ian murray - tucson herpetological society€¦ · for over 25 years his field work has included...

SONORAN HERPETOLOGIST 32 (1) 2019 1

Volume 25 Number 1January 2012

F U T U R E S P E A K E R S

17 April 2019—Ted Papenfuss: Herping with the Taliban in Afghanistan

15 May 2019—Howard Byrne: Arizona-Sonora Desert Museum

C U R R E N T R E S E A R C H

2 “A conservation checklist of the amphibians and reptiles of Sonora, Mexico, with updated species lists” by Julio A. Lemos-Espinal, Geoffrey R. Smith, James C. Rorabaugh

R E S E A R C H A R T I C L E S

3 “Notes on Reproduction of Green Toads, Anaxyrus debilis (Anura: Bufonidae), from New Mexico” by Stephen R. Goldberg

5 “Diet of the Lacertid Lizard Psammodromus algirus in North Tunisia” by Zakher Bouragaoui, Wael Ben Aba, and Said Nouira

B O O K R E V I E W

8 “Galápagos: Life in Motion” by Howard Clark, Jr.

L O C A L R E S E A R C H P R O G R E S S U P D A T E

9 “Rural Road Usage by Herpetofauna of the Southern Sonoran Desert Ecoregion” by Brian R. Blais, Andrew Antaya, Colin W. Brocka, and Corey J. Shaw

Number 1March 2019Volume 32

Ian Murray Chasing Lizards in the Namib Desert:

Insights into the Ecology of Sand Lizards and Day Geckos

6:00 PM; Wednesday, 20 March 2019

Ward 3 Office Conference Room, 1510 E Grant Rd, Tucson, AZ

Ian has been a conservation biologist work-ing for Pima County’s ecological monitoring program for over three years. At Pima County his responsibilities cover a variety of species from pygmy owls to talussnails to leopard frogs. Ian loves living in, working in, and learning about the Sonoran Desert and con-siders himself lucky to be able to be a part of ensuring sound stewardship of our landscapes and the species they contain.

He received his B.S. in biology from New Mexico State University and his Ph.D. from the University of New Mexico. At the University of New Mexico, his work focused

ISSN 2333-8075 (online) • 2577-9370 (print)

Ian Murray with African Helmeted Turtle (Pelomedusa subrufa), South Africa. Photo by Hilary Lease.

on the physiological ecology of small mam-mals, desert box turtles, and desert tortoises. He spent three years doing a postdoctoral fellowship at the University of Witwatersrand in Johannesburg, South Africa, where he studied several species of lizards in Namibia’s Namib Desert.

He will highlight some of the work that he did covering the ecological energetics of several species of Namib Desert lizards, including sand lizards and Namib day geckos (i.e., Rhoptropus, Meroles, and Pedioplanis). This includes information on the activity patterns, foraging ecology, thermoregulation, and energy budgets of these lizard species.

T H I S M O N T H ’ S P R O G R A M


Ted Papenfuss Museum of Vertebrate Zoology—University of California at Berkeley

Herping with the Taliban in Afghanistan

6:00 PM; Wednesday, 17 April 2019

Ward 3 Office Conference Room, 1510 E Grant Rd, Tucson, AZ

Ted is a research herpetologist at the Museum of Vertebrate Zoology. For over 25 years his field work has included expeditions to arid regions in West Asia, the Middle East, the Arabian Peninsula, and the Horn of Africa in Somalia and Eritrea. He tries to visit historic type localities to collect fresh specimens and tissues for DNA and morphological studies of amphib-ians an reptiles from these countries.

In the year 2000 he contacted the Taliban rulers of Afghanistan and asked them if he could come to

Afghanistan to “catch some lizards”. Ted was surprised how willing the Taliban leadership was to have him “come catch lizards”.

It took several months for the Taliban to arrange the trip. He was met at the Pakistan border town Quetta, smuggled across the border and driven to the Taliban stronghold of Kandahar, Afghanistan.

Osama bin Laden was living in Kandahar at the same time Ted was there, but due to conflicting schedules they never met.

Ted Papenfuss with the Taliban on a camping trip. Photo courtesy Ted Papenfuss.

Ted is a research herpetologist at the Museum of Vertebrate Zoology. For over 25 years his field work has included expeditions to arid regions in West Asia, the Middle East, the Arabian Pen-insula, and the Horn of Africa in Somalia and Eritrea.

A conservation checklist of the amphibians and reptiles of Sonora, Mexico, with updated species listsJulio A. Lemos-Espinal, Geoffrey R. Smith, James C. Rorabaugh, Corresponding author: Julio A. Lemos-Espinal ([email protected])

C U R R E N T R E S E A R C H

Abstract—Sonora has a rich natural diversity, including reptiles and amphibians. Sonora’s location on the United States-Mexico border creates some unique conservation challenges for its wildlife. We compiled a list of the amphibian and reptile species currently known for Sonora, summarized the conserva-tion status of these species, and compared our list of species with known species lists for adjacent states. The herpetofauna of Sonora comprises 200 species of amphibians and reptiles (38 amphibians and 162 reptiles). Overall, Sonora shares the most species with

Chihuahua, Sinaloa, and Arizona. Approximately 11% of the amphibian and reptile species are IUCN listed, but 35.5% are placed in a protected category by SEMARNAT, and 32.6% are categorized as high risk by the Environmental Vulnerability Score.

Reference

Lemos-Espinal, J.A., G.R. Smith, and J.C. Rorabaugh. 2019. A conservation checklist of the amphibians and reptiles of Sonora, Mexico, with updated species lists. ZooKeys 829: 131-160.

Copyright Julio A. Lemos-Espinal et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

http://zoobank.org/BA858553-AF05-459B-AD9A-A23FA003E8E2


Anaxyrus debilis (Girard, 1854) (Fig. 1) ranges from southeastern Colorado and southwestern Kansas south to Zacatecas, Mexico and southeast Ari-zona to eastern Texas (Stebbins and McGinnis 2018). Anaxy-rus debilis is secretive and hides under surface lit-ter and rocks (Lemos Espinal et al. 2018).

Anaxyrus debilis (Girard, 1854) (Fig. 1) ranges from southeastern Colorado and southwestern Kansas south to Zacatecas, Mexico and southeast Arizona to eastern Texas (Stebbins and McGinnis 2018). Anaxyrus debilis is secretive and hides under surface litter and rocks (Lemos Espinal et al. 2018). Breeding choruses of A. debilis last 1 to 3 nights following summer rainstorms in Arizona–New Mexico (Sullivan 1984). The most detailed account of A. debilis reproduction is from Kansas by Taggart (1997). In this paper I provide information on reproduction of A. debilis from a histological examination of gonadal material from museum samples collected in July and August from New Mexico. The use of museum collections for obtaining reproductive data avoids removing additional animals from the wild.

A sample of 31 A. debilis insidior (sensu Degenhardt et al. 1996) collected 1963 to 1993 from New Mexico (Appendix) consisting of 16 adult males (mean snout–vent length, SVL = 40.2 mm ± 2.9 SD, range = 35-45 mm), and 15 adult females (mean SVL = 45.3 mm ± 4.0 SD, range = 40-53 mm) was examined from the herpetology collection of the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County (LACM), Los Angeles, California, USA.

A small incision was made in the lower part of the abdomen and the left testis was removed from males and a piece of the left ovary from females. Gonads were embedded in paraffin, sections were cut at 5 µm and stained with Harris hematoxylin followed by eosin counterstain (Presnell and Schreibman 1997). Histology slides were deposited in LACM. An unpaired t-test was used to test for differences between mean male and female SVLs (Instat, vers. 3.0b, Graphpad Software, San Diego, CA).

The testicular morphology of A. debilis is similar to that of other anurans as described in Ogielska and Bartmanska (2009a). Within the seminiferous tubules, spermatogenesis occurs in vesicles called cysts which remain closed until the late spermatid stage is reached; cysts then open and differentiating sperm reach the lumina of the seminiferous tubules (Ogielaska and Bartmanska 2009a). All 16 males in my sample (July n = 14, August n = 2) exhibited spermiogenesis. Sperm cysts had opened and packets of sperm were

visible in the seminiferous tubules. In some cases intertwined sperm masses were present in the lumina of the seminiferous tubules. A ring of cysts containing germinal cells in various stages of development was present on the inner wall of the seminiferous tubule. The smallest reproductively active male in my sample (LACM 87681) measured 35 mm SVL and was from July. Wright and Wright (1949) reported adult male A. debilis ranged from 26 to 41 mm SVL.

The mean SVL of females was significantly larger than that of males (t = 4.1, df = 29, P = 0.0003). The ovaries of A. debilis are typical of other anurans in being paired organs lying on the ventral sides of the kidneys; in adults ovaries are filled with diplotene oocytes in various stages of development (Ogielska and Bartmanska 2009b). Mature oocytes are filled with yolk droplets; the layer of surrounding follicular cells is thinly stretched. Two stages were present in the ovarian cycle (Table 1); (1) (Stage 1) Spawning condition, yolk filled oocytes predominated. (2) Post-spawning, (Stage 2) few mature eggs were present. Both (Stage 2) females from July (LACM 87689, 132631) (Table 1) each contained postovulatory follicles from a recent spawning. Postovulatory follicles form when the ruptured follicle collapses after ovulation; the follicular lumen disappears and proliferating granulosa cells are surrounded by a fibrous capsule (Redshaw 1972). Postovulatory follicles are short-lived in most anuran species and are resorbed after a few weeks (Redshaw 1972). The smallest reproductively active females (spawning condition) both measured 40 mm SVL and

Notes on Reproduction of Green Toads, Anaxyrus debilis (Anura: Bufonidae), from New MexicoStephen R. Goldberg, Whittier College, Department of Biology, Whittier, CA; [email protected]

R E S E A R C H A R T I C L E

Figure 1. Green Toad (Anaxyrus debilis), Cochise County, AZ. Photo by Jim Rorabaugh.


were from July (LACM 184062) and August (LACM 140522). The size range of adult females given by Wright and Wright (1949) is 31-46 mm SVL.

Atresia is a widespread process occurring in the ovaries of all vertebrates (Uribe Aranzábal 2009). It is common in the amphibian ovary (Saidapur 1978) and is the spontaneous digestion of a diplotene oocyte by its own hypertrophied and phagocytic granulosa cells which invade the follicle and eventually degenerate after accumulating dark pigment (Ogielska and Bartmanska 2009b). See Saidapur and Nadkarni (1973) for a description of the stages of atresia in the frog ovary.

Moderate atresia was noted only in one ovary (LACM 87689) from July which contained numerous deteriorating unspawned follicles with yolk. Mild atresia (only occasional atretic follicles) were noted in LACM 132630 and LACM 184062 also from July and LACM 140540 from August.

Times of breeding for A. debilis through its range are given in Table 2. Anaxyrus debilis has longer activity and reproductive periods in states where activity is not dependent on summer monsoons. The time of breeding given as June to July in Degenhardt et al. (1996) should be extended to include August. (Table 1). As my samples from New Mexico were only from July and August, examination of A. debilis from earlier and later of the year are warranted to further elucidate the reproductive cycle of this species.

Acknowledgments—I thank Gregory B. Pauly (LACM) for permission to examine A. debilis.

Literature Cited

Bogert, C.M. 1962. Isolation mechanisms in toads of the Bufo debilis group in Arizona and western Mexico. American Museum Novitates 2100:1-37.

Bragg, A.N., and C.C. Smith. 1942. Observations on the ecology and natural history of Anura. IX. Notes on breeding behavior in Oklahoma. Great Basin Naturalist 3:33-50.

Brennan, T.C., and A. T. Holycross. 2009. A Field Guide to Amphibians and Reptiles in Arizona. Arizona Game and Fish Department, Phoenix, AZ.

Collins, J.T., S.L. Collins, and T. W. Taggart. 2010. Amphibians, Reptiles and Turtles in Kansas. Eagle Mountain Publishing, LC. Eagle Mountain, UT.

Degenhardt, W.G., C.W. Painter, and A.H. Price. 1996. Amphibians and Reptiles of New Mexico. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque, NM.

Hammerson, G.A. 1999. Amphibians and Reptiles in Colorado, A Colorado Field Guide. Second edition. The University Press of Colorado, Niwot, Colorado.

Lemos–Espinal, J.A., and J.R. Dixon. 2013. Amphibians and reptiles of San Luis Potosí. Eagle Mountain Publishing, LC. Eagle Mountain, UT.

Lemo–Espinal. J.A., and H.M. Smith. 2007. Amphibians and reptiles of the state of Coahuila, Mexico. Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México,

Tlalnepantla, edo. de México 54090, México; Comisión Nacional Para el Conocimiento y Uso de la Biodiversidad, 14010 México, D.F.

Lemos–Espinal, J.A., G.R. Smith, and A. Cruz. 2018. Amphibians & Reptiles of Nuevo León. ECO Herpetological Publishing & Distribution. Rodeo, NM.

Murphy, J.C. 2018. Arizona’s Amphibians & Reptiles, a Natural History and Field Guide. Book Services, www.Bookservices.us

Ogielska, M., and J. Bartmanska. 2009a. Spermatogenesis and male reproductive system in Amphibia—Anura. Pp. 34-99 in M. Ogielska (ed.). Reproduction of Amphibians. Science Publishers, Enfield, NH.

Ogielska, M., and J. Bartmanska. 2009b. Oogenesis and female reproductive systems in Amphibia—Anura. Pp. 153-272 in M. Ogielska (ed.). Reproduction of Amphibians. Science Publishers, Enfield, NH.

Times of breed-ing for A. debilis through its range are given in Table 2. Anaxyrus debilis has longer activity and reproduc-tive periods in states where activity is not dependent on summer mon-soons. The time of breeding given as June to July in Degen-hardt et al. (1996) should be extended to include August.

Table 1. Two stages in the ovarian cycle of 15 Anaxyrus debilis adult females from New Mexico; * = postovulatory follicles present in LACM 87689, 132631.

Month n (1) Spawning Condition

(2) Post-spawning; few mature eggs

July 8 6 2*

August 7 7 0

Table 2. Times of breeding by state (U.S.A. and Mexico) for Anaxyrus debilis.

State Time of Breeding Source

Arizona June through August Brennan and Holycross 2009

Arizona Late March to September Murphy 2018

Coahuila After heavy rains; no dates Lemos–Espinal and Smith 2007

Colorado Early June to mid–August Hammerson 1999

Colorado Late spring to August Young 2011

Kansas 12 June to 2 September Taggart 1997

Kansas Early June to mid–August Collins et al. 2010

New Mexico

August Bogert 1962

New Mexico

June to July Degenhardt et al. 1996

Nuevo León

Warm heavy rains; no dates

Lemos–Espinal et al. 2018.

Oklahoma April to August (calling only)

Bragg and Smith 1942

Oklahoma During or after rain; no dates

Sievert and Sievert 2011

San Luis Potosí

Warm heavy rains; no dates

Lemos–Espinal and Dixon 2013

Sonora Late June or early July Rorabaugh and Lemos–Espinal 2016

Texas Late March to mid–June Wright and Wright 1949

Texas March until September Tipton et al. 2012

Not given April to August Stebbins and McGinnis 2018


Presnell, J.K., and M.P. Schreibman. 1997. Humason’s Animal Tissue Techniques, Fifth edition. The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD.

Redshaw, M.R. 1972. The hormonal control of the amphibian ovary. American Zoologist 12:289-306.

Rorabaugh, J.C., and J.A. Lemos–Espinal. 2016. A Field Guide to the Amphibians and Reptiles of Sonora, Mexico. ECO Herpetological Publishing and Distribution, Rodeo, NM.

Saidapur, S.K. 1978. Follicular atresia in the ovaries of nonmammalian vertebrates. Pages 225-244 in G.H. Bourne, J.F. Danielli, and K.W. Jeon (eds.), International Review of Cytology, Vol. 54. Academic Press, New York, NY.

Saidapur, S.K., and V.B. Nadkarni. 1973. Follicular atresia in the ovary of the frog Rana cyanophlyctis (Schneider). Acta Anatomica 86:559-564.

Sievert, G., and L. Sievert. 2011. A Field Guide to Oklahoma’s Amphibians and Reptiles. Oklahoma Department of Wildlife Conservation, Oklahoma City, OK.

Stebbins, R.C., and S. M. McGinnis. 2018. Peterson

Appendix: Thirty-one Anaxyrus debilis examined by county from New Mexico, borrowed from the herpetology collection of the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County (LACM), Los Angeles, California, USA.

Hidalgo LACM 87677, 87680, 87681, 87683, 87687, 87694, 123214, 171426, 184062, 184511, Doña Ana LACM 1106, 132630–132639, 140515, 140516, 140522, 140525, 140536, 140537, 140540, 140541; Luna LACM 87689, 87690.

Field Guide to Western Reptiles and Amphibians, Fourth edition. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, Boston, MA.

Sullivan, B.K. 1984. Advertisement call variation and observations on breeding behavior of Bufo debilis and B. punctatus. Journal of Herpetology 18:406-411.

Taggart, T.W. 1997. Status of Bufo debilis (Anura: Bufonidae) in Kansas. Kansas Herpetological Society Newsletter No. 109:7-12.

Tipton, B.L., T.L. Hibbitts, T.D. Hibbitts, T.J. Hibbitts, and T.J. LaDuc, 2012. Texas Amphibians, A Field Guide. University of Texas Press, Austin, TX.

Uribe Aranzábal, M.C. 2009. Oogenesis and female reproductive system in Amphibia—Urodela. Pages 273-304 in M. Ogielska (ed.). Reproduction of Amphibians. Science Publishers, Enfield, NH.

Wright, A.H., and A.A. Wright. 1949. Handbook of Frogs and Toads of the United States and Canada, Third edition. Comstock Publishing Associates, a division of Cornell University Press. Ithaca, NY.

Young, M.T. 2011. The Guide to Colorado Reptiles and Amphibians. Fulcrum Publishing, Golden, CO.

Diet of the Lacertid Lizard Psammodromus algirus in North TunisiaZakher Bouragaoui, Department of Biology, University Tunis El Manar, Tunis, Tunisia; [email protected]

Wael Ben Aba, Department of Biology, University of Carthage, Borj Cedria, Tunisia

Said Nouira, Department of Biology, University Tunis El Manar, Tunis, Tunisia

R E S E A R C H A R T I C L E

Introduction

The lacertid lizard Psammodromus algirus is a species known for its large distribution from the Languedoc in France to the north east of Tunisia, Cap Bon Penin-sula (Mamou 2016). In 2006 a population located on the northern side of the Mediterranean Sea was deter-mined to be two separate species Psammodromus jean-neae and P. manuelae (Busack et al. 2006). This lim-ited the distribution of P. algirus to the southern side of the Mediterranean Sea. Most of the dietary studies of the species were conducted on populations in Eu-rope (Di Palma 1984, Díaz and Carrascal 1990, Díaz and Carrascal 1993) resulting in a lack of information about P. algirus diet from North Africa. Recently, a sig-nificant diet study was conducted in Algeria (Bouam et

Abstract—The study of diet composition of Psammodromus algirus from north Tunisia allowed us to calculate the abundance and occurrence of each prey category. Thus, P. algirus demonstrated a generalist and an opportunistic behavior. The species consumed a large range of insects and invertebrates but the diet was mainly composed of Coleoptera (59.9%).

Keywords —Lacertidae; diet; Coleoptera; Psammodromus algirus; Mediterranean; north Africa.

al. 2016) constituting great interest as Tunisia provides distribution continuity throughout the cost of North Africa. In this study, we study the northern Tunisia population as a model in order to have dietary compo-sition insight of the species, its prey, and their avail-ability.

Materials and Methods

Study area

The sampling was conducted from April to Septem-ber 2017, in the north west and north east (Cap Bon Peninsula) of Tunisia (North Africa). Several habitats were visited in order to sample all the possibilities in


Lizards, captured by hand, were taken back to the laboratory where they were kept separate in small terraria. Each specimen was left for 24 hours without food until the release of feces then returned to the site of capture. The feces were diluted in water then examined under a binocular loupe.

which Psammodromus algirus can occur. The landscape in the northwest is dominated by the oak forests of Quercus suber and Q. canariensis. A small number of pine forests consisting of Pinus halepensis with a mixed shrub component of Pistacia lentiscus, Myrtus sp., Erica arborea, and E. multiflora was examined as well. Euca-lyptus sp. forests were frequent due to the reforestation strategy of the General Direction of Forest – Agricul-ture Minister in the region. In the northeast, the land-scape is dominated by Eucalyptus sp. forest and shrubs (Calicotome spinosa and Pistacia lentiscus) (Fig. 1).

Sampling

Lizards, captured by hand, were taken back to the laboratory where they were kept separate in small ter-raria. Each specimen was left for 24 hours without food until the release of feces then returned to the site of capture. The feces were diluted in water then exam-ined under a binocular loupe. The remains of insects, invertebrates, and vertebrates were regrouped and pho-tographed then identified and classified following their taxonomic order.

Results

Abundance

The 31 specimens were divided as follows: 17 males, 8 females, and 7 juveniles. Within the fecal samples we found 625 identifiable prey elements digested by the lizards: 334 feet, 115 elytra, 48 thorax and abdomens, 42 heads, 24 complete bodies and 12 other elements from other body parts.

Five classes, 14 orders, and 11 families were identi-fied. The insect class had the highest abundance with 80.19%; Arachnida came second with 10.14%, fol-lowed by other undetermined classes 6.3%. Under Arachnida, we identified prey that belong to 3 orders. The most common being Araneae with 9.18%; Scor-piones and Pseudoscorpionida both had an abundance

of 0.48%. Within the insect group, we identified 8 orders among which the Coleoptera was most abun-dant, 59.9%. Hymenoptera, Orthoptera, and Hemip-tera had an abundance of 8.7%, 4.35%, and 3.86%, respectively. Diptera and Blatoodea had the same abundance of 1.93%. The least represented orders were Dermaptera with 0.97% and Neuroptera with only 0.48%. The 3 remaining classes are represented each by a single order and have the same abundance of 0.48% (Class Malacostraca was represented by the order Isop-oda, class Annelida was represented by the order Hap-lotaxida, and class Reptilia was represented by order Squamata) (Table 1).

The observed variation of relative abundance of in-gested taxon depended on both their abundance in the habitat and the alimentary behavior of the predator. Most of the prey items found in the diet of Psammo-dromus algirus were diurnal (i.e., Coleoptera and Ara-naea). We noted the absence of eusocial insects as prey, such as ants, although they were highly abundant in

Figure 1. Sampling localities of the lacertid lizard Psammodromus algirus from the northwest and northeast (Cap Bon Peninsula) of Tunisia – North Africa.

Table 1. Relative abundance of consumed prey by the lacertid lizard Psammodromus algirus from northern Tunisia.

Class Order n %

Arachnida Araneae 19 9.18

Scorpiones 1 0.48

Pseudoscorpionida 1 0.48

Insecta Coleoptera 124 59.9

Neuroptera 1 0.48

Hymenoptera 18 8.70

Hemiptera 8 3.86

Orthopterea 9 4.35

Diptera 4 1.93

Blattodea 4 1.93

Dermaptera 2 0.97

Malacostraca Isopoda 1 0.48

Annelida Haplotaxida 1 0.48

Reptilia Squamata 1 0.48

Other 13 6.30

25 miles (40 km)


The diversity of prey shows the opportunistic behavior of P. algirus. This behavior was observed in other populations of the same species over the Mediterranean (Arab and Doumandji 2003, Carretero and Llorente 1993, Castilla et al. 1991). The diet was mainly composed of Coleoptera. The high abundance of Coleoptera can be explained by the synchronization of their peak of activities and our sampling period.

all visited habitats. The presence of a lizard tail from the same species in the feces of an adult female may in-dicate cannibalism by P. algirus. This phenomena was observed previously in other saurian species (Simović and Marković, Žagar and Carretero 2012, Grano et al. 2011) and is considered a common predation event (Polis and Myers 1985). It is not well studied in P. al-girus.

Since the Coleoptera was the common prey con-sumed, we attempted to further identify the families of this order. Overall we identified 11 families with a rela-tive abundance of 40.32%. For the rest of Coleoptera (59.68%), it was not possible to identify them to the family level.

The most represented families were the Dasytidae with 12.9%, Bupristidae with 11.29%, and the Cara-bidae with 7.26%. The next most abundant were the Chrysomelidae and the Tenebrionidae, with an abun-dance of 2.4% and 1.61%, respectively. The remaining 6 families, the Anabidae, Malachiidae, Curculionidae, Lampyridae, Elateridae, and Staphylinidae, shared the same abundance of 0.81%.

Occurrence

Coleoptera occurred 83.87% within all prey found. They are an essential and consistent prey for P. algirus. Aranae had an occurrence of 48.38%, thus considered as an important prey as well. Hymenoptera were not a common prey item, with an occurrence of 22.58%. All remaining orders (Pseudoscorpionidea, Scorpiones, Blattodea, Dermaptera, Neuroptera, Reptilia, Isopoda, and Annelida) had an occurrence less than 10%, and are considered an infrequent prey source.

Although most of the Coleoptera (61.29%) were not identified to the family level, the occurrences of some families were high. The Carabidae and Bupris-tidae had the highest occurrence with 25.8% and 16.12%, respectively. The Chrysomylidae had an oc-currence of 6.45% and all the 6 remaining families (Malachiidae, Curculionidae, Lampyridae, Elatiridae, Staphylinidae, and Anabiidae) had an equal occurrence of 3.22% (Table 2).

Discussion

The diversity of prey shows the opportunistic be-havior of P. algirus. This behavior was observed in other populations of the same species over the Med-iterranean (Arab and Doumandji 2003, Carretero and Llorente 1993, Castilla et al. 1991). The diet was mainly composed of Coleoptera. The high abundance of Coleoptera can be explained by the synchronization of their peak of activities and our sampling period (all lizards were captured between April and May). How-ever, some predators opt for a trophic model that tend to specialize whenever the prey are abundant (Amat et al. 2008).

Opportunism is thus considered an adaptation to changing environmental conditions that allow P. al-girus to consume a large variety of prey. Consequent-ly, P. algirus uses less energy in searching for prey and achieves an optimal balance between the consumed energy and its energetic benefits (Schoener 1971). This behavior may also transform P. algirus into a specialist and selective predator within island habitats (Lo Cas-cio and Capula 2011). The absence of ants in the diet of P. algirus may be explained by the high abundance of larger prey species within the various habitats. Some researchers concluded that mermycophagy (consump-tion of termites or ants) in lizards may be a result of poor habitats were alimentation (nourishment provi-sioning) is scarce, such as within arid ecosystems and small islands (Znari and El Mouden 1997). Addition-al dietary study is needed within the Tunisian islands (Zembra, Zembretta, and Galiton), where the endemic subspecies P. algirus dorei occurs, to further explore op-portunism and prey preference.

Literature Cited

Amat, F., V. Pérez-Mellado, J.Á. Hernández-Estévez, and T. García Díez. 2008. Dietary strategy of a Pyrenean lizard, Iberolacerta aurelioi, living in a poor resources alpine environment. Amphibia-Reptilia 29:329-36.

Arab, K., and S.E. Doumandji. 2003. Etude du régime al-imentaire de la Tarente de Mauritanie Tarentola mauri-tanica (Linné. 1758)(Gekkonidae) et le psammodrome algire Psammodromus algirus (Linné. 1758)(Lacertidae) dans un milieu sub-urbain près d’Alger. Bulletin de la Société herpétologique de France 106:10-16.

Bouam, I., A. Necer, M. Saoudi, L. Tahar-Chaouch, and F. Khelfaoui. 2016. Diet and daily activity patterns of the lacertid lizard Psammodromus algirus (Sauria: Lac-ertidae) in a semi-arid Mediterranean region. Zoology and Ecology 26:244-52.

Table 2. Occurrence of consumed prey by the lacertid lizard Psammodromus algirus from Northern Tunisia.

Order Pi P%

Aranae 15 48.38

Coleoptera 26 83.87

Blattodea 1 3.22

Dermaptera 1 3.22

Neuroptera 1 3.22

Hymenoptera 7 22.58

Hemiptera 4 12.9

Orthoptera 7 22.58

Diptera 2 6.45

Reptilia 1 3.22

Pseodoscorpionidea 1 3.22

Scorpiones 1 3.22

Isopoda 1 3.22

Annelida 1 3.22

Others 6 19.35


Busack, S.D., A. Salvador, and R. Lawson. 2006. Two new species in the genus Psammodromus (Reptilia: Lacertidae) from the Iberian Peninsula. Annals of Carnegie Museum 75:1-10.

Carretero, M.A., and G.A. Llorente. 1993. Feeding of two sympatric lacertids in a sandy coastal area (Ebro Delta, Spain). Pp. 155-172 in Böhme, W., V. Pérez-Mellado, E. Valakos, and P. Maragou (eds.). Lacertids of the Mediter-ranean region. A biological approach. Hellenic Zoological Society, Athens, Greece.

Castilla, A.M., D. Bauwens, and G.A. Llorente. 1991. Diet composition of the lizard Lacerta lepida in central Spain. Journal of Herpetology 25:30-36.

Di Palma, M.G. 1984. Regime alimentaire de Psammodro-mus algirus (Reptilia, Lacertidae) dans une population insulaire du Canal de Sicile. Revue d’écologie – la Terre et la Vie 39:225-230.

Díaz, J.A., and L.M. Carrascal. 1990. Prey size and food selection of Psammodromus algirus (Lacertidae) in central Spain. Journal of Herpetology 24:342-347.

Díaz, J.A., and L.M. Carrascal. 1993. Variation in the effect of profitability on prey size selection by the lacertid lizard Psammodromus algirus. Oecologia 94:23-29.

Grano, M., C. Cattaneo, and A. Cattaneo. 2011. A case of cannibalism in Podarcis siculus campestris De Betta, 1857

(Reptilia, Lacertidae). Biodiversity Journal 2:151-152Lo Cascio, P., and M. Capula. 2011. Does diet in lacertid liz-

ards reflect prey availability? Evidence for selective preda-tion in the Aeolian wall lizard, Podarcis raffonei (Mertens, 1952)(Reptilia, Lacertidae). Biodiversity Journal 2:89-96.

Mamou, R. 2016. Contribution à la connaissance des am-phibiens et des reptiles du Sud de la Kabylie (W. de Bouira et de Bordj Bou Arreridj). Thesis, Université Abou Bekr Belkaid de Tlemcen, 138 pp.

Polis, G.A., and C.A. Myers. 1985. A survey of intraspecific predation among reptiles and amphibians. Journal of Herpetology 19:99-107.

Schoener, T.W. 1971. Theory of feeding strategies. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 2:369-404.

Simović, A., and A. Marković. 2013. A case of cannibalism in the common wall lizard, Podarcis muralis, in Serbia Slučaj kanibalizma kod zidnog guštera, Podarcis muralis, u Srbiji. Hyla 2013:48-49.

Žagar, A., and M.A. Carretero. 2012. A record of cannibal-ism in Podarcis muralis (Laurenti, 1768)(Reptilia, Lacerti-dae) from Slovenia. Herpetology Notes 5:211-213.

Znari, M., and E. El Mouden. 1997. Seasonal changes in the diet of adult and juvenile Agama impalearis (Lacertilia: Agamidae) in the central Jbilet mountains, Morocco. Journal of Arid Environments 37:403-412.

Galápagos: Life in MotionHoward O. Clark, Jr., CWB®, Editor, Sonoran Herpetologist, Tuscon Herpetological Society, Tucson, AZ; [email protected]

B O O K R E V I E W

Galápagos: Life in MotionWalter Perez and Michael Weisberg2018 — Hardcover $35.00 — 208 pp. 12 x 9 inches200 color photos Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ

ISBN 9780691174136 E-book ISBN 9780691184579

Book cover and details.

Walter Perez and Michael Weisberg have produced a delightful photo book about the wildlife dynamics on the Galápagos. The book is populated on every page with incredible color photos of Galápagos wildlife. The photos capture unique points of view of wildlife in action. The exquisite photography of Walter Perez jumps out at the reader with amazing detail. All of the classic photographic components come alive on each page. Lighting, composition, perspective — it’s all here. The book is more than a coffee table curiosity. Each page contains captivating text explaining each photo — providing a caption that allows the reader to enter the Galápagos world. A reader can easily get lost within each page, studying minute details of every photo while reading the stories the authors share.

The book is divided into five sections: (1) Many Little Worlds: The Galápagos Environments; (2) Finding Food; (3) Icons of the Galápagos: Tortoises, Mockingbirds, Finches, and Boobles; (4) Courtship, Mating, and Birth; and (5) Galápagos Animals Interacting. In addition there

is a conclusion section, and a species index. The book begins with a detailed map of the Galápagos islands and their relative location to the South American mainland.

From these chapter titles, we can immediately tell that the authors did their homework, and a careful read can lead to a satisfying education on the often hidden Galápagos world. Although I did not read the book with proofreading in mind, I did note that on page 76, a caption had “vermilion” misspelled as “vermillion” in reference to the Vermilion Flycatcher. I chuckle at this observation because it’s an often misspelled word in the biological universe.

Overall the book provides a vehicle into the biological and ecological exploration of the Galápagos. I highly recommend the book for the biologist and traveler alike.

Overall the book provides a vehicle into the biological and ecological exploration of the Galápagos. I highly recommend the book for the biologist and traveler alike.


Rural Road Usage by Herpetofauna of the Southern Sonoran Desert EcoregionBrian R. Blais, Andrew Antaya, Colin W. Brocka, and Corey J. Shaw, School of Natural Resources and the Environment, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ; [email protected]

L O C A L R E S E A R C H P R O G R E S S U P D A T E

Overview—As human population expands into developing rural areas, including new or increased usage of roadways, wildlife managers aim to conserve biodiversity while safely mitigating road conflicts (e.g., human-wildlife collisions) (Bennett 2017). Understanding when and where wildlife cross rural roads and which factors may influence road presence can guide mitigation planning for management activities (Clevenger et al. 2003), identify hot spots and hot times (Garrah et al. 2015), and inform conservation strategies (Pike 2016). Collectively, many researchers have found road mortality to be a general threat to herpetofauna (Row et al. 2007, Shepard et al. 2008b, Beebee 2013) and several authors note high mortality during times of seasonal migration (Langen et al. 2007; Andrews et al. 2008; Shepard et al. 2008a; Jochimsen et al. 2014).

The Sonoran Desert is one the richest ecoregions for North American herpetofauna. Albeit useful for thermoregulation, it is known that paved roads and highways can have significantly detrimental effects on reptiles in this region (Rosen and Lowe 1994; Jones et al. 2011). However, less is known about evening usage by herpetofauna along rural, unpaved (e.g., dirt) roads (Coleman et al. 2008), especially during continued human expansion into the Sonoran Desert’s rural regions (Zylstra et al. 2013). An urban wave of expansion often equates to reduced biodiversity (Hubbard et al. 2016) and acquiring a priori data in rural areas can offer some resolution into population responses to encroaching development (Bennett 2017).

To address when, where, and why herpetofauna may be present on rural roads, we began repeated evening road-cruise surveys on multiple road types (e.g., dirt/paved) in outskirts near Tucson, Arizona in 2018. Our methods largely followed Jones et al. (2011) and we safely stopped to record data when we visually detected a target species (Fig. 1). All surveys began at least 30 minutes after official sunset time. Our aim was to provide a baseline herpetofauna inventory along rural roads near edges of likely expanding human development and/or increased traffic flow. We also aimed to temporally quantify any hot spots or hot times that would be useful to researchers and managers alike. Finally, we investigated a suite of variables that may offer insight into when and why herpetofauna are using these roadways and if road-type differs for herpetofauna presence. Our replicated approach can be applied more broadly to other regional taxa of interest, particular road types, or habitat ecotones.

Preliminary Results—We identified three routes in the vicinity of Tucson, Arizona that are on the edge of further development and/or may see increased traffic in the near future. These segments occurr in Pima and Pinal counties, respectively. A segment of Box Canyon Road (i.e., Highway 62, hereafter H62) traverses Madrean Evergreen Woodland and Semidesert Grassland habitat for ca. 16.4 km and is entirely unpaved. Our E. Park Link Drive transect (hereafter PL) bisects both Sonoran Desertscrub subdivisions (predominantly Arizona Upland subdivision) and is paved for ca. 29.3

Figure 1. Road cruise surveys involve driving along a route transect while surveyors look for animals on the roadway. Inset top left = a sidewinder rattlesnake (Crotalus cerastes) found along an unpaved transect in Arizona Upland subdivision (Desertscrub) habitat. Inset top right = a piece of flexible metal conduit in the road appeared snake-like until closer inspection.

As human population expands into developing rural areas, including new or increased usage of roadways, wildlife managers aim to conserve biodiversity while safely mitigating road conflicts (e.g., human-wildlife collisions) (Bennett 2017).


km. Finally, our Silverbell Road route (hereafter SIL) has a more balanced mix between Arizona Upland and Lower Colorado Desertscrub subdivisions, is paved for ca. 9 km and unpaved for ca. 10 km, respectively. In 2018, we covered over 350 km (effort = 5.75 km/hr) across all sample transects.

Overall, we recorded 35 herpetofauna observations and 84 incidental (non-herp vertebrates) detections along and adjacent our routes (e.g., nearby detections in transit to a site) (Table 1). We included non-herp vertebrates because they are important to herpetofauna as prey, predators, or offer other ecosystem services, and classified them into groups such as avifauna (e.g., owls, nighthawks), lagomorphs (e.g., cottontails and jackrabbits), and small mammals (e.g., rodents). To increase sample size, we also included herpetofauna detections in the vicinity (i.e., en route) to our designated transect boundaries. Our most encountered reptiles were Crotalus atrox and C. cerastes (n = 5 each) and our most encountered amphibian was Incilius alvarius (n = 6). Crotalus atrox was the only herpetofaunal species found at all survey transects. The number of detections at each site varied, for either herpetofauna or incidental detections (Fig. 2). SIL had more herpetofauna and incidental detections than H62 or PL. This may have to do with location, survey terrain, and proximity to watercourses, especially the Los Robles Wash—a tributary of the nearby Santa Cruz

River. Although we encountered both amphibians and reptiles before the monsoon season, our detections increased after the onset of monsoon (Fig. 3). A similar pattern occurred for incidental species albeit with less irregularity.

Forthcoming Analyses—We are in the process of investigating how other extrinsic variables, including moon luminance, season, weather, and road-type, influence herpetofauna usage along rural roads. Some authors note that certain herpetofauna respond either positively or negatively pending moon-phase (i.e., brightness), as this may relate to predator-prey relationships or other life history strategies (Perry and Fisher 2013, Sperry et al. 2013). For instance, Blais and Shaw (2018) analyzed citizen-scientist data to find that the predominantly-diurnal desert iguana (Dipsosaurus dorsalis) can be found on roads during the evening, albeit infrequently.

Our research will continue in 2019, adding resolution to our analyses to address each of our objectives. This includes quantifying live detections versus road kill as well as continually building a dataset to empirically identify hot spots and hot times where and when they may occur. We will share our findings with other researchers and wildlife managers, including a final report to Tucson Herpetological Society. Moreover, road-cruises present opportunities to involve volunteers and/or detect other notable life history observations or

Classification Species SIL PL H62 n

Herpetofauna Anaxyrus cognatus 1 (3.4) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 1

Arizona elegans 2 (6.9) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 2

Crotalus cerastes 3 (10.3) 2 (50.0) 0 (0.0) 5

Coleonyx variegatus 2 (6.9) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 2

Crotalus atrox 2 (6.9) 2 (50.0) 1 (50.0) 5

Crotalus scutulatus 2 (6.9) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 2

Dipsosaurus dorsalis 1 (3.4) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 1

Incilius alvarius 6 (20.7) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 6

Lithobates catesbeiana 1 (3.4) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 1

Pituophis catenifer 3 (10.3) 0 (0.0) 1 (50.0) 4

Phrynosma solare 1 (3.4) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 1

Scaphiopus couchii 5 (17.2) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 5

Total Herpetofauna 29 4 2 35

Group

Incidental avifauna 2 (3.5) 1 (11.1) 5 (27.8) 8

cattle 0 (0.0) 1 (11.1) 3 (16.7) 4

lagomorphs 8 (14.0) 3 (33.3) 8 (44.4) 19

mesocarnivores 1 (1.8) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 1

small mammals 46 (80.7) 4 (44.4) 2 (11.1) 52

Total Incidentals 57 9 15 84

ALL 86 13 17 119

Table 1. Detections made during 2018 surveys. Taxonomic records include herpetofauna (amphibians and reptiles) and incidental detections (non-herpetofauna vertebrates). SIL = Silverbell Road, PL = Park Link Drive, H62 = Highway 62, and n = total number of detections by species across all sites. Numbers inside parentheses are the species percent makeup by route. These data include herpetofauna detections in the vicinity (i.e., en route) of the designated survey transects.

Overall, we recorded 35 herpetofauna observations and 84 incidental (non-herp vertebrates) detections along and adjacent our routes (e.g., nearby detections in transit to a site) (Table 1).


Figure 2. Site histories for herpetofauna (solid lines) and incidental (non-herpetofauna vertebrates) for 3 evening road cruise transects. H62 = Highway 62 (blue), PL = Park Link Drive (orange), and SIL = Silverbell Road (green). The “i” following a site-name indicates “incidental.” These data only include detections during a survey (i.e., omitting detections on roadways just prior to survey boundary).

Figure 3. Temporal detections across 2018 surveys, beginning 21 April through 11 November 2018 (Survey frequency averaged every 15 days). The solid line represents cumulative total number of amphibian and reptile detections and dashed line indicates non-herpetofauna vertebrates.


biogeographic discoveries (Blais and Shaw 2018). We are grateful for the Tucson Herpetological Society and the Charles H. Lowe Grant Fund that helped support this research project. We thank N. Dutt, B. Mayer, and S. Spallino for volunteering their time with us. Our research was permitted under a scientific collecting license with Arizona Game and Fish Department (#SP624600).

Literature Cited

Andrews, K.M., J.W. Gibbons, and D.M. Jochimsen. 2008. Ecological effects of roads on amphibians and reptiles: a literature review. Pages 121-143 in Mitchell, J.C., R.E. Jung Brown, and B. Bartholomew, Urban Herpetology. Society for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles.

Beebee, T.J.C. 2013. Effects of road mortality and mitiga-tion measures. Conservation Biology 27:657-668.

Bennett, V.J. 2017. Effects of road density and pattern on the conservation of species and biodiversity. Current Landscape Ecology Reports 2:1-11.

Blais, B.R., and C.J. Shaw. 2018. In the heat of the night: assessing nocturnal activity of the desert iguana (Dip-sosaurus dorsalis). Sonoran Herpetologist 31:65-70.

Clevenger, A.P., B. Chruszcz, and K.E. Gunson. 2003. Spatial patterns and factors influencing small verte-brate fauna road-kill aggregations. Biological Conser-vation 109:15-26.

Coleman, J.L., N.B. Ford, and K. Herriman. 2008. A road survey of amphibians and reptiles in a bottom-land hardwood forest. Southeastern Naturalist 7:339-348.

Garrah, E., R.K. Danby, E. Eberhardt, G.M. Cunning-ton, and S. Mitchell. 2015. Hot spots and hot times: wildlife road mortality in a regional conservation cor-ridor. Environmental Management 56:874-889.

Hubbard, K.A., A.D. Chalfoun, and K.G. Gerow. 2016. The relative influence of road characteristics and habi-tat on adjacent lizard populations in arid shrublands. Journal of Herpetology 50:29-36.

Jochimsen, D.M., C.R. Peterson and L. J. Harmon. 2014. Influence of ecology and landscape on snake

road mortality in a sagebrush-steppe ecosystem. Ani-mal Conservation 17:583–592.

Jones, T.R., R.D. Babb, F.R. Hensley, C. LiWanPo, and B.K. Sullivan. 2011. Sonoran desert snake communi-ties at two sites: concordance and effects of increased road traffic. Herpetological Conservation Biology 6:61-71.

Langen, T.A., A. Machniak, E.K. Crowe, C. Mangan, D.F. Marker, N. Liddle, and B. Roden. 2007. Meth-odologies for surveying herpetofauna mortality on rural highways. Journal of Wildlife Management 71:1361-1368.

Perry, G., and R.N. Fisher. 2013. Night lights and rep-tiles: observed and potential effects. Pages 169-191 in C. Rich and T. Longcore (eds), Ecological Con-sequences of Artificial Night Lighting. Island Press, Washington, DC.

Pike, D.A. 2016. Conservation management. Pages 419-435 in C.K. Dodd Jr, (ed.), Reptile Ecology and Con-servation: A Handbook of Techniques. Oxford Uni-versity Press, Oxford, United Kingdom.

Rosen, P.C., and C.H. Lowe. 1994. Highway mortality of snakes in the Sonoran Desert of southern Arizona. Biological Conservation 68:143-148.

Row, J.R., G. Blouin-Demers, and P.J. Weatherhead. 2007. Demographic effects of road mortality in black ratsnakes (Elaphe obsoleta). Biological Conservation 137:117-124.

Shepard, D.B., M.J. Dreslik, B.C. Jellen, and C.A. Phil-lips. 2008a. Reptile road mortality around an oasis in the Illinois corn desert with emphasis on the endan-gered eastern massasauga. Copeia 2008: 350-359.

Shepard, D.B., A.R. Kuhns, M.J. Dreslik, and C.A. Phil-lips. 2008b. Roads as barriers to animal movement in fragmented landscapes. Animal Conservation 11:288-296.

Sperry, J.H., M.P. Ward, and P.J. Weatherhead. 2013. Ef-fects of temperature, moon phase, and prey on noctur-nal activity in ratsnakes: an automated telemetry study. Journal of Herpetology 47:105-111.

Zylstra, E.R., R.J. Steidl, C.A. Jones, and R.C. Averill-Murray. 2013. Spatial and temporal variation in sur-vival of a rare reptile: a 22-year study of Sonoran des-ert tortoises. Oecologia 173:107-116.

Our research will continue in 2019, adding resolution to our analyses to address each of our objectives. This includes quantifying live detections versus road kill as well as continually building a dataset to empirically identify hot spots and hot times where and when they may occur.


M E M B E R S H I P

Membership InformationIndividual $20 Sustaining $30Family $25 Contributing $50Student $14 Life $500

The Tucson Herpetological Society would like to thank existing members and new members for renewing their membership. We appreciate your support and are always looking for members to actively participate in THS activities and volunteer opportunities. It is a great way to be involved with the conservation of amphibians and reptiles in the Sonoran Desert.

Tucson Herpetological Society P.O. Box 709, Tucson, Arizona 85702-0709

MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL FORM

NAME: ________________________________________________ Date ______________ Address or Personal Information Changes_______________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________

MEMBERSHIP DUES

[ ] $20 Individual [ ] $25 Family [ ] $14 Student [ ] $30 Sustaining [ ] $50 Contributing [ ] $500 Life $ _______ Jarchow Conservation Award $ _______ Speakers Bureau $ _______ Flat-tailed horned lizard Fund $ _______ C.H. Lowe Herp Research Fund $ _______ Total (MAKE CHECK PAYABLE TO: TUCSON HERPETOLOGICAL SOCIETY) The THS newsletter, the Sonoran Herpetologist, is delivered online only. Please indicate the email address you would like to receive the newsletter if you are not currently receiving the newsletter at your preferred address. If you are unable to receive the newslet-ter online, please contact Robert Villa at [email protected]. If not already done, please indicate if you want your email added to the THS directory and/or the Monthly meeting announcement (circle one or both). Please return this form with your check to the address above. Email address ___________________________________________________________

BOD minutes can be found here:http://bit.ly/2m9tXiI

M E E T I N G M I N U T E S

Including the THS in your will is an excellent way to support the value of this organization and the conservation of the herpetofauna of the Sonoran Desert. We would like to recognize and thank anyone who has included the THS in their will. Please contact us so we can express our appreciation. For information about designating the THS in your will, please contact Maggie Fusari, Treasurer, Tucson Herpetological Society, at [email protected].

Time to Renew Your THS membership?

Thank you for your membership in the Tucson Herpetological Society. Renewal reminders for upcoming membership expiration will be emailed at the beginning of the month that your membership expires. If you have any questions about your membership or would like to be in touch with a THS member you do not know how to reach, please contact our Membership Coordinator, Robert Villa, by email: [email protected].

Sonoran Herpetologist Natural History ObservationsThe Tucson Herpetological Society invites your contributions to our Natural History Notes section. We are particularly interested in photographs and descriptions of amphibians and reptiles involved in noteworthy or unusual behaviors in the field. Notes can feature information such as diet, predation, com-munity structure, interspecific behavior, or unusual locations or habitat use. Please submit your observa-tions to Howard Clark, [email protected]. Submissions should be brief and in electronic form.

The Sonoran Herpetologist welcomes short reports for our Local Research News, a regular feature in our journal. We are interested in articles that can update our readers on research about amphibians and reptiles in the Sonoran Desert region. These articles need be only a few paragraphs long and do not need to include data, specific localities, or other details. The emphasis should be on how science is being applied to herpetological questions. Please submit your materials to Howard Clark, [email protected]. Submissions should be brief and in electronic form.

Local Research News


Sonoran Herpetologist (ISSN 2333-8075 [online] 2577-9370 [print]) is the newsletter-journal of the Tucson Herpetological Society, and is Copyright © 1988-2019. The contents of Sonoran Herpetologist may be reproduced for inclusion in the newsletters of other herpetological societies provided the material is reproduced without change and with appropriate credit, and a copy of the publication is sent to the Tucson Herpetological Society. Occasional exceptions to this policy will be noted. Contents are indexed in Zoological Record. A complete set of back issues are available in the Special Collections area of the University of Arizona library. They are accompanied by a copy of The Collected Papers of the Tucson Herpetological Society, 1988-1991.

Editor-in-ChiefHoward Clark, Jr., [email protected]

Associate EditorsRobert Bezy, [email protected] Dennis Caldwell, [email protected] Suman Pratihar, [email protected] Don Swann, [email protected]

Art Editor Dennis Caldwell, [email protected]

Book Review Editor Philip Brown, [email protected]

Information for ContributorsAuthors should submit original articles, notes, book reviews to the Editor, either via email using an attached word processed manuscript or by mail to the Society’s address. The manuscript style should follow that of Journal of Herpetology and other publications of the Society for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles. For further information, please contact the editor, at [email protected].

https://portal.issn.org/resource/issn/2333-8075https://portal.issn.org/resource/issn/2577-9370

OfficersPresident Robert Villa, [email protected]

Vice President Rhishja Cota-Larson

Secretary Mark Barnard

Treasurer Margaret Fusari

Directors (2018)Karina HilliardShea LambertJohn MurphyDirectors (2018-2019)Ross MaynardMichael CardwellLarry Jones

Membership Robert Villa

Editor Howard O. Clark, Jr.

Society ActivitiesMonthly Members Meeting3rd Wednesday, 7:15 PM

Board of Directors MeetingLast Wednesday of each month (except December), 7:00 PM

Speakers Bureau (scheduled presentations)Robert Villa

Conservation CommitteeDennis Caldwell

Herpetological Information HotlineBob Brandner, (520) 760-0574

Jarchow Conservation AwardOpen

Publications:Sonoran Herpetologist, Backyard Ponds brochure,Living with Venomous Reptiles brochure, THS Herp Coloring Book, THS Collected Papers, 1988-1991

THS Webpagehttp://tucsonherpsociety.orgHeidi Flugstad, Webmaster, [email protected]

The Tucson Herpetological

Society is dedicated to conservation,

education, and research

concerning the amphibians and

reptiles of Arizona and

Mexico. Tucson Herpetological Society

is a registered 501(c)(3) non-profit organization

For more information about the THS and the reptiles and amphibians of the Tucson area visit tucsonherpsociety.org

Deadline for Sonoran Herpetologist: 15th of Feb, May, Aug, and Nov (based on the quarterly schedule)

SONORAN HERPETOLOGIST 32 (1) 2019

ian murray - tucson herpetological society€¦ · for over 25 years his field work has included...

Documents