Stage-specific threats reveal the inadequacy of adult-centered conservation
- Key Laboratory for Conserving Wildlife with Small Populations in Yunnan, Forestry College, Southwest Forestry University, China
- State Key Laboratory of Herbage Improvement and Grassland Agro-ecosystems, and College of Ecology, Lanzhou University, China
- Key Laboratory of Freshwater Fish Reproduction and Development (Ministry of Education), School of Life Sciences, Southwest University, China
Figures
Figure 1 with 2 supplements
Distribution of threat status across anuran families in China, based on the China Biodiversity Red List – Vertebrates Volume (2020).
Each stacked bar represents the proportion of species within a family categorized as Critically Endangered (CR), Endangered (EN), Vulnerable (VU), Near Threatened (NT), or Least Concern (LC). Families are ordered by total number of species.
Figure 1—figure supplement 1
Violin plots showing the distribution of (A) head length and (B) tympanum diameter across anuran families in China.
Species of the Bombinatoridae lack a tympanum; therefore, they are marked as 0 and are not shown in B. Additionally, because other families also include species without a tympanum, the kernel density estimation produces boundary effects, leading to negative values in the plots. Thus, we truncated the density estimation at the data boundaries during visualization. Each violin plot represents the kernel density estimate of trait values, with the inner boxplot indicating median, interquartile range, and outliers. Traits are standardized relative to snout-vent length.
Figure 1—figure supplement 2
Data completeness of each trait for (A) adults and (B) tadpoles.
Figure 2 with 3 supplements
Phylogenetically corrected associations between functional traits and extinction risk in Chinese anurans, separately for (A) adults and (B) tadpoles.
Each dot represents the phylogenetic generalized least squares (PGLS) regression coefficient (β) for a given trait, with horizontal lines indicating 95% confidence intervals. Traits significantly associated with threat status are marked with asterisks (*p<0.05; **p<0.01; ***p<0.001). For abbreviations of traits, please refer to Table 3. The silhouette images are sourced from phylopic (Minervarya mudduraja by Vijay Karthick; Bufo bufo by Luca Leicht).
Figure 2—figure supplement 1
Trait importance (sum of Akaike weights) of adult and tadpole traits based on model averaging under the Ornstein-Uhlenbeck (OU) evolutionary model using China Biodiversity Red List.
For abbreviations of traits, please refer to Table 3. The silhouette images are sourced from phylopic (Minervarya mudduraja by Vijay Karthick; Bufo bufo by Luca Leicht).
Figure 2—figure supplement 2
Phylogenetically corrected associations between functional traits and extinction risk in Chinese anurans based on International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List for (A) adults and (B) tadpoles.
Each dot represents the phylogenetic generalized least squares (PGLS) regression coefficient (β) for a given trait, with horizontal lines indicating 95% confidence intervals. Traits significantly associated with threat status are marked with asterisks (*p<0.05; **p<0.01; ***p<0.001). For abbreviations of traits, please refer to Table 3. The silhouette images are sourced from phylopic (Minervarya mudduraja by Vijay Karthick; Bufo bufo by Luca Leicht).
Figure 2—figure supplement 3
Trait importance (sum of Akaike weights) of adult and tadpole traits based on model averaging under the Ornstein-Uhlenbeck (OU) evolutionary model using International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List.
For abbreviations of traits, please refer to Table 3. The silhouette images are sourced from phylopic (Minervarya mudduraja by Vijay Karthick; Bufo bufo by Luca Leicht).
Tables
Table 1
Regression analysis results of extinction risk for adult and tadpole stages.
For abbreviations of traits, please refer to Table 3. BM, Brownian motion; OU, Ornstein-Uhlenbeck; GLS, generalized least squares; PGLS, phylogenetic generalized least squares; AICc, Akaike information criterion corrected for small sample size.
| Life stage | Model type | AICc | Model |
|---|---|---|---|
| Adult | PGLS (BM) | 1028.36 | / |
| PGLS (OU) | 859.95 | China extinction risk ~ 0.52 SVL** + 6.86 HL*** – 0.86 HW + 4.30 ED – 5.91 TD* – 2.06 HAL – 0.68 FL + 0.17 TL – 0.07 Arboreal – 0.13 Fossorial + 0.28 Terrestrial + 0.07 Aquatic – 0.17 Torrential | |
| GLS (non-phylogenetic) | 861.90 | / | |
| Tadpole | PGLS (BM) | 1032.56 | / |
| PGLS (OU) | 874.03 | China extinction risk ~ 0.40 TOL* + 2.69 BL – 3.58 BW + 3.96 BH + 0.20 TL + 1.00 TH – 2.73 TMW + 2.88 MW – 0.55 Lentic* + 0.06 Lotic | |
| GLS (non-phylogenetic) | 876.92 | / |
-
*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001.
Table 2
Relationships between tadpole and adult size within anuran families.
SVL: snout-vent length; TOL: total length; d: parameter quantifying the rate of return to the optimal value in the Ornstein-Uhlenbeck (OU) evolutionary model, reflecting the strength of phylogenetic signal.
| Family | Coefficient | d (SVL) | d (TOL) |
|---|---|---|---|
| All | 0.12 | 0.58 | 0.13 |
| Bufonidae | 0.11 | 0.00 | 2.74 |
| Dicroglossidae | 0.30 | 0.79 | 0.06 |
| Hylidae | –0.12 | 0.22 | 1.47 |
| Megophryidae | 0.33 | 0.67 | 0.09 |
| Microhylidae | 0.37 | 1.93 | 0.53 |
| Ranidae | 0.34 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Rhacophoridae | 0.24 | 0.50 | 0.55 |
Table 3
Functional traits and their potential ecological functions.
| Life stage | Functional trait | Trait abbreviation | Description | Ecological relevance | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Adult | Snout-vent length | SVL | Distance from tip of snout to posterior margin of vent | Body size. Resource acquisition | Lescano et al., 2018; Campos et al., 2019; Wells, 2019; Pitogo et al., 2021 |
| Head length | HL | Distance from the posterior of the jaws to the tip of the snout | Resource use and acquisition | Fei et al., 2009a; Lescano et al., 2018; Pitogo et al., 2021 | |
| Head width | HW | The maximum distance between the sides of the head | |||
| Eye diameter | ED | The horizontal distance from the anterior to posterior corner of the eye | Predation and anti-predator capabilities | Wilczynski and Capranica, 1984; Pereyra et al., 2016; Huang et al., 2019; Thomas et al., 2020 | |
| Tympanum diameter | TD | Greatest horizontal width of the tympanum | |||
| Hand length | HAL | Distance from the base of the outer palmar tubercle to the tip of Finger III | Resource use. Locomotor ability and modes of locomotion | Fei et al., 2009a; Lescano et al., 2018; Pitogo et al., 2021 | |
| Foot length | FL | Distance from the base of the inner metatarsal tubercle to the tip of Toe IV | |||
| Tibia length | TL | Distance from the outer surface of the flexed knee to the heel/tibiotarsal inflection | |||
| Arboreal | Arboreal | 0: presence; 1: absence | Habitat use | Inger et al., 1986; McDiarmid and Altig, 1999; Fei et al., 2009a | |
| Fossorial | Fossorial | 0: presence; 1: absence | |||
| Terrestrial | Terrestrial | 0: presence; 1: absence | |||
| Aquatic | Aquatic | 0: presence; 1: absence | |||
| Torrential | Torrential | 0: presence; 1: absence | |||
| Tadpole | Total length | TOL | Length from snout to end of tail | Body size. Resource acquisition | Altig and Johnston, 1989; McDiarmid and Altig, 1999; Baldo et al., 2014; Laudor et al., 2021 |
| Body length | BL | Length from snout to vent tube | Position in the water column and hydrodynamism | McDiarmid and Altig, 1999; Baldo et al., 2014; Sun et al., 2021 | |
| Body width | BW | The maximum width on both sides of the body | |||
| Body height | BH | Maximum height between dorsal and ventral surfaces | |||
| Tail length | TL | Length from base to end of tail | Swimming ability and maneuverability | Jennings and Scott, 1993; McDiarmid and Altig, 1999; Sun et al., 2021 | |
| Tail height | TH | Maximum height between upper and lower fins edges | |||
| Tail muscle width | TMW | The width of the tail muscles | |||
| Oral disc width | ODW | The maximum width of the oral disc | The ability to exploit food resources | Altig and Johnston, 1989; McDiarmid and Altig, 1999; Sun et al., 2021 | |
| Lentic | Lentic | 0: presence; 1: absence | Habitat use | McDiarmid and Altig, 1999; Fei et al., 2009a; Laudor et al., 2021 | |
| Lotic | Lotic | 0: presence; 1: absence |
Additional files
-
Supplementary file 1
Regression analysis (A) and variance inflation factor (B) results for adult and tadpole traits in relation to extinction risk.
- https://cdn.elifesciences.org/articles/110823/elife-110823-supp1-v1.docx
-
MDAR checklist
- https://cdn.elifesciences.org/articles/110823/elife-110823-mdarchecklist1-v1.pdf
Download links
A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.
Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)
Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)
Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)
Stage-specific threats reveal the inadequacy of adult-centered conservation
eLife 15:RP110823.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.110823.3
