Parasite loss and introduced species: the parasites of Eleutherodactylus coqui in its native and introduced ranges with comments on potential biological control Marr, Shenandoah R. 1, W.J. Mautz 2, and A.H. Hara 1 1 Beaumont Agricultural Research Center, College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources, University of Hawaii at Manoa, 875 Komohana St. Hilo, HI 96720 2 Biology Department, University of Hawaii at Hilo, 200 W. Kawili St., Hilo, HI 96720 Presented at the First International Conference on the Coqui Frog, Feb 7-9, 2008, Hilo, HI
Why are there so many coqui frogs in Hawaii? Similar environment to Puerto Rico Numerous retreat sites Lack of predators Lack of parasites??? Photo by Chris Jacobson
Other research questions What is the role of parasites in the coqui frog invasion? To what extent do parasites control host populations? Does a safe and effective biological control exist?
Enemy Release Hypothesis Plant or animal invader is released from its co- evolved parasites during invasion, allowing populations to reach greater densities Only a few individuals colonize new location Complex life cycles requiring >1 host Transmission of some parasites is host population dependent Some parasites are very host specific
Project Hypotheses Frogs in Puerto Rico will have greater parasite Species richness Prevalence Intensity than frogs in Hawaii Frogs in Hawaii will be larger than frogs in Puerto Rico
Methods Collected 80 frogs from 4 different sites in Puerto Rico and 80 frogs from 4 different sites on Big Island Site selection based on estimated population density, precipitation, elevation, and presence of other frogs Photos by Jamie Bettaso
Dissection Methods Examined skin, eyes, mouth, and internal organs Collected blood samples Examined fecal samples for eggs, larvae, and protozoans Photos by Jamie Bettaso
Results: species richness Parasite species richness: Puerto Rico>Hawaii Puerto Rico Four nematodes One acanthocephalan One cestode One oligiochaete One arachnid - Hawaii One nematode One acanthocephalan Number of parasite species 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Puerto Rico Hawaii
Prevalence No difference in the % of frogs infected with 1 1 parasite of any species (p=0.9590) GI tract: HI > PR (p=0.0001) Body cavity: PR > HI (p=0.0154) Lungs: PR > HI (p=0.0001) Mean prevalence (%) 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Rhabdias sp. Porrocaecum sp. Parapharyngodon sp. Aplectana sp. Allodero sp. Cestode Parasite species Mite Acanthocephalan 1 Cosmocercus sp. Acanthocephalan 2
Intensity Mean parasite count intensity: Hawaii > Puerto Rico (p= 0.001) Mean species count intensity: Puerto Rico > Hawaii (p< < 0.001) Mean Intensity 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Rhabdias sp. Porrocaecum sp. Parapharyngodon Aplectana sp. Acanthocephalan 1 Cestode Parasite Species Mite Allodero sp. Cosmocerca sp. Acanthocephalan 2
Body mass and length Puerto Rico > Hawaii for both mass and length Mean SVL mm 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 Mean= 37.1 Puerto Rico Mean= 32.2 Hawaii Mean Body Weight grams 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 Mean=3.19 Mean= 3.19 Puerto Rico Mean=2.15 Mean= 2.15 Hawaii Photo by Chris Jacobson
Body Size Higher frog densities in Hawaii more competition for food? Young population in Hawaii has not reached maximum size potential?
Other findings None of the same parasites found in Puerto Rico and Hawaii Majority of the nematodes found were in larval stage frog is an intermediate host This study reports the most parasite species recorded from E. coqui in Puerto Rico
Conclusions Many factors including retreat sites, environmental conditions, and lack of predators likely contribute to the success of coqui frogs in Hawaii Coqui frogs are probably more successful than they would have been had they brought their parasites with them L. Woolbright
What about biological controls? Nematode Rhabdias has potential Studies on two different species of bufonids found decreased growth, food intake, survival, and locomotory performance of infected young toads 1,2 1 Goater 1991 2 Goater et al. 1993
What needs to be done? Test for efficacy Non-target studies
Important considerations Rhabdias is fairly common in anurans worldwide Effects likely would not be noticeable for a long time If effective, likely most useful on juvenile frogs; may help minimize range expansion No parasite or disease is a magic bullet
Acknowledgements Carter Atkinson, Jamie Bettaso, Fernando Bird-Pico, Charles Bursey, Marta demaintenon,, Mike Dionne, Mike Dohm,, Rogelio Doratt,, Kevin Lafferty, Valerie McKenzie, Steve Nadler Support generously provided by the County of Hawaii, National Science Foundation, USDA, and Sigma Xi