Herpetological Review 41(4), 2010 475

open habitats in dry areas, tropical rainforests and disturbed areas (Izecksohn and Carvalho e Silva. 2001. Amphibians of Rio de Janeiro, Editora UFRJ, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, 148 pp.). Formerly known as L. ocellatus this species was renamed by Lavilla et al. (2010. Zootaxa 2346:1–16). The only record of predation on tad-poles of L. latrans refers to the Great Kiskadee (Pitangus sulphu-ratus; Vaira and Coria 1994. Herpetol. Rev. 25:118). There are no records of predation of L. latrans tadpoles by invertebrates. At 2120 h on 27 Oct 2009 we observed two predation events of L. latrans tadpoles by aquatic invertebrates. The observations were made in wetland habitat associated with a coastal sand dune (32.1654°S, 52.1523°W, Corrego Alegre, sea level) in the mu-nicipality of Rio Grande, RS, southern Brazil. Both events were observed simultaneously in a school of tadpoles in a temporary pond colonized by macrophytes (mainly Juncus acutus and Spartina ciliata). One of the tadpoles (21 mm body length) was preyed upon by a juvenile aquatic spider (Diapontia sp., Lycosi-dae) and the second tadpole (23 mm body length) by a juvenile water-bug (Belostoma sp., Belostomatidae). Most amphibians have a close dependence on water bodies for reproduction, thus making them vulnerable to aquatic predators (Toledo 2003. Phyl-lomedusa 2:105–108; Fulan and Almeida 2010. Acta. Sci. Biol. Sci. 32:121–124). This observation adds two new predators of L. latrans suggesting that the role of invertebrates in the popula-tion dynamics of anurans is still insufficiently known, especially in the Neotropics. Tadpoles were deposited in the Collection of the Laboratório de Ecologia de Vertebrados Terrestres of FURG (AMRG46; AMRG47). We thank CNPq and Fapergs for financial support and ICMBio for collecting permits.

Submitted by MAURO CÉSAR L. M. de OLIVEIRA, MAURÍCIO BEUX DOS SANTOS, and ALEXANDRO M. TOZETTI, Laboratório de Ecologia de Vertebrados Terrestres, Instituto de Ciências Biológicas, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande, Av. Itália, km 8, Rio Grande, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil (e-mail: mclmdeo@yahoo.com.br).

LITHOBATES AREOLATUS CIRCULOSUS (Northern Craw-fish Frog). PREDATION. Raccoons (Procyon lotor) are known to consume a wide variety of prey items. They often forage at the edge of shallow water in search of their preferred prey, crayfish (Zeveloff 2002. Raccoons: A Natural History. Smithsonian Insti-tute Press, Washington, D.C. 200 pp.). Amphibians typically do not constitute a large part of their diet. Zeveloff (2002, op. cit.) examined raccoon scat and found that 9% was composed of Tiger Salamander (Ambystoma tigrinum) remains. Whitaker and Mum-ford (2009. Mammals of Indiana. Indiana Univ. Press, Bloom-ington. 661 pp.) examined the stomach contents of 41 raccoons in Indiana and found that amphibians composed 1.7% of the rac-coons’ diet; both Green Frog (Lithobates clamitans) and Fowler’s Toad (Anaxyrus fowleri) remains were identified. Wright (1966. Herpetologica 22:127–128) witnessed a raccoon kill and eat five Colorado River Toads (Anaxyrus alvarius). The raccoon avoided consuming the toxic parotoid glands by turning the animals over and eating the viscera though the anterior abdominal wall. Schaaf and Garton (1970. Herpetologica 26:334–335) reported similar findings in which raccoons preyed upon American Toads (Anaxy-rus americanus) and often left the head and the upper back.

Parris and Redmer (2005. In Lannoo [ed.], Amphibian De-clines: The Conservation Status of United States Species, pp. 526–528. Univ. California Press, Berkeley) state that natural predators of Crawfish Frogs (Lithobates areolatus) are unknown. Here we report the first known incidents of raccoon predation on Crawfish Frogs, one in Indiana, one in Illinois. During a te-lemetry study in southwestern Indiana, an adult male Crawfish Frog was found freshly dead the morning of 2 April 2010 along the edge of a breeding wetland where it had migrated the week before. All that remained was the top of the skull and the dorsal skin. The previously intraperitoneally implanted transmitter was a meter away, and within 50 cm, along the shoreline, were fresh raccoon tracks. On 20 March 2010, a recently predated adult male Crawfish Frog was observed at a breeding wetland in southern Il-linois. The carcass consisted of a single, nearly-complete piece of skin connected to the top of the skull. The uneaten skin, which included the vocal sacs, was comprised of the dorsum, both sides, most of the venter, and one hind limb. The frog had the appear-ance of having been skinned. Crawfish Frog skin, similar to that of toads, is “studded with numerous glandular warts” (Goin and Netting 1940. Ann. Carn-egie Mus. 38:137–168); and like several other species of ranids, secretes antimicrobial peptides from granular glands (Ali et al. 2002. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta 1601:55–63). It is possible that skin secretions are distasteful and raccoons avoid eating the skin of Crawfish Frogs, similar to their behavior when preying upon toads.

Submitted by JENNIFER L. HEEMEYER, Indiana State University, Rm 135 Holmstedt Hall, Terre Haute, Indiana 47809, USA (e-mail: jheemeyer@indstate.edu); JOHN G. PALIS, P.O. Box 387, Jonesboro, Illinois 62952, USA (e-mail: jpalis@yahoo.com); and MICHAEL J. LANNOO, Indiana University, Rm 135 Holmstedt Hall, Terre Haute, Indiana 47809, USA.

LITHOBATES CATESBEIANUS (American Bullfrog). DIET. The American Bullfrog was introduced in Brazil in the 1930s for commercial breeding. However, escapes from farms and inten-tional introductions have allowed this species to establish inva-sive populations in wild habitats, especially in the Atlantic Rain-forest (Giovanelli et al. 2008. Biol. Invasions 10:585–595). Here we report data on the diet of the American Bullfrog obtained by stomach content analysis of 50 specimens collected in a reser-voir located in Viçosa (20.75764°S, 42.86075°W), Minas Gerais State, southeastern Brazil. The site is known as Represa do Bel-vedere, and is composed of a group of small connected dams sur-rounded by a secondary forest fragments and a grassplot. The dams have abundant aquatic vegetation, mostly Salvinia sp. and Nympheaceae. American Bullfrogs were collected during September–Decem-ber 2003. After collection, specimens were fixed in 10% formalin and preserved in 70% alcohol; SVL was measured to the nearest 0.05 mm and the stomach contents tabulated. Prey items were identified to the lowest known taxonomic level; plant remains were considered to be accidently ingested. Only 4 individuals (8%) had empty stomachs, and 16 (32%) had nothing but undetermined remains in their stomachs. Plant remains were found in 22 stomachs (44%), and two individuals

Herpetological Review 41(4), 2010476

had only plant material in the stomach. Thirty-four individuals (68%) had at least one identifiable prey in their stomachs, and prey number by frog varied from 1–16 (mean ± SD: 3.47 ± 3.07). The majority of the individuals measured (N = 28; 56%) were <50 mm SVL (range: 36.8–48.8; 43.92 ± 3.0). Sixteen frogs were between 51.5 and 84.2 mm SVL (65.65 ± 10.81), and the remain-ing six frogs were >90 mm SVL (range: 90.10–116.05; 100.96 ± 9.05). Among the 114 prey items identified, the most common were ants, adult Coleoptera, and Heteroptera which represented 52.64% of the total prey ingested (Table 1). Besides these three insect groups, non-ant hymenopterans, naiads of Odonata, and anurans were also frequent prey items (occurring in >10% of the samples). Insects dominanted the diet likely due to the small size of the majority of frogs. These data add Scinax fuscovarius to the list of anurans reported as prey of the invasive American Bullfrog not reported by Silva et al. (2009. S. Am. J. Herpetol. 4:286–284). We thank Mário R. Moura for laboratory assistance and Hen-rique C. Costa for useful suggestions on the manuscript.

Submitted by EMANUEL T. DA SILVA, Departamento de Biologia Animal, Universidade Federal de Viçosa, 36570-000 Viçosa, Minas Gerais, Brazil (e-mail: etsbio@yahoo.com.br); EVELYZE P. DOS REIS, Departamento de Biologia Geral, Universidade Federal de Viçosa; PATRÍCIA S. SANTOS, De-partamento de Zoologia, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Av. Antônio Carlos 6627, 31270–901, Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil; and RENATO N. FEIO, Departamento de Biolo-gia Animal, Universidade Federal de Viçosa (e-mail: rfeio@ufv.br).

LITHOBATES SYLvATICUS (Wood Frog). EGG PREDA-TION. Predation by tadpoles on eggs and larvae of heterospecif-ics has been reported for a number of amphibian species (Eh-rlich 1979. Bull. Maryland Herpetol. Soc. 15:25–26; Kiesecker and Blaustein 1998. Conserv. Biol. 12:776–787; Petranka et al. 1994. Copeia 1994:691–697). Among these are tadpoles of large-bodied ranids, including Bullfrogs (Lithobates catesbeianus) and Green Frogs (L. clamitans), which can overwinter in permanent wetlands and pose a serious threat to the reproductive success in pond-breeding amphibians. Vasconelos and Calhoun (2006. Wet-lands 26:992–1003) reported that colonization by L. clamitans drastically reduced the number of emerging L. sylvaticus juve-niles in restored wetlands. Here I report daily observations of pre-dation on communal egg masses of L. sylvaticus by L. clamitans tadpoles contributing to total reproductive failure in a stormwater retention pond. On 13–15 March 2010, L. sylvaticus breeding and oviposi-tion occurred in a stormwater retention pond in suburban Ow-ings Mills, Maryland, USA (39.425758°N, 76.813538°W). This pond typically dries in late summer, but significant rain during 2009 created a permanent water source allowing L. clamitans to successfully overwinter in the pond. A complete census of L. syl-vaticus egg masses was conducted on 16 March and 21 total egg masses were identified: 16 in a communal mass in the northern-most section of the pond (“N Mass”) and five in a separate com-munal mass in the easternmost section of the pond (“E Mass”). On 17 March at 2100 h, 40–60 large ranid tadpoles were observed feeding voraciously on eggs deposited in the deepest area of N Mass (ca. 60 cm water depth). On 18 March, 14.5 egg masses remained, and ca. 12.5 partially intact masses were present on 19 March at N Mass; all of which were deposited in the shallow margin of the pond. During that survey predation was first ob-served on E Mass eggs by 20–30 tadpoles, and only 4 partial egg masses remained. At this time no remaining eggs had developed past Gosner Stage 17, so it is unlikely that any embryos had suc-cessfully developed to free-swimming larvae (Gosner 1960. Her-petologica 16:183–190). The final survey was conducted on 20 March, four days after the first census, when only one egg mass was located at each of the two communal areas. Both egg masses had become partially stranded on woody vegetation as the pond’s water level dropped, though lower remnants of each egg mass were still submerged and being consumed by ca. 20 tadpoles. On 20 March, ten tadpoles were collected and euthanized for further analysis. All tadpoles were identified as L. clamitans in Gosner stages 30–37 and dissected for evidence of egg predation. Jelly coating was found in the tadpoles’ guts but no discernable

taBle. 1. Stomach contents of 44 Lithobates catesbeianus from “Represa do Belvedere,” municipality of Viçosa, Minas Gerais State, Brazil, collected from September to December 2003. Np = number of prey; Nbf = number of American Bullfrogs.

Prey Items Np % Np Nbf % Nbf

DIPLOPODA 1 0.88 1 2.27ARACHNIDA Araneae 4 3.51 4 9.09INSECTA Blattodea 1 0.88 1 2.27 Coleoptera (adults) 22 19.30 13 29.55 Coleoptera (larvae) 2 1.75 1 2.27 Diptera (adults) 2 1.75 2 4.55 Diptera (larvae) 4 3.51 3 6.82 Ephemeroptera (adults) 1 0.88 1 2.27 Ephemeroptera (larvae) 1 0.88 1 2.27 Hemiptera (Cicadellidae) 1 0.88 1 2.27 Hemiptera (Heteroptera) 12 10.53 6 13.64 Hymenoptera (Formicidae) 26 22.81 16 36.36 Hymenoptera (others) 10 8.77 8 18.18 Isoptera 3 2.63 3 6.82 Lepidoptera (adults) 2 1.75 2 4.55 Lepidoptera (larvae) 2 1.75 2 4.55 Odonata (adults) 5 4.39 3 6.82 Odonata (naiads) 6 5.26 5 11.36ARTHROPOD REMAINS 0 0 23 52.27AMPHIBIA Rhinella pombali (juvenile) 1 0.88 1 2.27 Scinax fuscovarius 1 0.88 1 2.27 Unidentified anurans 6 5.26 5 11.36Undetermined remains 0 0 16 36.36Plant material 0 0 21 45.65