptors readily took dead toads, especially small ones, although native frogs were preferred to toads if available. More carcasses were removed in the dry season than the wet season, perhaps reflecting seasonal availability of alternative prey. Raptors appeared to recognize and avoid bufotoxins, and typically removed and consumed only the toads’ tongues (thereby minimizing toxin uptake). The invasion of cane toads thus constitutes a novel prey type for scavenging raptors, rather than (as is the case for many other native predators) a threat to population viability.     

Responses of Australian wading birds to a novel toxic prey type, the invasive cane toad Rhinella marina

The impact of invasive predators on native prey has attracted considerable scientific attention, whereas the reverse situation (invasive species being eaten by native predators) has been less frequently studied. Such interactions might affect invasion success; an invader that is readily consumed by native species may be less likely to flourish in its new range than one that is ignored by those taxa. Invasive cane toads (Rhinella marina) in Australia have fatally poisoned many native predators (e.g., marsupials, crocodiles, lizards) that attempt to ingest the toxic anurans, but birds are more resistant to toad toxins. We quantified prey preferences of four species of wading birds (Nankeen night heron, purple swamphen, pied heron, little egret) in the wild, by offering cane toads and alternative native prey items (total of 279 trays offered, 14 different combinations of prey types). All bird species tested preferred the native prey, avoiding both tadpole and metamorph cane toads. Avoidance of toads was strong enough to reduce foraging on native prey presented in combination with the toads, suggesting that the presence of cane toads could affect predator foraging tactics, and reduce the intensity of predation on native prey species found in association with toads.     

A review of ecological interactions between native frogs and invasive cane toads in Australia

Translocated from their native range in the Americas in 1935, cane toads (Rhinella marina, Bufonidae) have now spread through much of tropical and subtropical Australia. The toad's invasion and impact have attracted detailed study. In this paper, I review information on ecological interactions between cane toads and Australian anurans. The phylogenetic relatedness and ecological similarity between frogs and toads creates opportunities for diverse interactions, ranging from predation to competition to parasite transfer, plus a host of indirect effects mediated via impacts of toads on other species, and by people's attempts to control toads. The most clear‐cut effect of toads on frogs is a positive one: reducing predator pressure by fatally poisoning anuran‐eating varanid lizards. However, toads also have a wide range of other effects on frogs, some positive (e.g. taking up parasites that would otherwise infect native frogs) and others negative (e.g. eating frogs, poisoning frogs, competing with tadpoles). Although information on such mechanisms predicts intense interactions between toads and frogs, field surveys show that cane toad invasion has negligible overall impacts on frog abundance. That counter‐intuitive result is because of a broad balancing of negative and positive impacts, coupled with stochastic (weather‐induced) fluctuations in anuran abundance that overwhelm any impacts of toads. Also, the impacts of toads on frogs differ among frog species and life‐history stages, and depend upon local environmental conditions. The impacts of native frogs on cane toads have attracted much less study, but may well be important: frogs may impose biotic resistance to cane toad colonization, especially via competition in the larval phase. Overall, the interactions between native frogs and invasive toads illustrate the diverse ways in which an invader's arrival can perturb the native fauna by both direct and indirect mechanisms, and by which the native species can curtail an invader's success. These studies also offer a cautionary tale about the difficulty of predicting the impact of an invasive species, even with a clear understanding of mechanisms of direct interaction.     

A trophic cascade initiated by an invasive vertebrate alters the structure of native reptile communities

Invasive vertebrates are frequently reported to have catastrophic effects on the populations of species which they directly impact. It follows then, that if invaders exert strong suppressive effects on some species then other species will indirectly benefit due to ecological release from interactions with directly impacted species. However, evidence that invasive vertebrates trigger such trophic cascades and alter community structure in terrestrial ecosystems remains rare. Here, we ask how the cane toad, a vertebrate invader that is toxic to many of Australia's vertebrate predators, influences lizard assemblages in a semi‐arid rangeland. In our study area, the density of cane toads is influenced by the availability of water accessible to toads. We compared an index of the abundance of sand goannas, a large predatory lizard that is susceptible to poisoning by cane toads and the abundances of four lizard families preyed upon by goannas (skinks, pygopods, agamid lizards and geckos) in areas where cane toads were common or rare. Consistent with the idea that suppression of sand goannas by cane toads initiates a trophic cascade, goanna activity was lower and small lizards were more abundant where toads were common. The hypothesis that suppression of sand goannas by cane toads triggers a trophic cascade was further supported by our findings that small terrestrial lizards that are frequently preyed upon by goannas were more affected by toad abundance than arboreal geckos, which are rarely consumed by goannas. Furthermore, the abundance of at least one genus of terrestrial skinks benefitted from allogenic ecosystem engineering by goannas where toads were rare. Overall, our study provides evidence that the invasion of ecosystems by non‐native species can have important effects on the structure and integrity of native communities extending beyond their often most obvious and frequently documented direct ecological effects.     

A native dasyurid predator (common planigale,Planigale maculata) rapidly learns to avoid a toxic invader

Abstract Interactions between invasive species and native fauna afford a unique opportunity to examine interspecific encounters as they first occur, without the complications introduced by coevolution. In northern Australia, the continuing invasion of the highly toxic cane toad Bufo marinus poses a threat to many frog‐eating predators. Can predators learn to distinguish the novel toxic prey item from native prey (and thus, avoid being poisoned), or are longer‐term genetically based changes to attack behaviour needed before predators can coexist with toads? To predict the short‐term impact of cane toads on native predators, we need to know the proportion of individuals that will attack toads, the proportion surviving the encounter, and whether surviving predators learn to avoid toads. We quantified these traits in a dasyurid (common planigale, Planigale maculata) that inhabits tropical floodplains across northern Australia. Although 90% of naïve planigales attacked cane toads, 83% of these animals survived because they either rejected the toad unharmed, or killed and consumed the prey snout‐first (thereby avoiding the toxin‐laden parotoid glands). Most planigales showed one‐trial learning and subsequently refused to attack cane toads for long time periods (up to 28 days). Toad‐exposed planigales also avoided native frogs for up to 9 days, thereby providing an immediate benefit to native anurans. However, the predators gradually learnt to use chemical cues to discriminate between frogs and toads. Collectively, our results suggest that generalist predators can learn to distinguish and avoid novel toxic prey very rapidly – and hence, that small dasyurid predators can rapidly adapt to the cane toad invasion. Indeed, it may be feasible to teach especially vulnerable predators to avoid cane toads before the toads invade, by deploying low‐toxicity baits that stimulate taste‐aversion learning.     

No signs of Na+/K+‐ATPase adaptations to an invasive exotic toxic prey in native squamate predators

Invasions by exotic toxic prey, like the release of the South American cane toad (Bufo (Rhinella) marinus) to the toad‐free Australian continent in 1935, have been shown to result in massive declines in native predator numbers. Due to minor nucleotide mutations of the Na⁺/K⁺‐ATPase gene most Australian squamate predators are highly susceptible to cane toad toxin. However, in spite of this, predators like yellow‐spotted goannas (Varanus panoptes) and red‐bellied black snakes (Pseudechis porhyriacus) still persist in parts of Queensland where they, in some areas, have co‐existed with cane toads for more than 70 years. Here, we show that the amino acids of the Na⁺/K⁺‐ATPase enzyme in the two species do not provide toad toxin resistance, and hence the two Queensland predators are still highly susceptible to cane toad toxin. Both yellow‐spotted goannas and lace monitors (Varanus varius) have, however, been recorded avoiding feeding on cane toads in areas where they co‐exist with this toxic amphibian. Moreover, both varanids have also been shown to learn to avoid feeding on toads when first subjected to conditioned taste aversion. Such behavioural shifts may therefore explain why yellow‐spotted goannas and red‐bellied black snakes still exist in cane toad infested areas of Queensland. The process appears, however, to be unable to rapidly restore varanid populations to pre‐toad population numbers as even after 10 years of co‐existence with cane toads in the Northern Territory, we see no signs of an increase in yellow‐spotted goanna numbers.     

Spatial and temporal variation in the morphology (and thus, predicted impact) of an invasive species in Australia

The impact of an invasive species is unlikely to be uniform in space or time, due to variation in key traits of the invader (e.g. morphology, physiology, behaviour) as well as in resilience of the local ecosystem. The weak phylogeographic structure typical of an invasive population suggests that much of the variation in an invading taxon is likely to be generated by the environment and recent colonisation history. Here we describe effects of the environment and colonisation history on key morphological traits of an invader (the cane toad Bufo marinus ). These "key traits" (body size and relative toxicity) mediate the impact of toads on Australian native predators, which often die as a consequence of ingesting a fatal dose of toad toxin. Measurements of museum specimens collected over >60 yr from a wide area show that seasonal variation in toad body size (due to seasonal recruitment) effectively swamps much of the spatial variance in this trait. However, relative toxicity of toads showed strong spatial variation and little seasonal variation. Thus, the risk to a native predator ingesting a toad will vary on both spatial and temporal scales. For native predators capable of eating a wide range of toad sizes (e.g. quolls, varanid lizards), seasonal variation in overall toad size will be the most significant predictor of risk. In contrast, gape-limited predators restricted to a specific range of toad sizes (such as snakes) will be most strongly affected by the relative toxicity of toads. Gape-limited predators will thus experience strong spatial variation in risk from toad consumption.     

Interacting impacts of invasive plants and invasive toads on native lizards

The ecological impacts of an invasive species may be reduced by prior invasions if selective pressures imposed by earlier events preadapt the native biota to deal with the newer arrival. In northwestern Australia, invasion of the cane toad (Rhinella marina) kills many native predators if they ingest the highly toxic toads. Remarkably, the toads' defensive toxins (bufadienolides) are chemically similar to those of another invasive species: an ornamental plant from Madagascar, Bryophyllum spp. (Crassulaceae, mother-of-millions). Omnivorous lizards (bluetongue skinks, Tiliqua scincoides) are imperiled by the invasion of toads in northwestern Australia, but conspecifics from other areas of the continent (those where exotic plants were introduced and including areas where toads have yet to invade) are less affected because they exhibit higher physiological tolerance of toad toxins (and also of plant toxins). The willingness of captive bluetongues to consume both toads and these plants and the high correlation in the lizards' sensitivity to toad toxins versus plant toxins suggest that exotic plants may have imposed strong selection on the lizards' physiological tolerance of bufadienolides. As a result, populations of lizards from areas previously exposed to these alien plants may be preadapted to deal with the toxins of the more recent anuran invader.     

Invasive cane toads might initiate cascades of direct and indirect effects in a terrestrial ecosystem

Understanding the impacts that invasive vertebrates have on terrestrial ecosystems extends primarily to invaders’ impacts on species with which they interact directly through mechanisms such as predation, competition and habitat modification. In addition to direct effects, invaders can also initiate ecological cascades via indirect population level effects on species with which they do not directly interact. However, evidence that invasive vertebrates initiate ecological cascades in terrestrial ecosystems remains scarce. Here, we ask whether the invasion of the cane toad, a vertebrate invader that is toxic to many of Australia’s vertebrate predators, has induced ecological cascades in a semi-arid rangeland. We compared activity of a large predatory lizard, the sand-goanna, and abundances of smaller lizards preyed upon by goannas in areas of high toad activity near toads’ dry season refuges and areas of low toad activity distant from toads’ dry season refuges. Consistent with the hypothesis that toad invasion has led to declines of native predators susceptible to poisoning, goanna activity was lower in areas of high toad activity. Consistent with the hypothesis that toad-induced goanna decline lead to increases in abundance the prey of goannas, smaller lizards were more abundant in areas of high toad activity. Structural equation modelling showed a positive correlation between goanna activity and distance from dry season refuge habitats used by toads. The abundances of small lizards was correlated negatively with goanna activity and distance from dry season refuges of toads. Our findings provide support for the notion that invasions by terrestrial vertebrates can trigger ecological cascades.     

Indirect facilitation of a native mesopredator by an invasive species: are cane toads re-shaping tropical riparian communities?

Top predators can suppress mesopredators both by killing them and by motivating changes in their behavior, and there are numerous examples of mesopredator release caused by declines in top predator populations. Demonstrated cases of invasive species triggering such releases among vertebrate trophic linkages (indirect facilitation), however, are rare. The invasive cane toad, Bufo marinus, has caused severe population-level declines in some Australian predators via lethal toxic ingestion. During a long-term study of the direct impacts of cane toads on predatory monitor lizards in tropical Australia, we documented significant, marked increases in annual counts of a mesopredator, the common tree snake (Dendrelaphis punctulatus). Mean snake counts during surveys of 70-km river transects at two sites increased from <1 individual per survey during 2001–2006, to 8–18 per survey in 2007. These increases occurred approximately 3 years following the arrival of cane toads, and 1–3 years after 71–96 % population declines in three species of predatory monitor lizards (Varanus panoptes, V. mertensi, and V. mitchelli). These data suggest a mesopredator release: the dramatic reduction of predatory monitor lizards caused increases in the tree snake by decreasing predation risk. The increases in tree snake counts were not attributable to either abiotic factors, or a trophic subsidy. The severe declines of predatory monitor lizards, coupled with recent evidence of cascading effects on their prey, suggest that cane toads are re-shaping riparian communities in tropical Australia through both direct negative effects and indirect facilitation.     

Do invasive cane toads (Chaunus marinus) compete with Australian frogs (Cyclorana australis)?

Abstract Despite widespread concern about the ecological impacts of invasive species, mechanisms of impact remain poorly understood. Cane toads (Chaunus [Bufo] marinus) were introduced to Queensland in 1935, and have now spread across much of tropical Australia. One plausible impact of toad invasion concerns competition between toads and native frogs, but there has been no previous experimental evaluation of this possibility. We examined interactions between toads and a morphologically similar species of native frog (Cyclorana australis) by manipulating toad and frog densities within large outdoor enclosures beside a floodplain in the wet‐dry tropics of the Northern Territory. Toads differed from frogs significantly in dietary composition and feeding rates, even in comparisons controlling for body‐size differences between these two taxa. Perhaps reflecting the abundant insect biomass, manipulating anuran densities or the presence of the putatively competing species did not influence food intake or dietary composition. However, the presence of toads suppressed activity levels of native frogs. The degree to which the invasion of cane toads influences attributes such as the activity levels, food intake and dietary composition of native frogs warrants further study, but our study suggests that competitive effects are likely to be minor compared with other pathways (such as direct poisoning during ingestion attempts) by which toads can affect frog populations.