The cane toad's (Chaunus [Bufo] marinus) increasing ability to invade Australia is revealed by a dynamically updated range model

Invasive species threaten biological diversity throughout the world. Understanding the dynamics of their spread is critical to mitigating this threat. In Australia, efforts are underway to control the invasive cane toad (Chaunus [Bufo] marinus). Range models based on their native bioclimatic envelope suggest that the cane toad is nearing the end of its invasion phase. However, such models assume a conserved niche between native and invaded regions and the absence of evolution to novel habitats. Here, we develop a dynamically updated statistical model to predict the growing extent of cane toad range based on their current distribution in Australia. Results demonstrate that Australian cane toads may already have the ability to spread across an area that almost doubles their current range and that triples projections based on their native distribution. Most of the expansion in suitable habitat area has occurred in the last decade and in regions characterized by high temperatures. Increasing use of extreme habitats may indicate that novel ecological conditions have facilitated a broader realized niche or that toad populations at the invasion front have evolved greater tolerance to extreme abiotic conditions. Rapid evolution to novel habitats combined with ecological release from native enemies may explain why some species become highly successful global invaders. Predicting species ranges following invasion or climate change may often require dynamically updated range models that incorporate a broader realization of niches in the absence of natural enemies and evolution in response to novel habitats.     

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.     

Interacting biocontrol programmes: invasive cane toads reduce rates of breakdown of cowpats by dung beetles

Ecological interactions among invasive species can affect not only the success of the invaders, but also their impact on ecosystems in the invaded range. In Australia, both dung beetles (subfamily Scarabaeinae) and cane toads (Rhinella marina) were introduced for biocontrol: the beetles to break down bovine faeces piles (cowpats) that otherwise accumulate and reduce pasture productivity, and the cane toad to consume scarab beetles that eat sugarcane and thus reduce sugar production. The dung beetles have been a success, whereas the toads have been a failure. Our experimental studies show that as well as impacting native fauna directly, cane toads reduce the rate of cowpat breakdown by consuming dung beetles. In the laboratory, dehydrated toads actively sought out cowpats based on scent cues, and in field enclosures, the presence of a cane toad significantly reduced rates of cowpat decomposition. Although toads have benefited from agricultural activities, their spread across Australia likely has reduced the effectiveness of one of the most successful biocontrol programmes ever conducted in that continent.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

Behavioural responses of reptile predators to invasive cane toads in tropical Australia

The ecological impact of an invasive species can depend on the behavioural responses of native fauna to the invader. For example, the greatest risk posed by invasive cane toads (Rhinella marina Bufonidae) in tropical Australia is lethal poisoning of predators that attempt to eat a toad; and thus, a predator's response to a toad determines its vulnerability. We conducted standardized laboratory trials on recently captured (toad‐naïve) predatory snakes and lizards, in advance of the toad invasion front as it progressed through tropical Australia. Responses to a live edible‐sized toad differed strongly among squamate species. We recorded attacks (and hence, predator mortality) in scincid, agamid and varanid lizards, and in elapid, colubrid and pythonid snakes. Larger‐bodied predators were at greater risk, and some groups (elapid snakes and varanid lizards) were especially vulnerable. However, feeding responses differed among species within families and within genera. Some taxa (notably, many scincid and agamid lizards) do not attack toads; and many colubrid snakes either do not consume toads, or are physiologically resistant to the toad's toxins. Intraspecific variation in responses means that even in taxa that apparently are unaffected by toad invasion at the population level, some individual predators nonetheless may be fatally poisoned by invasive cane toads.     

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.     

Foraging responses of predators to novel toxic prey: effects of predator learning and relative prey abundance

Learning to avoid toxic prey items may aid native predators to survive the invasion of highly toxic species, such as cane toads Bufo marinus in tropical Australia. If the predators’ initial aversion is generalized, native prey that resemble the toxic invader may receive a benefit through accidental mimicry. What ecological factors influence the acquisition of learned avoidance (and hence, the impact of invasion on both predators and native prey)? We conducted laboratory experiments to evaluate how the relative abundance of toad tadpoles compared to palatable native tadpoles (Litoria caerulea and L. rubella) affected the ability of native aquatic predators to discriminate between these two prey types. Both fish (northern trout gudgeon, Mogurnda mogurnda) and frogs (Dahl's aquatic frog, Litoria dahlii) learned to discriminate between toads and frogs within an eight‐day period. Higher abundance of toad tadpoles relative to frog tadpoles enhanced rates of predator learning, and thus reduced predation on toads and increased predation on native tadpoles. In the field, spatial and temporal variation in the relative abundance of cane toads compared to native frogs may influence the rates at which these novel toxic items are deleted from predator diets, and the duration of predator protection afforded to natives that resemble the invader.     

Exploiting intraspecific competitive mechanisms to control invasive cane toads (Rhinella marina)

If invasive species use chemical weapons to suppress the viability of conspecifics, we may be able to exploit those species-specific chemical cues for selective control of the invader. Cane toads (Rhinella marina) are spreading through tropical Australia, with negative effects on native species. The tadpoles of cane toads eliminate intraspecific competitors by locating and consuming newly laid eggs. Our laboratory trials show that tadpoles find those eggs by searching for the powerful bufadienolide toxins (especially, bufogenins) that toads use to deter predators. Using those toxins as bait, funnel-traps placed in natural waterbodies achieved near-complete eradication of cane toad tadpoles with minimal collateral damage (because most native (non-target) species are repelled by the toads' toxins). More generally, communication systems that have evolved for intraspecific conflict provide novel opportunities for invasive-species control.     

Microbial biotransformation as a source of chemical diversity in cane toad steroid toxins

The cane toad is an invasive pest that is rapidly colonising northern Australia. The cane toad parotoid gland secretes cardiotoxic steroids (bufadienolides) that are poisoning native predator species. This study reveals bufadienolide diversity within the secretions of Australian cane toads is different to cane toads from overseas, being far more structurally diverse than previously assumed. It is proposed that this variation is mediated by in situ bacterial biotransformation.     

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 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.