The Louisiana Amphibian Monitoring Program from 1997 to 2017: Results, analyses, and lessons learned.

To determine trends in either frog distribution or abundance in the State of Louisiana, we reviewed and analyzed frog call data from the Louisiana Amphibian Monitoring Program (LAMP). The data were collected between 1997 and 2017 using North American Amphibian Monitoring Program protocols. Louisiana...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Jacoby Carter, Darren Johnson, Jeff Boundy, William Vermillion
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2021
Materias:	Medicine R Science Q
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/0d9b0e9ca86f40c5a4021347200aaba8
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:0d9b0e9ca86f40c5a4021347200aaba8
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:0d9b0e9ca86f40c5a4021347200aaba82021-12-02T20:13:55ZThe Louisiana Amphibian Monitoring Program from 1997 to 2017: Results, analyses, and lessons learned.1932-620310.1371/journal.pone.0257869https://doaj.org/article/0d9b0e9ca86f40c5a4021347200aaba82021-01-01T00:00:00Zhttps://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0257869https://doaj.org/toc/1932-6203To determine trends in either frog distribution or abundance in the State of Louisiana, we reviewed and analyzed frog call data from the Louisiana Amphibian Monitoring Program (LAMP). The data were collected between 1997 and 2017 using North American Amphibian Monitoring Program protocols. Louisiana was divided into three survey regions for administration and analysis: the Florida Parishes, and 2 areas west of the Florida parishes called North and South. Fifty-four routes were surveyed with over 12,792 stops and 1,066 hours of observation. Observers heard 26 species of the 31 species reported to be in Louisiana. Three of the species not heard were natives with ranges that did not overlap with survey routes. The other two species were introduced species, the Rio Grande Chirping Frog (Eleutherodactylus cystignathoides) and the Cuban Treefrog (Osteopilus septentrionalis). Both seem to be limited to urban areas with little to no route coverage. The 15 most commonly occurring species were examined in detail using the percentage of stops at which they observed along a given survey and their call indices. Most species exhibited a multimodal, concave, or convex pattern of abundance over a 15-year period. Among LAMP survey regions, none of the species had synchronous population trends. Only one group of species, winter callers, regularly co-occur. Based on the species lists, the North region could be seen as a subset of the South. However, based on relative abundance, the North was more similar to Florida parishes for both the winter and summer survey runs. Our analyses demonstrate that long-term monitoring (10 years or more) may be necessary to determine population and occupancy trends, and that frog species may have different local demographic patterns across large geographic areas.Jacoby CarterDarren JohnsonJeff BoundyWilliam VermillionPublic Library of Science (PLoS)articleMedicineRScienceQENPLoS ONE, Vol 16, Iss 9, p e0257869 (2021)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Medicine R Science Q
spellingShingle	Medicine R Science Q Jacoby Carter Darren Johnson Jeff Boundy William Vermillion The Louisiana Amphibian Monitoring Program from 1997 to 2017: Results, analyses, and lessons learned.
description	To determine trends in either frog distribution or abundance in the State of Louisiana, we reviewed and analyzed frog call data from the Louisiana Amphibian Monitoring Program (LAMP). The data were collected between 1997 and 2017 using North American Amphibian Monitoring Program protocols. Louisiana was divided into three survey regions for administration and analysis: the Florida Parishes, and 2 areas west of the Florida parishes called North and South. Fifty-four routes were surveyed with over 12,792 stops and 1,066 hours of observation. Observers heard 26 species of the 31 species reported to be in Louisiana. Three of the species not heard were natives with ranges that did not overlap with survey routes. The other two species were introduced species, the Rio Grande Chirping Frog (Eleutherodactylus cystignathoides) and the Cuban Treefrog (Osteopilus septentrionalis). Both seem to be limited to urban areas with little to no route coverage. The 15 most commonly occurring species were examined in detail using the percentage of stops at which they observed along a given survey and their call indices. Most species exhibited a multimodal, concave, or convex pattern of abundance over a 15-year period. Among LAMP survey regions, none of the species had synchronous population trends. Only one group of species, winter callers, regularly co-occur. Based on the species lists, the North region could be seen as a subset of the South. However, based on relative abundance, the North was more similar to Florida parishes for both the winter and summer survey runs. Our analyses demonstrate that long-term monitoring (10 years or more) may be necessary to determine population and occupancy trends, and that frog species may have different local demographic patterns across large geographic areas.
format	article
author	Jacoby Carter Darren Johnson Jeff Boundy William Vermillion
author_facet	Jacoby Carter Darren Johnson Jeff Boundy William Vermillion
author_sort	Jacoby Carter
title	The Louisiana Amphibian Monitoring Program from 1997 to 2017: Results, analyses, and lessons learned.
title_short	The Louisiana Amphibian Monitoring Program from 1997 to 2017: Results, analyses, and lessons learned.
title_full	The Louisiana Amphibian Monitoring Program from 1997 to 2017: Results, analyses, and lessons learned.
title_fullStr	The Louisiana Amphibian Monitoring Program from 1997 to 2017: Results, analyses, and lessons learned.
title_full_unstemmed	The Louisiana Amphibian Monitoring Program from 1997 to 2017: Results, analyses, and lessons learned.
title_sort	louisiana amphibian monitoring program from 1997 to 2017: results, analyses, and lessons learned.
publisher	Public Library of Science (PLoS)
publishDate	2021
url	https://doaj.org/article/0d9b0e9ca86f40c5a4021347200aaba8
work_keys_str_mv	AT jacobycarter thelouisianaamphibianmonitoringprogramfrom1997to2017resultsanalysesandlessonslearned AT darrenjohnson thelouisianaamphibianmonitoringprogramfrom1997to2017resultsanalysesandlessonslearned AT jeffboundy thelouisianaamphibianmonitoringprogramfrom1997to2017resultsanalysesandlessonslearned AT williamvermillion thelouisianaamphibianmonitoringprogramfrom1997to2017resultsanalysesandlessonslearned AT jacobycarter louisianaamphibianmonitoringprogramfrom1997to2017resultsanalysesandlessonslearned AT darrenjohnson louisianaamphibianmonitoringprogramfrom1997to2017resultsanalysesandlessonslearned AT jeffboundy louisianaamphibianmonitoringprogramfrom1997to2017resultsanalysesandlessonslearned AT williamvermillion louisianaamphibianmonitoringprogramfrom1997to2017resultsanalysesandlessonslearned
_version_	1718374688151830528

The Louisiana Amphibian Monitoring Program from 1997 to 2017: Results, analyses, and lessons learned.

Ejemplares similares