Global Invasive Species Database 100 of the worst Donations home
Standard Search Standard Search Taxonomic Search   Index Search

   Eleutherodactylus coqui (兩棲動物) English 
生態 分佈 管理 影響 參考資料 聯繫

    此物種詳細資訊 Hawaii
    狀態: 外來
    出現紀錄: ????????
    來源: Campbell et al. 2002; Kraus and Campbell, 2002
    到達日期: Between 1988 and 1992
    簡介: 意外引入
    The likely pathway of Eleutherodactylus coqui introduction into Hawaii is through the nursery trade.There is evidence of a population explosion and of the expansion of E. coqui's ecological range to higher elevations (Kraus and Campbell, 2002). Originally restricted to horticulture sites but now found in residential areas, resorts and hotels, and public lands. Colonies have spread rapidly since 1997 and frog abundance within colonies has also grown rapidly (Campbell et al. 2002).
    Until recently, the only legal method in Hawaii for the control of frogs was hand capture, which is ineffective for large populations. For small populations it can be successful, especially if used with a taped recording of the frogs call to attract males. More recently, permission has been given to hand-spray caffeine for E. coqui control (Kraus and Campbell, 2002).
    Evidence shows that the ecological range of E. coqui in Hawaii has continued to expand. Initially the frogs were reported from relativly low elevations (0–670 m). Subsequent studies show that a large population of the frog has survived and overwintered at 920m elevation four other populations have survived two winters at elevations of 1170m. In their native Puerto Rico E. coqui occcur at the upper elevation of 1200m (Kraus and Campbell, 2002). Colonies are found in 150+ locations on the island of Hawaii, 35+ on Maui, 5+ on Oahu and 1 on Kauai, from sea level to over 3500 feet (Campbell et al. 2002).
    經濟 /民生: Results of a study conducted by Kaiser & Burnett (2006) to evaluate the economic impacts of E. coqui frogs in Hawai'i, concludes that that "the presence of the noisy coqui frog in Hawai'i county has begun to lower property values". The authors estimate direct damage to property values at a minimum of US$7.6 million and expected losses in profitability for floriculture and nursery products at US$81,000 in losses per year for the county, if the frog spread across all residential properties. For more details, please follow this link Kaiser & Burnett 2006 .

ISSG Landcare Research NBII IUCN University of Auckland