Native Australian frogs avoid the scent of invasive cane toads

Invasive species can affect the ecosystems they colonize by modifying the behaviour of native taxa; for example, avoidance of chemical cues from the invader may modify habitat use (shelter site selection) by native species. In laboratory trials, we show that metamorphs of most (but not all) native frog species on a tropical Australian floodplain avoid the scent of invasive cane toads (Bufo marinus Linnaeus 1758). Cane toads also avoid conspecific scent. This response might reduce vulnerability of metamorph frogs and toads to larger predatory toads. However, similar avoidance of one type of pungency control (garlic), and the presence of this avoidance behaviour in frogs at the toad invasion front (and hence, with no prior exposure to toads), suggest that this may not be an evolved toad‐specific response. Instead, our data support the simpler hypothesis that the metamorph anurans tend to avoid shelter sites that contain strong and unfamiliar scents. Temporal and spatial differences in activity of frogs versus toads, plus the abundance of suitable retreat sites during the wet season (the primary time of frog activity), suggest that avoiding toad scent will have only a minor impact on the behaviour of native frogs. However, this behavioural impact may be important when environmental conditions bring toads and frogs into closer contact.     

Larger Body Size at Metamorphosis Enhances Survival,Growth and Performance of Young Cane Toads (Rhinella marina)

Body size at metamorphosis is a key trait in species (such as many anurans) with biphasic life-histories. Experimental studies have shown that metamorph size is highly plastic, depending upon larval density and environmental conditions (e.g. temperature, food supply, water quality, chemical cues from conspecifics, predators and competitors). To test the hypothesis that this developmental plasticity is adaptive, or to determine if inducing plasticity can be used to control an invasive species, we need to know whether or not a metamorphosing anuran’s body size influences its subsequent viability. For logistical reasons, there are few data on this topic under field conditions. We studied cane toads (Rhinella marina) within their invasive Australian range. Metamorph body size is highly plastic in this species, and our laboratory studies showed that larger metamorphs had better locomotor performance (both on land and in the water), and were more adept at catching and consuming prey. In mark-recapture trials in outdoor enclosures, larger body size enhanced metamorph survival and growth rate under some seasonal conditions. Larger metamorphs maintained their size advantage over smaller siblings for at least a month. Our data support the critical but rarely-tested assumption that all else being equal, larger body size at metamorphosis is likely to enhance an individual’s long term viability. Thus, manipulations to reduce body size at metamorphosis in cane toads may help to reduce the ecological impact of this invasive species.     

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.     

Competing tadpoles: Australian native frogs affect invasive cane toads (Rhinella marina) in natural waterbodies

The cane toad (Rhinella marina) is one of the most successful invasive species worldwide, and has caused significant negative impacts on Australian fauna. Experimental work in the laboratory and in mesocosms has shown that tadpoles of native frogs can affect survival, size at metamorphosis and duration of larval period of cane toad tadpoles. To test if these effects occur in nature, we conducted a field experiment using two temporary ponds where we set up enclosures with tadpoles of native green tree frogs (Litoria caerulea) and cane toads in treatments with a range of densities and combinations. The presence of green tree frog tadpoles significantly decreased the growth rate of toad tadpoles and increased the duration of their larval period in both ponds; in one pond, frog tadpoles also significantly reduced the body length and mass of metamorph toads. Toad tadpoles did not have any significant negative effects on green tree frog tadpoles, but there was strong intraspecific competition within the latter species: increased frog tadpole density resulted in increased larval period and reduced survival, growth rate and size at metamorphosis for frogs at one or both ponds. Our results are encouraging for the possibility of using native frogs as one component of an integrated approach to the biological control of cane toads.     

Abiotic and biotic influences on the dispersal behavior of metamorph cane toads (Bufo marinus) in tropical Australia

A mechanistic understanding of factors influencing the dispersal behavior of metamorph cane toads (Bufo marinus) has direct conservation relevance in Australia. These invasive anurans are toxic to native predators, and if we can predict their distribution across the landscape, we can also predict (and perhaps, manage) the scale of their impact. We propose that the major drivers of metamorph distribution are the risk of dehydration (restricting the young toads to moist substrates near pond margins) and biotic advantages to dispersal away from the pond (especially, less risk of cannibalism). To test this model, we investigated the influence of abiotic and biotic cues on the behavior of individual toads in the laboratory. Substrate moisture levels strongly influenced metamorph activity levels and habitat selection: dry substrates induced most metamorphs to remain near water. The only biotic cue to influence metamorph dispersal was proximity of a larger (cannibalistic) conspecific; a cannibal's presence at the pond margin caused most metamorphs to spend less time there, and as a consequence, to dehydrate more rapidly. Our results suggest that the spatial and temporal distribution of metamorph cane toads reflects a trade-off between competing risks: the danger of desiccation tends to keep young toads close to the pond margin in dry conditions, whereas the danger of cannibalism stimulates dispersal.     

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.     

Impact of the invasive cane toad (Bufo marinus) on an Australian frog (Opisthodon ornatus) depends on minor variation in reproductive timing

Invasive species are widely viewed as unmitigated ecological catastrophes, but the reality is more complex. Theoretically, invasive species could have negligible or even positive effects if they sufficiently reduce the intensity of processes regulating native populations. Understanding such mechanisms is crucial to predicting ultimate ecological impacts. We used a mesocosm experiment to quantify the impact of eggs and larvae of the introduced cane toad (Bufo marinus) on fitness-related traits (number, size and time of emergence of metamorphs) of a native Australian frog species (Opisthodon ornatus). The results depended upon the timing of oviposition of the two taxa, and hence the life-history stages that came into contact. Growth and survival of O. ornatus tadpoles were enhanced when they preceded B. marinus tadpoles into ponds, and reduced when they followed B. marinus tadpoles into ponds, relative to when tadpoles of both species were added to ponds simultaneously. The dominant tadpole-tadpole interaction is competition, and the results are consistent with competitive priority effects. However, these priority effects were reduced or reversed when O. ornatus tadpoles encountered B. marinus eggs. Predation on toxic toad eggs reduced the survival of O. ornatus and B. marinus. The consequent reduction in tadpole densities allowed the remaining O. ornatus tadpoles to grow more rapidly and to metamorphose at larger body sizes (>60% disparity in mean mass). Thus, exposure to B. marinus eggs reduced the number of O. ornatus metamorphs, but increased their body sizes. If the increased size at metamorphosis more than compensates for the reduced survival, the effective reproductive output of native anurans may be increased rather than decreased by the invasive toad. Minor interspecific differences in the seasonal timing of oviposition thus have the potential to massively alter the impact of invasive cane toads on native anurans.     

Behavioural tactics used by invasive cane toads (Rhinella marina) to exploit apiaries in Australia

Behavioural flexibility plays a key role in facilitating the ability of invasive species to exploit anthropogenically‐created resources. In Australia, invasive cane toads (Rhinella marina) often gather around commercial beehives (apiaries), whereas native frogs do not. To document how toads use this resource, we spool‐tracked cane toads in areas containing beehives and in adjacent natural habitat without beehives, conducted standardized observations of toad feeding behaviour, and ran prey‐manipulation trials to compare the responses of cane toads versus native frogs to honeybees as potential prey. Toads feeding around beehives travelled shorter distances per night, and hence used different microhabitats, than did toads from nearby control sites without beehives. The toads consumed live bees from the hive entrance (rather than dead bees from the ground), often climbing on top of one another to gain access to the hive entrance. Prey manipulation trials confirm that bee movement is the critical stimulus that elicits the toads’ feeding response; and in standardized trials, native frogs consumed bees less frequently than did toads. In summary, cane toads flexibly modify their movements, foraging behaviour and dietary composition to exploit the nutritional opportunities created by commercial beehives, whereas native anurans do not.     

Ecological impacts of invading species: Do parasites of the cane toad imperil Australian frogs?

Parasite transfer to native fauna is a potentially catastrophic impact of invasive species. Introduced cane toads in Australia frequently host the nematode lungworm Rhabdias pseudosphaerocephala, which reduces viability of metamorph toads. If native frogs are vulnerable to this South American parasite, cane toad invasion may affect native species via this route; but if the native taxa are not vulnerable, we may be able to exploit the parasites for managing toads. Our laboratory experiments show that infective larvae can penetrate the body of all seven species of Australian frogs (five hylids: Cyclorana longipes, Litoria caerulea, Litoria dahlii, Litoria nasuta, Litoria rothii, one myobatrachid: Opisthodon ornatus, and one limnodynastid: Limnodynastes convexiusculus) we tested, but most did not host the adult worms at the end of the trials, and none showed major impairment of growth, survival or locomotor performance. One native tree‐frog (L. caerulea) retained high infection levels with few ill effects, suggesting that we might be able to use this taxon as a reservoir species to build up local parasite densities for toad management. However, the interspecific variation in lungworm retention suggests that generalizations about parasite effects on native frogs will be elusive.     

Effects of an invasive species on refuge‐site selection by native fauna: The impact of cane toads on native frogs in the Australian tropics

Invasive species can induce shifts in habitat use by native taxa: either by modifying habitat availability, or by repelling or attracting native species to the vicinity of the invader. The ongoing invasion of cane toads (Rhinella marina) through tropical Australia might affect native frogs by affecting refuge‐site availability, because both frogs and toads frequently shelter by day in burrows. Our laboratory and field studies in the wet‐dry tropics show that native frogs of at least three species (Litoria tornieri, Litoria nasuta and Litoria dahlii) preferentially aggregate with conspecifics, and with (some) other species of native frogs. However, the frogs rarely aggregated with cane toads either in outdoor arenas or in standardized experimental burrows that we monitored in the field. The native frogs that we tested either avoided burrows containing cane toads (or cane toad scent) or else ignored the stimulus (i.e. treated such a burrow in the same way as they did an empty burrow). Native frogs selected a highly non‐random suite of burrows as diurnal retreat sites, whereas cane toads were less selective. Hence, even in the absence of toads, frogs do not use many of the burrows that are suitable for toads. The invasion of cane toads through tropical Australia is unlikely to have had a major impact on retreat‐site availability for native frogs.     

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.     

Factors affecting the vulnerability of cane toads (Bufo marinus) to predation by ants

Experimental evidence on the determinants of prey vulnerability is scarce, especially for vertebrates in the field. Invasive species offer robust opportunities to explore prey vulnerability, because the intensity of predation on or by such animals has not been eroded by coevolution. Around waterbodies in tropical Australia, native meat ants (Iridomyrmex reburrus) consume many metamorph cane toads (Bufo marinus, an invasive anuran). We document the determinants of toad vulnerability, especially the roles of toad body size and ant density. Larger metamorphs were attacked sooner (because they attracted more ants), but escaped more often. Overall, smaller toads were more likely to be killed. Ant densities influenced toad responses, as well as attack rate and success. Data on the immediate outcomes of attacks underestimate mortality: more than 73% of apparent ‘escapees’ died within 24 h. Because mortality during this period was independent of toad size, predation was less size selective than suggested by immediate outcomes. © 2010 The Linnean Society of London, Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 2010, 99 , 738–751.     

Quantifying Anuran Microhabitat Use to Infer the Potential for Parasite Transmission between Invasive Cane Toads and Two Species of Australian Native Frogs

Parasites that are carried by invasive species can infect native taxa, with devastating consequences. In Australia, invading cane toads (Rhinella marina) carry lungworm parasites (Rhabdias pseudosphaerocephala) that (based on previous laboratory studies) can infect native treefrogs (Litoria caerulea and L. splendida). To assess the potential of parasite transmission from the invader to the native species (and from one infected native frog to another), we used surveys and radiotelemetry to quantify anuran microhabitat use, and proximity to other anurans, in two sites in tropical Australia. Unsurprisingly, treefrogs spent much of their time off the ground (especially by day, and in undisturbed forests) but terrestrial activity was common at night (especially in anthropogenically modified habitats). Microhabitat overlap between cane toads and frogs was generally low, except at night in disturbed areas, whereas overlap between the two frog species was high. The situations of highest overlap, and hence with the greatest danger of parasite transmission, involve aggregations of frogs within crevices by day, and use of open ground by all three anuran species at night. Overall, microhabitat divergence between toads and frogs should reduce, but not eliminate, the transmission of lungworms from invasive toads to vulnerable native frogs.     

Sex and age differences in habitat use by invasive cane toads (Rhinella marina) and a native anuran (Cyclorana australis) in the Australian wet–dry tropics

Although generalized habitat use may contribute to the success of invasive taxa, even species that are typically described as habitat generalists exhibit non‐random patterns of habitat use. We measured abiotic and biotic factors in 42 plots (each 100 × 10 m) along a 4.2‐km long unpaved road in tropical Australia, at a site that had been invaded by cane toads (Rhinella marina Bufonidae) seven years previously. We also counted anurans at night in each of these plots on 103 nights during the tropical wet season, over a five‐year period, beginning soon after the initial toad invasion. Spatial distributions differed significantly among adult male toads (n = 1047), adult female toads (n = 1222), juvenile toads (n = 342) and native frogs (Cyclorana australis Hylidae, n = 234). Adult male toads were closely associated with water bodies used as calling and/or spawning sites, whereas adult female toads and native frogs were most commonly encountered in drier forested areas on sloping ground. Juvenile toads used the margins of the floodplain more than conspecific adults did, but the floodplain itself was rarely used. Understanding which components of the habitat are most important to specific age and sex classes within a population, or how invasive species differ from native species in this respect, can clarify issues such as the spatial and temporal location of ecological impact by an invader, and the most effective places for control of the invader with minimal collateral effects on the native biota.     

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.     

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.     

Frogs in the spotlight: a 16‐year survey of native frogs and invasive toads on a floodplain in tropical Australia

Although widespread declines in anuran populations have attracted considerable concern, the stochastic demographics of these animals make it difficult to detect consistent trends against a background of spatial and temporal variation. To identify long‐term trends, we need datasets gathered over long time periods, especially from tropical areas where anuran biodiversity is highest. We conducted road surveys of four anurans in the Australian wet–dry tropics on 4637 nights over a 16‐year period. Our surveys spanned the arrival of invasive cane toads (Rhinella marina), allowing us to assess the invader's impact on native anuran populations. Our counts demonstrate abrupt and asynchronous shifts in abundance and species composition from one year to the next, not clearly linked to rainfall patterns. Typically, periods of decline in numbers of a species were limited to 1–2 years and were followed by 1‐ to 2‐year periods of increase. No taxa showed consistent declines over time, although trajectories for some species showed significant perturbations coincident with the arrival of toads. None of the four focal frog species was less common at the end of the study than at the beginning, and three of the species reached peak abundances after toad arrival. Survey counts of cane toads increased rapidly during the initial stage of invasion but have subsequently declined and fluctuated. Distinguishing consistent declines versus stochastic fluctuations in anuran populations requires extensive time‐series analysis, coupled with an understanding of the shifts expected under local climatic conditions. This is especially pertinent when assessing impacts of specific perturbations such as invasive species.     

Effects of an invasive anuran [the cane toad (Bufo marinus)] on the invertebrate fauna of a tropical Australian floodplain

The ways in which invasive organisms influence native ecosystems remain poorly understood. For example, feral cane toads Bufo marinus have spread extensively through tropical Australia over the last 70 years, but assessments of their ecological impact remain largely anecdotal. We conducted experimental trials to examine the effect of cane toad presence on invertebrate fauna in relatively small (2.4 × 1.2 m) outdoor enclosures on a floodplain near Darwin in the wet–dry tropics. Toads significantly reduced invertebrate abundance and species richness, but only to about the same degree as did an equivalent biomass of native anurans. Thus, if toads simply replaced native anurans, the offtake of invertebrates might not be substantially different from that due to native anurans before toad invasion. However, our field surveys suggest that toads cause a massive (fourfold) increase in total amphibian biomass. The end result is that cane toads act as a massive nutrient sink in the floodplain ecosystem because they consume vast numbers of invertebrates but (unlike native frogs) are largely invulnerable to predation by frog-eating predators.     

Foraging Responses of the Larvae of Invasive Bullfrogs(Lithobates catesbeianus): Possible Implications for Bullfrog Control and Ecological Impact in China

The predatory behavior of invasive species can affect their ecological impact, and offer opportunities for targeted control. In Australia, tadpoles of invasive cane toads(Rhinella marina) do not consume eggs of native anurans, but are strongly attracted to(and consume) newly-laid eggs of conspecifics; chemical cues from such eggs(or adult secretions) thus can be used to attract toad tadpoles to traps. Do other invasive anurans show similar selectivity? Our laboratory trials on a Chinese population of invasive American bullfrogs(Lithobates catesbeianus) revealed similar behaviors as exhibited by Australian cane toads. Bullfrog tadpoles rarely consumed the eggs of native anurans, but were attracted to both bullfrog eggs and bullfrog skin secretions. Although the attraction response was less intense in bullfrogs than in cane toads, it might nonetheless enable selective removal of bullfrog tadpoles from invaded sites.