Hydrobiologia

, Volume 746, Issue 1, pp 255–269 | Cite as

Effects of carbaryl on species interactions of the foothill yellow legged frog (Rana boylii) and the Pacific treefrog (Pseudacris regilla)

INVASIVE SPECIES
  • 261 Downloads

Abstract

Amphibian species worldwide are being confronted with novel anthropogenic stressors such as contaminants and invasive species. While much work has been done to examine these factors individually, less is known about how these stressors might interact. No studies to this point have examined the potentially synergistic impacts between these two stressors on a threatened amphibian species. We present the results from three separate laboratory studies focusing on two species of frogs, the Pacific tree frog (Pseudacris regilla) and a federal species of concern, the foothill yellow legged frog (Rana boylii). These experiments examine the toxicity of an insecticide, carbaryl, on each species, on their competitive interactions, and on their interaction with a non-native crayfish predator (Pacifastacus leniusculus). R. boylii were more susceptible to pesticide exposure than P. regilla and exposure reduced their ability to compete. This differential effect of the pesticide resulted in a remarkable increase in mortality (50%) for R. boylii with an invasive crayfish predator present while P. regilla exhibited no change. These results add to concerns over the utility of single species toxicity tests in determining safe levels for environmental exposure and advocate for the use of multiple species tests that focus on key species interactions.

Keywords

Pesticide Multiple stressors Predation Competition Sub-lethal effects 

References

  1. Bridges, C. M., 1997. Tadpole swimming performance and activity affected by acute exposure to sublethal levels of carbaryl. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 16: 1935–1939.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bridges, C. M., 1999a. Effects of a pesticide on tadpole activity and predator avoidance behavior. Journal of Herpetology 33: 303–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bridges, C. M., 1999b. Predator-prey interactions between two amphibian species: effects of insecticide exposure. Aquatic Ecology 33: 205–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bridges, C. M. & R. D. Semlitsch, 2000. Variation in pesticide tolerance of tadpoles among and within species of Ranidae and patterns of amphibian decline. Conservation Biology 14: 1490–1499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Boone, M. D. & R. D. Semlitsch, 2001. Interactions of an insecticide with larval density and predation in experimental amphibian communities. Conservation Biology 15: 228–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Boone, M. D., R. D. Semlitsch, J. F. Fairchild & B. B. Rothermel, 2004. Effects of an insecticide on amphibians in large-scale experimental ponds. Ecological Applications 14: 685–691.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bulen, B. J. & C. A. Distel, 2011. Carbaryl concentration gradients in realistic environments and their influence on our understanding of the tadpole food web. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 60: 343–350.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brown, J. R., T. Miiller & J. L. Kerby, 2013. The interactive effect of an emerging infectious disease and an emerging contaminant on Woodhouse’s toad (Anaxyrus woodhousii) tadpoles. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 32: 2003–2008.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Caro, T., J. Eadie & A. Sih, 2005. Use of substitute species in conservation biology. Conservation Biology 19: 1821–1826.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Collins, J. P. & A. Storfer, 2004. Global amphibian declines: Sorting the hypotheses. Diversity and Distributions 9: 89–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Datta, S., L. Hansen, L. McConnell, J. Baker, J. Lenoir & J. N. Seiber, 1998. Pesticides and PCB contaminants in fish and tadpoles from the Kaweah River Basin, California. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 60: 829–836.Google Scholar
  12. Davidson, C., 2004. Declining downwind: Amphibian population declines in California and historical pesticide use. Ecological Applications 14: 1892–1902.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Davidson, C., H. B. Shaffer & M. R. Jennings, 2002. Spatial tests of the pesticide drift, habitat destruction, UV-B, and climate-change hypotheses for California amphibian declines. Conservation Biology 16: 1588–1601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Distel, C. A. & M. D. Boone, 2011. Insecticide has asymmetric effects on two tadpole species despite priority effects. Ecotoxicology 20: 875–884.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dodson, S. I., T. Hanazato & P. R. Gorski, 1995. Behavioral responses of Daphnia pulex exposed to carbaryl and Chaoborus kairomone. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 14: 43–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gamradt, S. & L. B. Kats, 1995. Effect of introduced crayfish and mosquitofish on California newts. Conservation Biology 10: 1155–1162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gherardi, F., 2006. Crayfish invading Europe: the case study of Procambarus clarkii. Marine and Freshwater Behaviour and Physiology 39: 175–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gosner, K., 1960. A simplified table for staging anuran embryos and larvae with notes on identification. Herpetelogica 16: 183–190.Google Scholar
  19. Hopkins, W. A., 2007. Amphibians as models for studying environmental change. ILAR Journal 48: 270–277.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kats, L. & R. P. Ferrer, 2003. Alien predators and amphibian declines: review of two decades of science and the transition to conservation. Diversity and Distributions 9: 99–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kerby, J. L. & L. B. Kats, 1998. Modified interactions between salamander life stages caused by wildfire-induced sedimentation. Ecology 79: 740–745.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kerby, J. L. & A. Storfer, 2009. Combined effects of atrazine and chlorpyrifos on susceptibility of the Tiger Salamander to Ambystoma tigrinum virus. Ecohealth 6: 91–98.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kerby, J., S. Riley, P. Wilson & L. B. Kats, 2005. Barriers and flow as limiting factors in the spread of an invasive crayfish (Procambarus clarkii) in southern California streams. Biological Conservation 126: 402–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kerby, J. L., K. Richards-Hrdlicka, A. Storfer & D. Skelly, 2010. An examination of amphibian sensitivity to environmental contaminants: Are amphibians poor canaries? Ecology Letters 13: 60–67.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kerby, J. L., A. Wehrmann & A. Sih, 2012. Impacts of the insecticide diazinon on the behavior of predatory fish and amphibian prey. Journal of Herpetology 46: 171–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kupferberg, S., 1997. Bullfrog (Rana catesbeiana) invasion of a California river: the role of larval competition. Ecology 78: 1736–1751.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Little, E. E., R. D. Archeski, B. A. Flerov & V. I. Kozlovskaya, 1990. Behavioral indicators of sublethal toxicity in rainbow trout. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 19: 380–385.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Luttbeg, B. & J. L. Kerby, 2005. Are scared prey as good as dead? Trends in Ecology and Evolution 20: 416–418.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Nakata, K., K. Tsutsumi, T. Kawai & S. Goshima, 2005. Coexistence of two North American invasive crayfish species, Pacifastacus leniusculus (Dana, 1852) and Procambarus clarkii (Girard, 1852) in Japan. Crustaceana 78: 1389–1394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Norris, L. A., H. W. Lorz, and S. Z. Gregory. 1983. Influence of forest and range land management on anadramous fish habitat in western North America: forest chemicals. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report PNW-149.Google Scholar
  31. Pintor, L. M., A. Sih & J. L. Kerby, 2009. Behavioral correlations provide a mechanism for explaining high invader densities and increased impacts on native prey. Ecology 90: 581–587.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Preisser, E. L., D. I. Bolnick & M. F. Benard, 2005. Scared to death? The effects of intimidation and consumption in predator-prey interactions. Ecology 86: 501–509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Relyea, R. A., 2003. Predator cues and pesticides: a double dose of danger for amphibians. Ecological Applications 13: 1515–1521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Relyea, R. A., 2004. Growth and survival of five amphibian species exposed to combinations of pesticides. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 23: 1737–1742.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Relyea, R. A. & J. T. Hoverman, 2006. Assessing the ecology in ecotoxicology: a review and synthesis in freshwater systems. Ecology Letters 9: 1157–1171.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Relyea, R. A. & N. Mills, 2001. Predator-induced stress makes the pesticide carbaryl more deadly to gray treefrog tadpoles (Hyla versicolor). Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 98: 2491–2496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Rohr, J., J. Kerby & A. Sih, 2006. Community ecology as a framework for predicting contaminant effects. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 21: 607–613.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Schmitz, O. J., A. P. Beckerman & K. M. O’Brien, 1997. Behaviorally mediated trophic cascades: effects of predation risk on food web interactions. Ecology 78: 1388–1399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Sih, A., A. M. Bell & J. L. Kerby, 2004. Two stressors are far deadlier than one. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 19: 274–276.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Sparling, D. W., G. M. Fellers & L. L. McConnell, 2001. Pesticides and amphibian population declines in California, USA. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 7: 1591–1595.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Sparling, D. W. & G. M. Fellers, 2009. Toxicity of two insecticides to california, USA, anurans and its relevance to declining amphibian populations. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 28: 1696–1703.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Stuart, S. N., J. S. Chanson, N. A. Cox, B. E. Young, A. S. L. Rodrigues, D. L. Fischman & R. W. Waller, 2004. Status and trends of amphibian declines and extinctions worldwide. Science 5702: 1783–1786.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Weltje, L., P. Simpson, M. Gross, M. Crane & J. R. Wheeler, 2013. Comparative acute and chronic sensitivity of fish and amphibians: a critical review of data. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 32: 984–994.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Werner, E. E., 1991. Nonlethal effects of a predator on competitive interactions between two anuran larvae. Ecology 72: 1709–1720.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Werner, E. E. & B. R. Anholt, 1997. Predator-induced behavioral indirect effects: consequences to competitive interactions in anuran larvae. Ecology 77: 157–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Biology DepartmentUniversity of South DakotaVermillionUSA
  2. 2.Environmental Science and PolicyUniversity of CaliforniaDavisUSA

Personalised recommendations