Delineation of terrestrial reserves for amphibians: post-breeding migrations of Italian crested newts (Triturus c. carnifex) at high altitude
By R. Schabetsberger, R. Jehle, A. Maletzky, J. Pesta, Marc Sztatecsny. 2004
85 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Little is known about the terrestrial phase of high-altitude populations of European amphibians, in spite of potentially important implications for conservation and management. We followed 51 adult Italian crested newts (Triturus carnifex) that emigrated from an ephemeral lake (Lake Ameisensee, 1282 m a.s.l., Northern Calcareous Alps, Austria) with radio-tracking. Transmitters were inserted into each newt’s stomach and we collected data until it did not relocate for more than 1 week or until the transmitter was regurgitated. Most newts migrated in a north-westerly direction towards an old growth spruce forest. Subterranean shelters, mostly 5–80 cm deep burrows of small mammals located 13–293 m from the lake, were reached in between 4 h and 7.8 days. Twenty percent of T. carnifex shared their refuges with other congeneric species. Females migrated significantly further (median distance 168 m) than males (median 53 m). We propose a terrestrial core reserve extending 100 m from the furthermost terrestrial refuges of newts found with radio-tracking linked with patches of old-growth forest. This terrestrial reserve is substantially larger than has been suggested as sufficient in the recent literature.
Subfields: Ecology, Global and Planetary Change
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/697bf42bd92bbf9d8873a08ae43f6d510f88c24f
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Ecology
- Mathieu Denoël
- Gentile Francesco Ficetola
- R. Rannap
- Emilio Padoa-Schioppa
- Anthony Lehmann
- F. De Bernardi
- L. Bottoni
- F. Braña
In Global and Planetary Change
- Gentile Francesco Ficetola
- Mathieu Denoël
- Emilio Padoa-Schioppa
- F. De Bernardi
- R. Rannap
- Anthony Lehmann
- L. Bottoni
- F. Braña
Citations in the corpus
- Conservation of newt guilds in an agricultural landscape of Belgium: the importance of aquatic and terrestrial habitats (2008, background): “Fish also consume invertebrates (the food of newts) and disturb natural pond ecosystems, which may then become unsuitable for predatory amphibians (Schabetsberger et al., 2006).”
- The importance of aquatic and terrestrial habitat for the European pond turtle (Emys orbicularis): implications for conservation planning and management (2004, background): “…2003 and references therein), but also in permitting several critical life-history functions of semi-aquatic species, allowing long-term survival of populations (Burke and Gibbons 1995; Nolet and Rosell 1998; Joyal et al. 2001; Gibbons 2003; Semlitsch and Bodie 2003; Schabetsberger et al. 2004).”
- Effect of salmonid introduction and other environmental characteristics on amphibian distribution and abundance in mountain lakes of northern Spain (2006, background): “…predators may be increased by the fact that distances among mountain lakes are frequently outside amphibian dispersal capacities (e.g. Jehle & Arntzen, 2000; Holenweg, 2001; Schabetsberger et al., 2004), which can prevent recolonization displacements (see e.g. Bradford, Tabatabai & Graber, 1993).”
- Spring migration distances of some Central European amphibian species (2009, unknown): “Depending the on site, the 95th percentiles of migration distances are beyond those reported by most other authors (see also Bell, 1977; Dolmen, 1980; Griffiths, 1984; Jehle, 2000; Jehle and Arntzen, 2000; Schabetsberger et al., 2004).”
- Multi-scale effect of landscape processes and habitat quality on newt abundance: Implications for conservation (2006, background): “Terrestrial buffer zones around breeding sites are thus essential to allow amphibians to complete their life cycle ( Semlitsch, 1985 and Schabetsberger et al. , 2004).”
- Impacts of habitat loss and restoration on amphibian populations (2009, background): “…due to their generally low dispersal rates (Bowne and Bowers 2004), although that impact may differ among species according to their different mobility (e. g. Green 2003, Schabetsberger et al. 2004, Funk et al. 2005, Semlitsch 2008) and the ability to cross unsuitable areas between habitat patches.”