Invasive parasites in multiple invasive hosts: the arrival of a new host revives a stalled prior parasite invasion

The success of a biological invasion can depend upon other invasions; and in some cases, an earlier invader may fail to spread until facilitated by a second invader. Our study documents a case whereby an invasive parasite has remained patchily distributed for decades due to the fragmented nature of available hosts; but the recent arrival of a broadly distributed alternative invasive host species provides an opportunity for the parasite to expand its range considerably. At least 20 years ago, endoparasitic pentastomids (Raillietiella frenata) were brought with their native host, the invasive Asian house gecko Hemidactylus frenatus, to the port city of Darwin in tropical Australia. These geckos rarely disperse away from human habitation, restricting the transmission of their parasites to urban environments – and thus, their pentastomids have remained patchily distributed and have only been recorded in scant localities, primarily surrounding Darwin. The recent range expansion of the invasive cane toad Rhinella marina into the Darwin area has provided an alternative host for this pentastomid. Our results show that the cane toad is a competent host for Ra. frenata– toads shed fully embryonated pentastomid eggs in their faeces – and that pentastomids are now common in cane toads near Darwin. Likely reflecting the tendency for the parasite's traditional definitive host (the Asian house gecko) and only known intermediate host (the cockroach) to reside around buildings, we found the prevalence of this parasite follows an urban distribution. Because cane toads are widely distributed through urban and rural habitat and can shed viable pentastomid eggs, the toad invasion is likely to facilitate the parasite's spread across the tropics, into areas (and additional susceptible hosts) that were previously inaccessible to it.     

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.     

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.     

Cane Toads on Cowpats: Commercial Livestock Production Facilitates Toad Invasion in Tropical Australia

Habitat disturbance and the spread of invasive organisms are major threats to biodiversity, but the interactions between these two factors remain poorly understood in many systems. Grazing activities may facilitate the spread of invasive cane toads (Rhinella marina) through tropical Australia by providing year-round access to otherwise-seasonal resources. We quantified the cane toad’s use of cowpats (feces piles) in the field, and conducted experimental trials to assess the potential role of cowpats as sources of prey, water, and warmth for toads. Our field surveys show that cane toads are found on or near cowpats more often than expected by chance. Field-enclosure experiments show that cowpats facilitate toad feeding by providing access to dung beetles. Cowpats also offer moist surfaces that can reduce dehydration rates of toads and are warmer than other nearby substrates. Livestock grazing is the primary form of land use over vast areas of Australia, and pastoral activities may have contributed substantially to the cane toad’s successful invasion of that continent.     

Behavioural flexibility allows an invasive vertebrate to survive in a semi-arid environment

Plasticity or evolution in behavioural responses are key attributes of successful animal invasions. In northern Australia, the invasive cane toad (Rhinella marina) recently invaded semi-arid regions. Here, cane toads endure repeated daily bouts of severe desiccation and thermal stress during the long dry season (April–October). We investigated whether cane toads have shifted their ancestral nocturnal rehydration behaviour to one that exploits water resources during the day. Such a shift in hydration behaviour could increase the fitness of individual toads by reducing exposure to desiccation and thermal stress suffered during the day even within terrestrial shelters. We used a novel method (acoustic tags) to monitor the daily hydration behaviour of 20 toads at two artificial reservoirs on Camfield station, Northern Territory. Remarkably, cane toads visited reservoirs to rehydrate during daylight hours, with peaks in activity between 9.00 and 17.00. This diurnal pattern of rehydration activity contrasts with nocturnal rehydration behaviour exhibited by adult toads in their native geographical range and more mesic parts of Australia. Our results demonstrate that cane toads phase shift a key behaviour to survive in a harsh semi-arid landscape. Behavioural phase shifts have rarely been reported in invasive species but could facilitate ongoing invasion success.     

Fatal attraction: adaptations to prey on native frogs imperil snakes after invasion of toxic toads

Adaptations that enhance fitness in one situation can become liabilities if circumstances change. In tropical Australia, native snake species are vulnerable to the invasion of toxic cane toads. Death adders (Acanthophis praelongus) are ambush foragers that (i) attract vertebrate prey by caudal luring and (ii) handle anuran prey by killing the frog then waiting until the frog''s chemical defences degrade before ingesting it. These tactics render death adders vulnerable to toxic cane toads (Bufo marinus), because toads elicit caudal luring more effectively than do native frogs, and are more readily attracted to the lure. Moreover, the strategy of delaying ingestion of a toad after the strike does not prevent fatal poisoning, because toad toxins (unlike those of native frogs) do not degrade shortly after the prey dies. In our laboratory and field trials, half of the death adders died after ingesting a toad, showing that the specialized predatory behaviours death adders use to capture and process prey render them vulnerable to this novel prey type. The toads'' strong response to caudal luring also renders them less fit than native anurans (which largely ignored the lure): all toads bitten by adders died. Together, these results illustrate the dissonance in behavioural adaptations that can arise following the arrival of invasive species, and reveal the strong selection that occurs when mutually naive species first interact.     

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.     

Origin of the parasites of an invading species,the Australian cane toad (Bufo marinus): are the lungworms Australian or American?

Phylogeographical analyses that identify the geographical origin of parasites in invading species can clarify the parasites' potential for biological control of the invader and the risks posed by the parasite to native species. Our data on nuclear and mitochondrial genetic sequences show that the nematode lungworms (Rhabdias spp.) in invasive Australian populations of cane toads (Bufo marinus) are Rhabdias pseudosphaerocephala, a South American species. We did not find this lungworm species in any Australian frogs sympatric with cane toads, suggesting that the parasite does not attack Australian frogs and hence may offer potential as a biocontrol agent of the toad.     

Cane toads a threat to West Indian wildlife: mortality of Jamaican boas attributable to toad ingestion

The notorious “cane toad” (Bufo marinus) is considered to be one of the 100 worst invasive species in the world. A native of South and Central America, Mexico, and the Rio Grande Valley of the United States, this large toad was intentionally introduced to islands in the Caribbean, and subsequently throughout the southern Pacific, as a biological control agent to combat sugar cane pests. Unfortunately, the primary result of those introductions has been deleterious impacts on native biotas, primarily through competition and predation. More recently, the cane toad has devastated populations of amphibian-eating predators in Australia, through the ingestion of this highly toxic anuran. Elsewhere, however, the impact of the toad on native predators has not been documented. Here we report the first evidence that the cane toad is impacting native predators in other geographic regions. Specifically, we document death due to cane toad poisoning in the endemic and threatened Jamaican boa (Epicrates subflavus). To our knowledge, this is the first report of cane toads causing mortality in naturally occurring predators outside of Australia. Like all members of the genus, B. marinus secretes a powerful bufogenin toxin, which is often fatal if ingested by naïve species that have not co-evolved with Bufo species. Our results should therefore serve as a warning that other endemic predator species in the West Indies and elsewhere may be at risk. Thus, efforts to control the population growth and spread of cane toads may be of even greater conservation concern than previously recognized.     

Toads in the backyard: why do invasive cane toads (Rhinella marina) prefer buildings to bushland?

Like many invasive species, cane toads (Rhinella marina) in Australia concentrate in the disturbed habitats created by human activity, rather than in pristine areas. We surveyed cane toads in the wet–dry tropics of the Northern Territory to assess the abundances, body sizes, sexes, behaviour, hydration state and feeding rates of toads around buildings compared to those in areas remote from buildings, and conducted experimental trials to assess the effects of building-related variables (lights and increased toad densities) on the foraging success of toads. Toads around buildings were smaller than bushland conspecifics, and adult sex-ratios were female-biased. Toads were more sedentary around buildings than in the bush, but their feeding rates (based on direct observations and faeces production post-capture) were similar. That similarity, despite twofold-higher densities of competing toads around building, reflected the strong enhancement of feeding rates due to artificial lights attracting insects (in our experimental trials, a threefold increase regardless of the number of competing toads). Toads collected from around buildings were apparently in better hydric condition. Thus, access to water also may attract toads to buildings. The relative scarcity of adult male toads around buildings likely reflects waterbody-centred reproductive activities, whereas the concentration of females and juveniles around buildings is driven largely by access to the insects attracted by artificial light. We conclude that buildings enhance the persistence of cane toad populations and may facilitate their spread.     

Far from home: responses of an American predator species to an American prey species in a jointly invaded area of Australia

Far from their native ranges in the Americas, two invasive species come into contact in Australian waterbodies. Cane toads (Rhinella marina) fatally poison many anurophagous predators, whereas eastern mosquito fish (Gambusia holbrooki) voraciously consume anuran larvae. As cane toads spread south along Australia’s east coast, they are colonizing areas where mosquito fish are abundant. What happens when these two American invaders encounter each other in Australia? We tested the responses to toad tadpoles of mosquito fish from populations that were sympatric versus allopatric with cane toads. Toad-sympatric fish generally ignored toad tadpoles. Toad-allopatric fish initially consumed a few tadpoles, but rapidly developed an aversion to these toxic prey items. The laboratory-reared progeny of toad-allopatric fishes were more likely to approach toad tadpoles than were the offspring of toad-sympatric fishes, but the two groups learned toad-avoidance at similar rates. Thus, mosquito fish show an innate aversion to cane toad tadpoles (perhaps reflecting coevolution with North American bufonid taxa), as well as an ability to rapidly learn taste-aversion. Our comparisons among populations suggest that several decades of toad-free existence in Australia caused a decline in the fishes’ innate (heritable) aversion to toads, but did not affect the fishes’ capacity to learn toad-avoidance after an initial exposure. Any impact of mosquito fish on cane toads thus is likely to be transitory. The rapid (<100-year) time frame of these shifts (the initial weakening of the fishes’ response during toad-allopatry, and its recovery after secondary contact) emphasizes the dynamic nature of faunal responses during biological invasions, and the interplay between adaptation and phenotypic plasticity.     

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.     

The Interacting Effects of Ungulate Hoofprints and Predatory Native Ants on Metamorph Cane Toads in Tropical Australia

Many invasive species exploit the disturbed habitats created by human activities. Understanding the effects of habitat disturbance on invasion success, and how disturbance interacts with other factors (such as biotic resistance to the invaders from the native fauna) may suggest new ways to reduce invader viability. In tropical Australia, commercial livestock production can facilitate invasion by the cane toad (Rhinella marina), because hoofprints left by cattle and horses around waterbody margins provide distinctive (cool, moist) microhabitats; nevertheless the same microhabitat can inhibit the success of cane toads by increasing the risks of predation or drowning. Metamorph cane toads actively select hoofprints as retreat-sites to escape dangerous thermal and hydric conditions in the surrounding landscape. However, hoofprint geometry is important: in hoofprints with steep sides the young toads are more likely to be attacked by predatory ants (Iridomyrmex reburrus) and are more likely to drown following heavy rain. Thus, anthropogenic changes to the landscape interact with predation by native taxa to affect the ability of cane toads in this vulnerable life-history stage to thrive in the harsh abiotic conditions of tropical Australia.     

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.     

Invasive Cane Toads: Social Facilitation Depends upon an Individual’s Personality

Individual variation in behavioural traits (including responses to social cues) may influence the success of invasive populations. We studied the relationship between sociality and personality in invasive cane toads (Rhinella marina) from a recently established population in tropical Australia. In our field experiments, we manipulated social cues (the presence of a feeding conspecific) near a food source. We captured and compared toads that only approached feeding sites where another toad was already present, with conspecifics that approached unoccupied feeding sites. Subsequent laboratory trials showed correlated personality differences (behavioural syndromes) between these two groups of toads. For example, toads that approached already-occupied rather than unoccupied feeding sites in the field, took longer to emerge from a shelter-site in standardized trials, suggesting these individuals are ‘shy’ (whereas toads that approached unoccupied feeding stations tended to be ‘bold’). Manipulating hunger levels did not abolish this difference. In feeding trials, a bold toad typically outcompeted a shy toad under conditions of low prey availability, but the outcome was reversed when multiple prey items were present. Thus, both personality types may be favored under different circumstances. This invasive population of toads contains individuals that exhibit a range of personalities, hinting at the existence of a wide range of social dynamics in taxa traditionally considered to be asocial.     

Behavioural responses of carnivorous marsupials (Planigale maculata) to toxic invasive cane toads (Bufo marinus)

The arrival of a toxic invasive species may impose selection on local predators to avoid consuming it. Feeding responses may be modified via evolutionary changes to behaviour, or via phenotypic plasticity (e.g. learning, taste aversion). The recent arrival of cane toads (Bufo marinus) in the Northern Territory of Australia induced rapid aversion learning in a predatory marsupial (the common planigale, Planigale maculata). Here, we examine the responses of planigales to cane toads in north‐eastern Queensland, where they have been sympatric for over 60 years, to investigate whether planigale responses to cane toads have been modified by long‐term exposure. Responses to toads were broadly similar to those documented for toad‐naïve predators. Most Queensland planigales seized (21 of 22) and partially consumed (11 of 22) the first toad they were offered, but were likely to ignore toads in subsequent trials. However, unlike their toad‐naïve conspecifics from the Northern Territory, the Queensland planigales all survived ingestion of toad tissue without overt ill effects and continued to attack toads in a substantial proportion of subsequent trials. Our data suggest that (i) learning by these small predators is sufficiently rapid and effective that selection on behaviour has been weak; and (ii) physiological tolerance to toad toxins may be higher in planigales after 60 years (approximately 60 generations) of exposure to this toxic prey.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

An invasive species imposes selection on life‐history traits of a native frog

As well as their direct ecological impacts on native taxa, invasive species can impose selection on phenotypic attributes (morphology, physiology, behaviour, etc.) of the native fauna. In anurans, body size at metamorphosis is a critical life‐history trait: for most challenges faced by post‐metamorphic anurans, larger size at metamorphosis probably enhances survival. However, our studies on Australian frogs (Limnodynastes convexiusculus) show that this pattern can be reversed by the arrival of an invasive species. When metamorph frogs first encounter invasive cane toads (Bufo marinus), they try to eat the toxic invader and, if they are able to do so, are likely to die from poisoning. Because frogs are gape‐limited predators, small metamorphs cannot ingest a toad and thus survive long enough to disperse away from the natal pond (and thus from potentially deadly toads). These data show that larger size at metamorphosis can reduce rather than increase anuran survival rates, because larger metamorphs are more easily able to ingest (and thus be poisoned by) metamorph cane toads. Our results suggest that patterns of selection on life‐history traits of native taxa (such as size and age at metamorphosis, seasonal timing of breeding and duration of pondside aggregation prior to dispersal) can be modified by the arrival of an invasive species. © 2010 The Linnean Society of London, Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 2010, 100 , 329–336.