You are here
Species
Rhinella marina (Linnaeus, 1758)
IUCN
NCBI
EOL Text
This species ranges from southern Texas, USA, through tropical Mexico and Central America to northern South America (central Brazil and Amazonian Peru and northern parts of Amazonian Bolivia, Colombia, Venezuela [including Margarita Island] and the Guianas, throughout Trinidad and Tobago). It is introduced in southern Florida, Puerto Rico (introduced in the 1920s), St Croix, St Thomas, Hawaii (introduced from Puerto Rico in 1932, now common on all main islands), Jamaica (including Cabarita Island) (introduced from Barbados in 1844, common throughout island in lowlands), the U.S. Virgin Islands, Hispaniola (Dominican Republic and Haiti), St Kitts, Nevis, Antigua, Montserrat, Guadeloupe, the Grenadines, Martinique, St Lucia, St Vincent, Barbados, Aruba, Grenada, Guam (McCoid 1993), Saipan (Wiles and Guerrero 1996), and many other tropical and subtropical localities (Schwartz and Henderson 1988). It is also an invasive and introduced species in much of the lowlands of Papua New Guinea, the Admiralty and Bismarck Islands and the Solomon Islands. It was introduced to Australia in 1935, to north tropical Queensland to control sugar cane pests (which it failed to do). Now the southern limit of its distribution is near Coffs Harbour in northeastern New South Wales, and its range extends through most of Queensland and into the Northern Territory to Kakadu National Park (first recorded at Koolpin Gorge, 24 June 2002 and Twin Falls, 10 June 2002). It is also introduced and now widespread in the Philippines. It is found on most of the major islands. It was introduced into Japan first from Hawaii to Taiwan, Province of China, and then from Taiwan through Daito Islands (1930) to Ishigaki Island (1978). The population of Bonin Island was introduced from Guam, which in itself had the species introduced in 1937 (Christy et al. 2007). It is also found on Hatomajima. It occurs from sea level up to 3,000 m asl.
License | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/ |
Rights holder/Author | International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources |
Source | http://www.iucnredlist.org/apps/redlist/details/41065 |
>1,000,000 individuals
Comments: Total adult population size likely exceeds 1,000,000.
License | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ |
Rights holder/Author | NatureServe |
Source | http://explorer.natureserve.org/servlet/NatureServe?searchName=Rhinella+marina |
Mate attraction in frogs and toads typically involves multiple males calling and females responding to these acoustic signals, often choosing which prospective male to approach based at least in part on differences among the calls of different males. Mating typically involves the male grasping the female in amplexus (a tight "embrace" in which the male mounts the female, wrapping his front legs around her). In most frogs and toads, including Cane Toads, fertilization is external, with males depositing sperm on eggs as they are laid. In many species, "satellite males" may also be present at breeding sites. A satellite male may remain silent, but rather than compete with other males to attract a female, he may instead intercept a female attracted by another male and attempt to force a mating by grasping her in amplexus and fertilizing her eggs.
Bruning et al. (2010) investigated the possibility that female Cane Toads may be able to affect the outcome of competition among males for the primary amplexus position by making it more or less difficult for particular aspiring mates to maintain amplexus. This would allow females to retain a greater degree of female mate choice. The authors suggest that female Cane Toads (and presumably some other species as well) have co-opted a common anti-predator strategy for this purpose. Frogs and toads often defend themselves against predators by inflating their body: the increased girth may deter predators by both increasing the apparent size of the animal and by rendering it too large to ingest (e.g., Williams et al. 2000). Bruning et al. carried out experiments in which male frogs were induced to clasp model females with adjustable balloons inserted inside them. The researchers then measured the force required to pull males off females inflated to varying degrees. They also carried out mating trials using live females that had had their ability to inflate eliminated by placing a catheter into the trachea, preventing the tracheal glottis from closing (which is necessary to keep the body inflated). The results reported by Bruning et al. indicate that inflated female toads are indeed more difficult for males to hold on to, and that the ability of a female in amplexus to inflate her body can facilitate takeovers by larger rival males. In females who were unable to inflate, a small male could maintain his amplectant position despite takeover attempts by larger rivals. Thus, a female toad’s ability to inflate her body can influence the body size of her eventual mate. Given that females may often benefit from mating with larger-than-average males (Davies and Halliday 1977), females might use their ability to inflate to make it easier for a rival male to dislodge a smaller male. This could explain why field studies typically find that larger males are able to dislodge smaller ones.
License | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/ |
Rights holder/Author | Shapiro, Leo, Shapiro, Leo, EOL Rapid Response Team |
Source | http://eolspecies.lifedesks.org/pages/19734 |
This toad is considered the most widely-introduced amphibian species in the world. People have tried to use it to control insects such as the greybacked cane beetle, Lepidoderma albohirtum which threatened sugar cane production. However, there is no evidence that it has controlled any pest in Australia and it is now considered a pest species itself in its introduced range of Australia and on Pacific and Caribbean Islands. It preys on and outcompetes native amphibians and also causes predator declines, since these predators have no natural immunity to the bufotoxin it secretes. (Bureau of Rural Sciences 1998, Aguirre and Poss 1999).
Negative Impacts: injures humans (poisonous ); household pest
License | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/ |
Rights holder/Author | ©1995-2013, The Regents of the University of Michigan and its licensors |
Source | http://animaldiversity.ummz.umich.edu/accounts/Rhinella_marina/ |
The natural range of Rhinella marina is from the Rio Grande Valley of Texas south to the Central Amazon and southeastern Peru. This toad has been introduced into the Caribbean Islands, South Florida (Key West and Stock islands, Tampa Bay, Hillsborough, Dade and Broward counties), the Hawaiian islands, and Australia's east coast (East Queensland and Coastal New South Wales). Rhinella marina has been called one of the 100 worst invasive species worldwide by the Invasive Species Specialist Group.
Biogeographic Regions: nearctic (Introduced , Native ); neotropical (Introduced , Native ); australian (Introduced ); oceanic islands (Introduced )
- Aguirre, W., S. Poss. 1999. "Indigenous Species in the Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem : Bufo marinus" (On-line). Accessed December 10, 1999 at http://museum.ims.usm.edu/~musweb/nis/Bufo_marinus.html.
- Cameron, E. 2002. "Cane Toads, Giant Toads or Marine Toads" (On-line). Australian Museum Online. Accessed July 28, 2005 at http://www.amonline.net.au/factsheets/canetoad.htm.
- Invasive Species Specialist Group, 2005. "Bufo marinus" (On-line). Global Invasive Species Database. Accessed July 28, 2005 at http://www.issg.org/database/species/ecology.asp?si=113&fr=1&sts=.
License | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/ |
Rights holder/Author | ©1995-2013, The Regents of the University of Michigan and its licensors |
Source | http://animaldiversity.ummz.umich.edu/accounts/Rhinella_marina/ |
Rhinella marina is a tropical species that prefers forested areas with semi-permanent water nearby (Cogger 1983).
Habitat Regions: tropical ; terrestrial
Terrestrial Biomes: forest ; rainforest
- Cogger, H. 1983. Reptiles and Amphibians of Australia. Sanibel, Florida: Ralph Curtis Press.
License | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/ |
Rights holder/Author | ©1995-2013, The Regents of the University of Michigan and its licensors |
Source | http://animaldiversity.ummz.umich.edu/accounts/Rhinella_marina/ |
Bufo marinus is considered to be abundant in Dade and in some areas of Monroe Counties, occurring in lesser numbers elsewhere in south Florida (USGS/SEARMI).
License | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/ |
Rights holder/Author | Text can be freely copied and altered, as long as original author and source are properly acknowledged. |
Source | http://www.sms.si.edu/irlspec/Bufo_marinus.htm |
Egg strings may be free-floating or wrapped around submerged as well as surface material (Somma 2004). Eggs hatch into tadpoles at around three days and the tadpoles metamorphose to juvenile toads around 45-55 days later (Krakauer 1970, Ashton and Ashton 1988).
License | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/ |
Rights holder/Author | Text can be freely copied and altered, as long as original author and source are properly acknowledged. |
Source | http://www.sms.si.edu/irlspec/Bufo_marinus.htm |
Comments: Introduced in many areas in effort to reduce populations of agricultural pests (insects, white sugar cane grub in Puerto Rico).
License | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ |
Rights holder/Author | NatureServe |
Source | http://explorer.natureserve.org/servlet/NatureServe?searchName=Rhinella+marina |