Marty Michener wrote:
> Congratulations, Walt! We are very pleased and impressed. I am sure
> Martyn Stewart would have chimed in as well if he were not having ISP
> server woes at the moment (likely what has been sending out his email two=
> days after he "sent" it).
All a matter if you keep going out and recording you find things.
> As you have noted in past posts, only M. carolinensis, now Gastrophryne
> carolinensis should be any where near Georgia.
>
> Regarding your photos: My compliments! I spent five years photographing=
> small herpetological athletes for This Broken Archipelago and between the=
> squirms and the shiny skin it is a tough row to hoe. We kept the beasts =
in
> a refrigerator (never below 35 F.) overnight before photographing, and us=
ed
> flash, not sunlamps.
We took our lumps, these had been sitting in their critter keepers
outside in the shade. They were fully primed.
> You also say:
>
> "Note the Unknowns:
>
> 1. have less belly spotting. Under lights last night their bellies
> appeared white. Not sure why the difference, they looked like they
> photographed today.
> 2. are darker and less patterned on the top and sides.
> 3. seem to have rougher upper skin.
> 4. though these were calling males, the chin is not darkened
> All three are represented in the photos. The light nose on one may be a
> injury. He certainly took several hard leaps into the side of the
> confinement pail before we could stop him. One of the reasons for all
> the hand holding. Also note one has a regenerating toe, not from us, the
> injury is older.
> On all your notes I concur with, after reading the W&W species
> treatments. Also what about size? How do the lengths compare to the abo=
ve
> ranges? Since your fingers in the photos look HUGE, I assume the size
> range is within the listed ones.
Maybe on the small size, but close. And about the same size as the
regulars from there. If anything they give the impression of being just
slightly squeezed shorter, making them look slightly plumper. But that's
very slight. I did not actually try to take a ruler to them.
Actually Justin's fingers. He got wrangling duties while I tried to keep
up with the camera.
> Nor do your new guys look at all like M. olivacea pictures or description=
s.
> This Texas beast has an all-pale gray or white belly, and the back seems=
> paler and smooth.
From what I've seen in photos of olivacea, I concur. I've also heard
the call, it's online, and it's not right though a little closer:
http://www.zo.utexas.edu/research/txherps/frogs/gastrophryne.olivacea.html
http://www.zo.utexas.edu/research/txherps/frogs/calls.html
(and now everyone knows where I got the initial layout ideas for my frog
pages, many years ago)
There could be something along that line, as these have less belly
spotting. I should suggest that their genetics be compared to olivacea
as well if possible.
Walt
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|