Over 100 Frog Species Discovered in Sri Lanka

randomErr writes "An ecological treasure trove of brightly colored and diverse new frog species has been discovered on the tea-plantation-covered island of Sri Lanka. The discovery of more than a hundred new rain-forest species makes the country a new center of frog diversity and increases the urgency for protecting what little forest it retains."

Are any of them this one?

[mhesseltine]

The Mexican Staring Frog of Southern Sri Lanka [bitzi.com]

Thank you Trey and Matt.

Nuclear?

[littlerubberfeet]

In all suriousness, the French used to do nuclear testing near Sri-Lanka. COuld these be corrupted genes? If not, where can I be a tree hugger and send money to?

Re:Nuclear?

[m_evanchik]

I'm not a biologist, but even counting the quick breeding cycle of frogs (1/year?, could speciation occur in such a small amount of time/generations?

And what nuke tests are you taslking about. France hasn't had any colonial possessions near Sri Lanka for some 200 years or so. And I thought they did all their testing by their Pacific Island possessions and perhaps their North African ones.

Re:Nuclear?

[scheme]

What about the tests in the 1790s? That was before the atmospheric test ban treaty.

You mean the nuclear tests the french conducted during the french revolution? Those tests weren't all that big. The French were too busy trying to perfect the guillotine and beheading various nobles.

Re: Nuclear?

[Black Parrot]

> If not, where can I be a tree hugger and send money to?

You can be a tree hugger in the privacy of your own home, and send your money to me.

Ambiguous Title.

[Gaijin42]

The discovery of more than a hundred new rain-forest species...

The new finding increases the island's previously known tree frog diversity more than fivefold to over 100 species.

So did they find 100 species, or did they find a few more, bringing the Total to 100. They found at least five, because they talk about some later down, but shoddy reporting...

Also, what exactly makes a species? Just because they look different doesn't mean they are a different species. White people look alot different from black people. Same species. Did they do DNA comparisons? How different is different?

This reminds me of the Darwin thing with the birds on the island that gave him the idea of evolution. Most scientists say, if the birds in question weren't so "holy" because of darwin, they wouldn't be classified as different spiecies at all, because the differences are so minor.

Re:Ambiguous Title.

[rizzo420]

black people can make babies with white people. just like different breeds of dogs can make mutts. species are 2 organisms that can't reproduce together. and that can happen because of molecular reasons, but it also happens because of other reasons (ie: they won't reproduce together because of geographic or morphological differences). that's how species are determined. you're right in thinking that dna plays a big part, but it's not the only part when it comes to speciation.

Re:Ambiguous Title.

[RaboKrabekian]

That's not entirely accurate. Horses and Donkeys can reproduce, but they are different species as far as I know.

Re:Ambiguous Title.

[rizzo420]

they also do not make babies that can continue to reproduce, and i think it was first performed in a lab. yes, i do believe that they are different species. together they make a mule (a stronger, larger, infertile donkey used for labor). in something like 200 years (maybe much more, i don't remember), there have only been 5 mules that happened to be able to reproduce.

Re:Ambiguous Title.

[belgin]

Hmm... Mules have been around for three thousand or so years. People were breeding jacks with mares well before the rise of the Roman Republic. The reason is that a horse will literally work itself to death if you keep encouraging it. A donkey frequently won't do any work at all if it can get away with it. A mule will work until it reaches its limits and then stops. If it will harm the mule to keep working, it typically won't go one step farther. Mules also have most of the strength of horses and much of the sure-footedness of donkeys.

The term mule is used by biologists to indicate any typically sterile cross-species offspring. This is because scientists named this sort of breeding after the classic horse / donkey pair. IIRC, donkeys or ponys can also have mule offspring with zebras.

A rare few mules were able to breed with donkeys, horses or other mules, but it is in the less than 1% category, IIRC.

If lions and tigers were discovered today, they would possibly be considered one species, as Ligers and Tigons are fully interbreedable with either parent species.

For another animal "species" people seem vaguely aware of, oxen are castrated bulls. The difference is that an ox is castrated at a certain point in cattle puberty that casuses it to become immensely muscular due to an excess of testosterone and similar hormones.

Re:Ambiguous Title.

[Bowling Moses]

Nit to pick: Ligers/Tigons can breed with each other or with either parent species, but the result in any case (barring freaks like the equivalent to the very rare fertile mule) is sterile. Personally I love this little fact as it helps to illustrate that biology's got exceptions to lots of little artificial rules and helps to muddy the definition of species a tad. Drives the (unmentionable combiners/perverters of science and religion) nuts.

Re:Ambiguous Title.

[belgin]

Interesting... I didn't realize that the second generation of offspring came out mules...

That does screw up my view of how cross-species reproduction works. It really makes me wonder why that first generation is so consistantly fertile.

Re:Ambiguous Title.

[iconian]

According to the numerous biology courses I took as an undergraduate, two individuals are considered members of the same species if they can breed naturally and produce fertile offsprings. If two individuals can only breed in laboratory settings, they are not considered to be members of the same species. If two individuals produce an offspring that's incapable of reproducing, they are also not considered to be members of the same species.

Re:Ambiguous Title.

[rizzo420]

this is exactly what i was getting at with my comment. i failed to use the word "naturally" or "in natural conditions." it might be possible to breed horses and donkeys and produce offspring, but they won't do it on their own. there are also a number of different definitions on what determines a species. i don't remember them all offhand, but i believe one of the strongest, most widely used one is the definition that if they can reproduce naturally and produce viable offspring, they are the same species. now it is also known that there are some species that would be the same thing except you have 2 different groups living on opposite sides of the world. because of that geographical limitation, they are different species because they won't interbreed naturally if brought together.

Re:Ambiguous Title.

[Fergal]

Yeah right, a Great Dane and Pekinese love match!!!!

Re:Ambiguous Title.

[rizzo420]

it can happen. all domestic dogs are Canis domesticus. same species. different looks, different breeds. at one time there were fewer breeds, only geographical differences, but they were able to interbreed. humans bred them for specific tasks. poodles were originally hunting dogs in france.

Re:Ambiguous Title.

[ShawnDoc]

Basically, a species is a species when scientists say it is. Its really arbitrary. The general rule is if they cannot reproduce with any other similiar type of animal, they are a different species. However, there are plenty of birds/fish that are classified as different species, despite the fact they can mate and produce perfectly healthy offspring with other "species".

Scientists, to justify this, have changed the rule, and basically said, "If you can find any tiny little difference between two populations, and for some reason there isn't much cross breeding (Say, thanks to a mountain range between the two groups), then each is its own particular species. Of course, this is really just a matter of different breeds (think dogs), rather than species.

Its all bullshit and arbitrary.

sourpuss of the week.

[GodsMadClown]

The traditional answer to the question of species definition is that of reproduction. When two populations stop interbreeding they become a new species. The cause can be anything from differences in range, morphological differences, behavioral differences, to lots of other stuff. When Population A stops having sex with Population B, they're different species. For us non-biologists that's probably good enough.

If you don't believe the reporter about the count, perhaps you'll believe the guy with the PhD?

The simultaneous discovery of more than 100 species is...astonishing news," said David Skelly of Yale University's School of Forestry and Environmental Studies in New Haven, Connecticut

Now, on to my *first* reaction to your post.
Stop being such a freakin' humbug and engage your sense of wonder. These dudes out in Sri Lanka found 100 new species in a single study! You must give them major props for that. Read the article further and you will see that

Five of the new species are tree frogs that lay eggs in homespun foam baskets suspended above water--from whence the tadpoles take their first dip. The remainder are all species that produce young on the forest floor in robust eggs. These direct-developing young avoid being tadpoles and emerge as fully fledged, if tiny, versions of their parents.

This is very interesting stuff here. New reproduction stuff, cool new behavior... This is interesting! blah... I'm done.

Re:Ambiguous Title.

[Agthorr]

Generally, if two things can mate, and produce fertile offspring, they're the same species.

-- Agthorr

In addition...

[nytes]

Discovered in one corner of the plantation were hundreds of used highlighter pens.

Twisted article.

[Perdo]

the real story:

Evaluating Sri Lanka's amphibian diversity [wht.org]

The national geographic article is fluffy trash drawing conclusions that the scientist involved did not come to.

"We are destroying enviroment before we even know what we are destroying so give us money so we can save the enviroment."

Pethiyagoda hypothosizes the exact opposite. That the destruction of corridors of rainforest created islands of rainforest where the frogs species differentiated. The dry land acted like a natural barrier would.

So, destroy the rainforest but do it in strips so we can artificially create new species to replace the ones we loose in the destruction of the rainforest.

Speculation

[Bob Vila's Hammer]

"The discovery of these species is just an indication that we are losing some of the world's most important resources before we even know what those resources really are..."

Okay, they found some radioactive frogs. They didn't find Sean Connery's pony tail and the cure for cancer.

Frogs still barometers of environmental health?

[lute3]

The film 'Red Planet' brings that famous frog phrase to mind..

Would this diversity indicate...
1) rapid adaption was necessary in an environment that was becoming more harsh at human hands?
2) the frogs are flourishing? Is the environment's supposed toxicity is not hampering frogs in nearly profound ways as previously speculated?
3) there was a miscount in the first place? This is Sri Lanka. Might it have much less biological study than the African Savannah, the Australian Outback, or even the Brazilian rain forest?

A beautiful country

[abdulla]

It's also a beautiful country in general, besides being war ravaged for the past few decades, it's nice to see the country move on and to have people take interest in it once again.

Re:A beautiful country

[floydigus]

Not exactly 'war ravaged'. The north east is basically a no-go area for tourists, but apart from the occasionaly flare up (e.g. Tamil Tigers take over control tower at Columbo international airport two years ago) it's basically very safe, and yes, beautiful too.

Mmm, Tasty

[hackwrench]

But how will they taste sauteed with a little butter?

Slogan

[BigT]

Do you suppose the phrase "a new center of frog diversity" will be showing up on their tourism literature soon?

Hypno-toad

[docbrown42]

Do you think one of the new frogs found is the hypno-toad? 'Cause I could really use one of those.

Re:Hypno-toad

[Havokmon]

Do you think one of the new frogs found is the hypno-toad? 'Cause I could really use one of those.

The way they're handing out grants these days to funky studies (Study: Rich kids do more drugs than poor kids), I wouldn't think it too hard to get a few hundred bucks to fly down there and lick all the toads.

Maybe you could even help them build a temple Homer. :)