The British Herpetological Society

The Herpetological Journal is the Society's prestigious quarterly scientific journal. Articles are listed in Biological Abstracts, Current Awareness in Biological Sciences,Current Contents, Science Citation Index, and Zoological Record.

The 2017/18  impact factor of the Herpetological Journal is 1.268

  pdfBHS Ethics Policy

Download Access:

  • The latest 20 issues can be downloaded when logged in with a Herpetological Journal subscription membership.
  • Individual articles can be purchased for download.
  • Older issues and occasional Open Access articles are available for public download

pdf 01. Intraspecific variation in the avoidance response of stream frog (Mannophryne trinitatis ) tadpoles to fish and prawn predators


Open Access

pp. 337-346
Authors: Jowers, M. J.; Campell-Palmer, R.; Walsh, P. T. & Downie, J. R.

Abstract: The stream frog, Mannophryne trinitatis, lives in and beside steep mountain streams of Trinidad's Northern and Central ranges. Male frogs have strong anti-predator behaviour and prefer to deposit tadpoles in pools that lack predators (particularly the fish Rivulus hartii and the freshwater prawn Macrobrachium carcinus). The two predators are rarely found in the same streams and different M. trinitatis populations may show specific anti-predator behaviour to the predators they encounter in the wild. To assess tadpole spatial avoidance of predators, we presented small and larger tadpoles from four M. trinitatis populations to each predator. Three tadpole sources were from the Northern Range: Mount Saint Benedict, Lopinot (where R. hartii is abundant), and the Maracas Bay area (where M. carcinus is present); the fourth was from Tamana cave, Central Range, where neither predator occurs. To determine predator detection mechanisms employed by the tadpoles, we presented the predators in three container types: a mesh cage (for chemical and visual detection), an opaque container with holes (chemical but no visual detection), and a transparent container (visual but no chemical detection). Different sized tadpoles (large and small) showed the same response to predators, and tadpoles principally used chemical cues to detect predators. All populations showed a stronger response to the presence of R. hartii than to M. carcinus. We attribute this latter difference to the restricted distribution of M. carcinus and to the few sympatric zones between the tadpoles and these predators. Thus tadpoles lacked a specific anti-predator response to M. carcinus. Naïve tadpoles from Mount Saint Benedict and Tamana that had never previously encountered either of the predators showed strong anti-predator responses, suggesting that the anti-predator response is likely to be inherited.



For further information and submission guidelines please see our Journal Instructions to Authors



NOTE: as of January 2017, all new editions of the HJ are ONLY available online via the BHS website. The BHS no longer has a commercial hosting agreement with Ingenta  -  although editions prior to end 2016 remain accessible on Ingenta .  Those editions are of course also accessible on the BHS website for subscribers with an active and valid membership.  Should you experience any difficulty accessing HJ editions via the website or have any queries in this regard, please contact