Download full text in PDF

Bìol. Tvarin. 2023; 25 (4): 3–10.
https://doi.org/10.15407/animbiol25.04.003
Received 20.07.2023 ▪ Revision 22.09.2023 ▪ Accepted 21.12.2023 ▪ Published online 29.12.2023

---

The food spectrum analysis of Rana temporaria and Bufo bufo in anthropogenically transformed habitats of the Ukrainian Roztochchia

N. Balandiukh

This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Ivan Franko National University of Lviv, 4 Hrushevsky str., Lviv 79005, Ukraine

---

As a result of the research, 109 individuals of two amphibian species: the common frog (Rana temporaria) and the common toad (Bufo bufo) were selected. These two species are the most numerous among other species of amphibians within the studied territory, therefore, they can be considered typical species in the anthropogenically transformed habitats of the Ukrainian Roztochchia. During the analysis of the collected material, Ivlev’s selectivity index was used to determine the selective attitude of the studied amphibian species to the number of consumed objects. Comparing data obtained from Barber’s traps and material extracted from the stomachs of amphibians, it was concluded that depending on the habitat type, both the common frog (Rana temporaria) and the common toad (Bufo bufo) show a certain feeding selectivity. The common toad consumes mostly the representatives of Annelida (15%), Arachnida (15%) and Coleoptera (18%), what makes up 48% of all consumed objects in total. The common frog, under the conditions of anthropogenically transformed environment, prefers Mollusca (15%), Myriapoda (20%) and Hemiptera (20%) mostly, what is 55% in total. In half of the stomachs we examined for, both amphibian species, plant residues were found, specifically parts of leaves and branches. Additionally, in individuals of the Bufo bufo species, stones were discovered in the stomach. Most likely, these items ended up there accidentally during the capture of primary food objects. Species of tailless amphibians are highly vulnerable to the negative impact of various anthropogenic factors. Deforestation, water bodies drainage, and global or local environmental pollution can significantly affect diverse ecosystems. This, in turn, may lead to the disappearance of segments of the dietary spectrum for amphibians. Monitoring the trophic interactions of this animal class is crucial, given the importance of amphibians as vital links in food chains. This factor underscores the need for periodic trophic monitoring, as amphibians play a pivotal role in sustaining ecological balance within their vulnerable populations.

Key words: Rana temporaria, Bufo bufo, feeding (trophics), distribution, number, herpetobionts, habitats, Ukrainian Roztochchia

---

1. Astwood-Romero JA, Álvarez-Perdomo N, Parra-Torres MF, Rojas-Peña JI, Nieto-Vera MT, Ardila-Robayo MC. Stomach contents in anurans species from Natural Reserves in the Villavicencio municipality, Meta, Colombia. Zoología. 2016; 38 (1): 165–181. DOI:15446/caldasia.v38n1.57836.
2. Balandiukh NI, Andriishyn BO, Reshetylo OS. Seasonal diet differences of the common toad Bufo bufo (Linnaeus, 1758) in Ukrainian Roztochchia (Western Ukraine). Acta Biol. Univer. Daugavpiliensis, 2020; 20 (2): 113–119. Available at: https://du.lv/seasonal-diet-differences-of-the-common-toad-bufo-bufo-linnaeus-1758-in-ukrainian-roztochia-western-ukraine
3. Dunger W, Fiedler HJ. Soil Biology Methods. Stuttgart, New York, Gustav Fischer Publishing, 1989: 432 p. Available at: https://www.cabidigitallibrary.org/doi/full/10.5555/19901941589
4. Gusev VI, Yermolenko VM, Svishchuk VV, Shmygovskyi KA. Atlas of Insects of Ukraine. Kyiv, Radianska Shkola, 1962: 304 p. Available at: http://irbis-nbuv.gov.ua/ulib/item/ukr0000016 (in Ukrainian)
5. Ivlev VS. Experimental Ecology of fish Nutrition. Moscow, Kharchpromvydav, 1955: 251 p.
6. Kuzmin SL, Dunaev EA, Munkhbayar H, Munkhbaatar M, Oyuunchimeg Z, Terbish H. Amphibians of Mongolia. Moscow, Partnership of Scientific Publications KMK, 2017: 302 p. Available at: https://amphibiaweb.org/refs/pdfs/Kuzmin_Amphibia_Mongolia.pdf
7. Menéndez-Guerrero PA. Trophic ecology of the anuran community of the Yasuní National Park in the Ecuadorian Amazon. Bachelor Degree work Biol. Sci. Pontifical Catholic University of Ecuador, Quito, Ecuador. 2001: 164 p. Available at: https://multimedia20stg.blob.core.windows.net/publicaciones/Menendez%202001.pdf (in Spanish)
8. Parmelee JR. Trophic ecology of a tropical anuran assemblage. Scientific Papers, Natural History Museum, The University of Kansas. 1999; 11: 1–59. DOI: 10.5962/bhl.title.16167.
9. Pysanets E. Amphibians of Ukraine. A guide for identifying amphibians of Ukraine and neighboring countries. Kyiv, Raevsky Publishing House, 2007: 92 p. Available at: https://museumkiev.org/upload/zoo/Amphibia_in_Ukraine_ukr.pdf
10. Shcherbak NN (ed.). Guide to the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles. Kyiv, 1989: 172 p.
11. Shcherbak NN, Shcherban MI. Amphibians and Reptiles of Ukrainian Carpathians. Kyiv, Naukova Dumka, 1980: 268 p.
12. Sverlova NV, Hural RI. A Key for the Identification of Terrestrial Mollusks of Western Ukraine. Lviv, National Museum of Natural History, 2005. (in Ukrainian)
13. Toft C. Feeding ecology of Panamanian litter anurans: patterns in diet and foraging mode. Herpetol. 1981; 15 (2): 139–144. DOI: 10.2307/1563372.
14. Weber NA. The food of the giant toad, Bufo marinus, in Trinidad and British Guiana with special reference to the ants. Annals Entomol. Soc. America. 1938; 31 (4): 499–503. DOI: 10.1093/aesa/31.4.499.
15. Yermolenko VM., Klyuchko F. A Handbook of Insects. Kyiv, Radianska Shkola, 1971: 183 p. (in Ukrainian)