Next Article in Journal
Evolution of Hip Muscles Strength in Femoroacetabular Impingement Patients Treated by Arthroscopy or Surgical Hip Dislocation: A Retrospective Exploratory Study
Next Article in Special Issue
The Delineation and Ecological Connectivity of the Three Parallel Rivers Natural World Heritage Site
Previous Article in Journal
A Structure-Based Mechanism for the Denaturing Action of Urea, Guanidinium Ion and Thiocyanate Ion
Previous Article in Special Issue
The Evolutionary Dynamics of the Mitochondrial tRNA in the Cichlid Fish Family
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Biology
Volume 11
Issue 12
10.3390/biology11121766
biology-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Geographical Variation in Body Size and the Bergmann’s Rule in Andrew’s Toad (Bufo andrewsi)

by
Ying Jiang
1,2,3,†,
Li Zhao
2,3,†,
Xiaofeng Luan
1,* and
Wenbo Liao
2,3,*
1
School of Ecology and Nature Conservation, Beijing Forestry University, Beijing 100083, China
2
Key Laboratory of Southwest China Wildlife Resources Conservation (Ministry of Education), China West Normal University, Nanchong 637009, China
3
Key Laboratory of Artificial Propagation and Utilization in Anurans of Nanchong City, China West Normal University, Nanchong 637009, China
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
†
These authors contributed equally to this work.
Biology 2022, 11(12), 1766; https://doi.org/10.3390/biology11121766
Submission received: 13 November 2022 / Revised: 28 November 2022 / Accepted: 29 November 2022 / Published: 6 December 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Macro-Ecology, Macro-Evolution and Conservation of Animals and Plants)
Browse Figure
Versions Notes

Abstract

:

Simple Summary

Understanding variations in the morphology and age of animals along a geographical gradient may aid in our comprehension of the evolution of these animals. In this view, we studied variation in the age and body size of Andrew’s toad (Bufo andrewsi) across 31 populations along a geographical gradient. The results revealed that along with a decrease in the annual mean temperature, the age structure increased, whereas body size did not indicate an increasing trend, showing no support for Bergmann’s rule. Precipitation seasonality negatively correlated with longevity and mean age, whereas precipitation of the driest month positively correlated with body size. Moreover, we also found that UV-B seasonality positively correlated with age structure traits and body size. The present study provided critical cues that explain the considerable variability observed in the ecogeographic patterns among Andrew’s toads.

Abstract

Environmental variation likely modifies the life-history traits of vertebrates. As ectothermic vertebrates, it is possible that the body size of amphibians is impacted by environmental conditions. Here, we firstly quantified age and body size variation in the Andrew’s toad (Bufo andrewsi) across the Hengduan Mountains. Then, we examined the environmental correlates of this variation based on the literature and our unpublished data on the age and body size of the Andrew’s toad from 31 populations distributed in southwestern China. Although our analysis revealed significant variations in age and body size across B. andrewsi populations, neither latitude nor altitude correlated with this variability in age and body size. We found that age at sexual maturity, mean age, and longevity increased with decreasing annual mean temperature, whereas age at sexual maturity increased with decreasing temperature seasonality, implying that temperature was a crucial habitat characteristic that modulated age structure traits. Moreover, we revealed positive associations between age structure and UV-B seasonality, and negative relationships between both mean age and longevity and precipitation seasonality. We also found that body size increased with increasing precipitation in the driest month and UV-B seasonality. However, body size did not covary with temperature, signifying no support for Bergmann’s rule. These findings help us to understand amphibians’ abilities to adapt to environmental variation, which is particularly important in order to provide a theorical basis for their conservation.

1. Introduction

Environmental variations can impose pressures on an animal’s physiology [1,2,3], phenology [4,5,6], morphology [7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19], distribution [20], and life-history strategies [21,22,23,24,25,26]. The ecogeographic patterns of covariation between biological traits and environmental variables [27] provide opportunities to assess the adaptions of animals in response to the selection pressures imposed by significant variations in temperature, precipitation, and associated microclimate variations [28,29]. The variation in life-history traits, such as age structure and body size, across environmental gradients is one of the most frequently studied ecogeographic patterns [30,31,32].
Body size is a key life-history trait [33,34,35,36,37] that is affected by some factors, including resource consumption, interactions, population dynamics and community assembly in different environments [38,39,40,41]. Thus, body size should be associated with metabolic rate, population density, longevity, and geographic range (see [38,42,43]). Identifying the environmental factors that affect body size variation among populations is important in order to understand how animals adapt to abiotic environments by changing their phenotypic plasticity [22,44,45,46,47,48].
A well-known ecogeographic pattern of variation in body size is Bergmann’s rule, which describes the tendency for endotherms to be larger in colder conditions at high latitudes or altitudes [49]. The potential mechanism underpinning Bergmann’s rule may be a reduction in heat loss due to the low surface-to-volume ratio of larger individuals (the heat conservation hypothesis) [49,50,51]. When applying Bergmann’s rule to ectothermic vertebrates which neither produce nor conserve heat [52], the conclusions remain ambiguous at either interspecific or intraspecific levels [53], for example, some taxa follow this rule [45,54], other taxa do not follow this rule [22,55] and many taxa show the inverse of Bergmann’s rule [56,57,58]. In other words, there is no consensus on the generalization of the Bergmann’s clines for ectothermic vertebrates and further research is required.
In view of this ambiguity, studies on body size variation among ectotherms have proposed three main hypotheses: the water supply hypothesis [59], the hibernation hypothesis [60], and the heat balance hypothesis [61]. These hypotheses emphasize the effects of environmental factors (e.g., water deficits and temperature seasonality) on growth rates and sexual maturity, which subsequently affect body size. For instance, individuals living in harsh environments devote more time and energy to growing, which causes them to become older and to grow larger, and, thus, these individuals are of a larger body size [62]. Furthermore, some species display sex-specific relationships between environmental factors and body size because males and females suffer distinct selection pressures in the same environment [63,64,65,66,67]. As such, the extent to which these hypotheses explain the ecogeographic patterns of body size variation remains uncertain.
The anuran is an ideal model for exploring the influence of environmental changes on body size, since their highly permeable skin, unshelled eggs, low vagility, and frequent territoriality are particularly vulnerable to environmental stresses (e.g., temperature, precipitation, and ultraviolet radiation) [68]. However, few studies exploring body size variation have been conducted, of which only nearly 5% of all amphibian species have been studied, and there is much controversy as to whether the effects of environmental changes on body size variation support Bergmann’s rule [45,55,57,61,65,66,67,68,69,70,71,72,73,74,75,76,77,78,79,80,81,82]. Although the effect of temperature on body size is contested, precipitation, as a proxy for productivity, has been found to affect the body size of frogs [24,83]. One possible explanation is that precipitation affects the abundance of food resources, humidity, and the length of the breeding season for anurans [84]. Therefore, individuals living in environments with less precipitation should display a shorter breeding season and obtain fewer resources, and will subsequently possess a smaller body size. Temperature and precipitation are not the only factors that affect the growth and development of many amphibian species, but other environmental factors, such as ultraviolet-B (UV-B) radiation, can also have different effects on the growth and development of amphibians [85]. For example, some studies have found that high UV-B radiation can damage DNA, resulting in increasing d [86,87], whereas inadequate levels of UV-B radiation may result in decreased head width, vertebrae length, and femur length [88]. Whether the final body size of the amphibian is the consequence of a unique main factor or several factors acting synergistically remains contested. In this case, a detailed study on body size variation across populations is necessary.
To examine the main driving force of body size variation, a species that is distributed across a wide geographic range may be the most ideal model, as different populations exist along geographical gradients and are consequently exposed to different climatic and environmental conditions. The Andrew’s toad (Bufo andrewsi) is not endemic to China and is widely distributed in the Hengduan Mountains, China, with altitudes ranging from 750 m to 3500 m [24,89]. Previous studies have investigated the life-history traits, male mating choice, testes mass, organ size (e.g., heart, lung, gallbladder, livers, spleen, kidneys, and digestive tract), and population genetic structure of this species [24,45,90,91,92,93,94,95,96]. However, studies on body size variation have investigated only a few populations [22,45]. Here, we use data on mean body size and age from our previously published paper [24] and our unpublished data to explore how environmental changes (i.e., temperature, precipitation, and UV-B radiation variables) affect the body size variations of B. andrewsi. The present study aimed to (1) examine the differences in age structure and body size among populations, (2) test the applicability of the Bergmann’s rule in B. andrewsi, and (3) characterise the associations between environmental factors, age structure, and body size. This study would help to elucidate the adaption of amphibians to environmental changes through variations in age structure and body size responding to changes of environmental stress.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Data on Body Size and Age Estimation

To explore the body size variation of B. andrewsi along its environmental gradients, we captured 309 males and 103 females from 14 populations between 2017 and 2019. The populations encompassed a wide range of the geographic distribution of this species. We diagnosed the toads as B. andrewsi based on their morphological key characteristics (body length and body colour) and distribution ranges [89]. Each population was not equidistant from the others (Figure 1). For all populations, individuals were captured by hand on spawning sites at night. After confirming whether the individuals were adults by directly observing secondary sexual traits, we used callipers to measure the snout-vent length (SVL) as an index of body size to the nearest 0.01 mm. Prior to being released at the collection site, the second phalange of the longest finger of the right hindlimb of all individuals were removed and preserved in 4% neutral buffered formalin for subsequent age estimation.
The skeletochronology was used to estimate the ages of each sampled individual [22]. To produce histological sections for age determination, we used paraffin sectioning and Harris’s haematoxylin staining (see details in [66,97]). With a LEITZ dialux 40 microscope, we selected the cross-sections of the phalanx that had the smallest medullar cavity and the thickest cortical bone (13 m thick) to count the lines of arrested growth (LAG). To take photos of the best portions, we utilized a Motic BA300 digital camera mounted on a Moticam2006 light microscope with a 400× magnification. When determining age in all samplings, we considered the effect of endosteal resorption, false, and multiple lines on the accuracy of age determination.
We then extracted reliable data on body size, age, and the sample coordinates of 17 populations from the published literature [24], in which the same standard measurements were performed. Considering that all toads captured at the spawning sites provided for the age distribution of the reproductive population, it was reasonable to use the minimum age of adult toads as an estimate of age at sexual maturity in a population and the maximum age as an estimate of longevity. A total of 2240 toads (1663 males, 577 females) were estimated for their ages, with measurements of body size (Table S1).

2.2. Environmental Predictors

To explore the effects of environmental changes on the body size variation of B. andrewsi, the bioclimatic and UV-B variables were used as environmental predictors, which were found to be influential for the anurans’ survival [86,98,99,100]. We obtained bioclimatic data from WorldClim v2 [100] and UV-B data from the glUV dataset v1 [99] and extracted those variables for the sampling sites using ArcGIS 10.8 [101]. Then, to avoid high collinearity among bioclimatic variables and UV-B variables, respectively, we used Pearson’s correlation tests to analyse their correlations and exclude high-related variables (Figure S1) [85,102]. Five bioclimatic variables and two UV-B variables were retained for subsequent analysis, including annual mean temperature (a measure of heat in the environment), temperature seasonality (an indicator of energy predictability), annual precipitation (a measure of water availability), precipitation seasonality (an indicator of water predictability), precipitation of the driest month, UV-B seasonality, and mean UV-B of the lowest month (Table S2).

2.3. Statistical Analysis

All statistical analyses were conducted in R 4.2.0 [103]. Prior to analyses, continuous variables were log10-transformed to meet the normality assumption.
To explore geographical variation in age structure (i.e., age at sexual maturity, longevity, and mean age) among the 14 populations, we first used the R package ‘lme4′ [94,104] to implement the generalized linear mixed models (GLMMs) with age as the dependent variable, sex as a fixed factor, and the population as a random factor. We then conducted GLMMs with age as the dependent variable, altitude and latitude as fixed factors, and population as a random factor to examine the effect of geographical gradients on age. Furthermore, we performed those models again with sex added into the models as a covariate to control for the effect of sex on age.
To investigate differences in body size between males and females among populations, we treated body size as the dependent variable, sex as a fixed factor, and population as a random factor. We further tested for variation in body size among populations when controlling for the effect of age on body size, age was added into the model as a covariate together with sex × age (fixed effect) and age × population (random effect). Sex differences in growth rates would be suggested by a significant sex–age interaction. To estimate the effect of geographical gradients on body size, a GLMM was used. Here, population was used as a random factor, latitude and altitude as fixed factors, and sex as a covariate.
To test the hypothesis that age covaries with environmental variables, we implemented several general linear models (GLMs) with age as the dependent variable, bioclimatic and UV-B data as independent variables, and sex as a covariate. We conducted the test for the effects of environmental factors on body size using a GLM in which body size was considered as a dependent variable, bioclimatic and UV-B data as independent variables, and sex and mean age as covariates.

3. Results

3.1. Geographical Variation in Age

GLMMs showed that age at sexual maturity differed significantly between the sexes (F = 15.560, p = 0.002), with females ageing later at sexual maturity than males, but not among the 14 populations (AIC = −7.961, p = 0.162). Meanwhile, longevity differed significantly among the 14 populations (AIC = −28.933, p = 0.009) but not between the sexes (F = 0.595, p = 0.454). Moreover, age at sexual maturity and longevity did not increase with increasing altitude or latitude (Table 1). Controlling the effect of sex, age at sexual maturity and longevity still displayed no correlation with altitude (age at sexual maturity: F = 0.182, p = 0.678; longevity: F = 0.003, p = 0.952). Although mean age differed significantly among 14 populations (GLMM: AIC = −29.019, p = 0.017) and between males and females (F = 6.652, p = 0.023; Table 2), the effects of altitude and latitude on mean age remained insignificant after correcting for sex effect (Table 1).

3.2. Geographical Variation in Body Size

GLMM indicated that mean body size differed significantly among the 14 populations (AIC = −80.809, p = 0.011) and between the sexes (F = 79.056, p < 0.001). Females always had larger body sizes than males (Table S1). When controlling the age effect (F = 0.164, p = 0.690), differences in body size remained significant among 14 populations (AIC = −71.758, p = 0.015) but not between the sexes (F = 1.455, p = 0.248). The non-significant interaction effects of sex and age on body size revealed that the relationship between body size and age (≈growth rate) did not differ between the sexes (F = 0.275, p = 0.608). The age × population interaction was also non-significant (AIC = −75.702, p > 0.5), indicating that the growth rate did not differ among the populations. Contrary to our prediction, the effects of altitude and latitude on mean body size were not significant across 14 populations, regardless of whether the effects of sex were controlled (Table 1).

3.3. Effect of Environmental Factors

For 31 populations, age at sexual maturity, longevity, and mean age were negatively correlated with annual mean temperature (age at sexual maturity: t = −2.644, p = 0.011; longevity: t = −2.548, p = 0.014; mean age: t = −2.983, p = 0.004), indicating that individuals of populations living in lower-temperature environments matured sexually later, had older mean age and lived longer than those living in higher temperature environments (Table 2). Meanwhile, although age at sexual maturity did not change with variation of precipitation, mean age, and longevity were negatively associated with precipitation seasonality (Table 2). Significant and positive trends were detected between age at sexual maturity (t = 2.769, p = 0.008), longevity (t = 3.081, p = 0.003), mean age (t = 2.902, p = 0.005), and UV-B seasonality. Moreover, mean UV-B of the lowest month showed a negative effect on age at sexual maturity (t = −2.232, p = 0.029).
For 31 populations, we found that mean body size cannot be predicted by temperature when the effects of sex and age were controlled, which was inconsistent with the prediction of Bergmann’s rule that larger individuals lived at lower temperature (Table 2). However, mean body size was positively associated with precipitation of the driest month (t = 2.339, p = 0.023) and UV-B seasonality (t = 2.506, p = 0.015).

4. Discussion

Our results provided significant evidence for body size variation in B. andrewsi across populations in response to environmental conditions. Inconsistent with the predictions, we did not find any significant effects of altitude and latitude on variation in age characteristics and body size among 14 populations. Age at sexual maturity, longevity, and mean age increased with decreasing annual mean temperature in 31 populations. Populations living under low-temperature conditions have earlier sexual maturity, better longevity, and larger mean age than populations living under high-temperature conditions. However, the non-significant relationship between body size variation and temperatures fails to support Bergmann’s rule when correcting age and sex effects. Moreover, a negative relationship between age at sexual maturity and temperature seasonality indicated that individuals living in fluctuating temperature environments mature earlier. Animals reproduce earlier (younger, and with smaller size) when predators are present in their environment [33]. Similarly, our results demonstrated significant negative correlations between both longevity and mean age and precipitation seasonality but showed marked positive correlations between age characteristics and UV-B seasonality. Body size increased with increasing precipitation of the driest month and UV-B seasonality. In what follows, we discussed our findings in association with what was previously known from intraspecific anuran studies.
Like those of most other ectotherms [67,105,106], anuran life-history traits (e.g., age at sexual maturity, mean age, and longevity) vary with environmental conditions [66,82,107,108]. For instance, populations experiencing longer growth seasons have younger ages at sexual maturity, mean age, and longevity than populations experiencing shorter growth seasons in previous studies that discussed geographical variation in B. andrewsi age structure [22,45]. In this study, we found that low temperature led to older age at sexual maturity and mean age and longer longevity across 31 populations. The observed increase in age at sexual maturity, mean age, and longevity with decreasing annual mean temperature may reflect food resources and predation risk. Indeed, low temperatures led to food limitation because invertebrates are regarded as the major food resources of anurans that have decreased in quantity [109]. Moreover, predation risk becomes weak at low-temperature environments compared with high-temperature environments [110]. These risks are expected to increase juvenile mortality, and juveniles are likely to need a longer time to reach adulthood, leading to later age at sexual maturity and higher mean age [22,106,111]. Meanwhile, the toads living under lower temperature conditions devote more energy to somatic growth and survive longer than those living under higher temperature conditions because of the increased predation rates at high-temperature environments. Hence, variations in environmental factors determine the direction of age structure variations across geographical gradients.
Interestingly, a previous study on the growth rate in B. andrewsi suggested that females have a larger growth rate than males when they live shorter growth seasons whereas males have larger growth rates than females when they experience longer growth seasons [22]. For both sexes, high-altitude populations have a smaller growth rate than lower-altitude populations [45]. In this study, we found that the effects of the interaction of age and sex on body size were non-significant among populations, suggesting that males and females had similar growth patterns. Moreover, the non-significant effects of the interaction of age and population on body size suggested that high-altitude populations did not have a smaller growth rate, and this result differed from the previous findings [45].
Previous studies have shown that body size variation and Bergmann’s rule along geographic gradients were determined by three main parameters, namely, age at sexual maturity, longevity, and growth rate [22,45]. In the case of Bergmann’s rule, later age at sexual maturity and better longevity can play greater roles in promoting an increase in body size than slower growth in promoting a decrease in body size. The converse Bergmann’s cline is observed among populations within a species when growth rate is contained so that any prolonged time spent on growth fails to compensate for the effect of slow growth on body size [45]. In this study, body size did not increase with altitude and decreasing temperature among all populations. The age at maturity and longevity were also not correlated with altitude but increased with decreasing annual mean temperature. These findings suggested that body size variation that does not follow Bergmann’s rule, which was attributed to the fact that the increase in body size resulting from later age at sexual maturity and better longevity did not have greater roles than the decrease in body size resulting from slower growth rate. This result is inconsistent with other studies on body size variation and environmental conditions in ectotherms [26,45,55].
Life-history traits are often related to precipitation in anurans, as many studies have found an increasing trend for both body size and age with decreasing precipitation [112,113]. The observed negative relationship between longevity and mean age and precipitation seasonality of B. andrewsi was inconsistent with the prediction that better longevity may occur in harsher environments [113]. We attributed this phenomenon to the fact that environments with high fluctuations in rainfall were not conducive to survival and result in shorter longevity and smaller mean age, because the toads cannot survive and reproduce without water. Furthermore, the positive relationship between body size and precipitation of the driest month was observed, which may indicate that the toads had more time and energy to devote to growth when in a resource-rich environment resulting from abundant water.
The cost of producing protective pigments, repairing cellular damage, or behaviourally avoiding UV-B radiation may delay individual growth under conditions with low levels of UV-B [114], whereas individuals with relatively high UV-B exposure show preferential allometric skeletal development of components due to calcitriol secretion [88]. Moreover, UV-B radiation may affect embryo survival and development in amphibians [87,88]. Our findings indicated that high values of UV-B seasonality had positive effects on the age and body size of B. andrewsi, suggesting that the toads would achieve better longevity and grow larger in regions with high seasonality in UV-B radiation. This condition may compel individuals to trade-off energy input and time investment into growth.
Geographical variation in body size in the toads is driven by genetic differences [115,116]. Although the responses of the size-related elements to environmental changes are common [28,117], potential genetic effects on body size variation in the toads across populations based on common garden experiments need to be considered.

5. Conclusions

In conclusion, we used data from 2240 individuals of the amphibian B. andrewsi across distribution ranges of the species in China to examine the effects of environmental changes on the body size and age structure of the species. The results of our study confirmed significant geographical variation in body size among the 31 populations. We failed to identify any correlations between both latitude and altitude and age or body size among B. andrewsi populations, which was contrary to our predictions. Nevertheless, we found that individuals from populations with lower temperatures matured earlier and had larger mean ages and better longevity than individuals from populations with higher temperatures. Moreover, a negative relationship between age at sexual maturity and temperature seasonality suggested that those who live in climates with temperature fluctuations tend to mature earlier. We also found that after removing the effects of sex and age, although body size increased in response to increasing rainfall in the driest month and UV-B seasonality, the non-significant link between body size and temperature did not follow Bergmann’s rule.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/biology11121766/s1, Table S1: Descriptive information about the study sites of Andrew’s toad (B. andrewsi), together with mean (±SD) body size and age characteristics of males and females; Table S2: Environmental variables compiled to depict environment gradients for Andrew’s toad (B. andrewsi); Figure S1: Pearson’s correlation tests for bioclimatic variables and UV-B variables.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, W.L.; methodology, Y.J. and L.Z.; formal analysis, Y.J., L.Z. and X.L.; writing—original draft preparation, Y.J. and L.Z.; writing—review and editing, W.L.; visualization, Y.J. and X.L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the National Natural Sciences Foundation of China (31772451, 31970393), the Key Project of Science and Technology of Sichuan Province (22NSFSC0011), and Forestry Department of Hainan Province (HNZY2020-37).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due to privacy or ethical restrictions.

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank C.L. Mai, J.P. Yu, and Z.P. Mi for their assistance in data collection during the experiment, and thank M.H. Deng for her help in cartography.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Rosenzweig, C.; Karoly, D.; Vicarelli, M.; Neofotis, P.; Wu, Q.; Casassa, G.; Menzel, A.; Root, T.L.; Estrella, N.; Seguin, B.; et al. Attributing physical and biological impacts to anthropogenic climate change. Nature 2008, 453, 353–357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Souchet, J.; Gangloff, E.J.; Micheli, G.; Bossu, C.; Trochet, A.; Bertrand, R.; Clobert, J.; Calvez, O.; Martinez-Silvestre, A.; Darnet, E.; et al. High-elevation hypoxia impacts perinatal physiology and performance in a potential montane colonizer. Integr. Zool. 2020, 15, 544–557. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. De Meester, G.; Šunje, E.; Prinsen, E.; Verbruggen, E.; Van Damme, R. Toxin variation among salamander populations: Discussing potential causes and future directions. Integr. Zool. 2021, 16, 336–353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Moritz, C.; Agudo, R. The future of species under climate change: Resilience or decline? Science 2013, 341, 504–508. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Hua, F.; Hu, J.; Liu, Y.; Giam, X.; Lee, T.M.; Luo, H.; Wu, J.; Liang, Q.; Zhao, J.; Long, X.; et al. Community-wide changes in intertaxonomic temporal co-occurrence resulting from phenological shifts. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2016, 22, 1746–1754. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Liang, T.; Meiri, S.; Shi, L. Sexual size dimorphism in lizards: Rensch’s rule, reproductive mode, clutch size, and line fitting method effects. Integr. Zool. 2022, 17, 787–803. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Hu, J.; Xie, F.; Li, C.; Jiang, J. Elevational patterns of species richness, range and body size for spiny frogs. PLoS ONE 2011, 6, e19817. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  8. Rutherford, L.; Murray, L.E. Personality and behavioral changes in Asian elephants (Elephas maximus) following the death of herd members. Integr. Zool. 2021, 16, 170–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Zedda, M.; Sathe, V.; Chakraborty, P.; Palombo, M.R.; Farina, V. A first comparison of bone histomorphometry in extant domestic horses (Equus caballus) and a Pleistocene Indian wild horse (Equus namadicus). Integr. Zool. 2021, 16, 448–460. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Munoz-munoz, F.; Pages, N.; Durao, A.F.; England, M.; Werner, D.; Talavera, S. Narrow versus broad: Sexual dimorphism in the wing form of western European species of the subgenus Avaritia (Culicoides, Ceratopogonidae). Integr. Zool. 2021, 16, 769–784. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Huang, C.H.; Zhong, M.J.; Liao, W.B.; Kotrschal, A. Investigating the role of body size, ecology, and behavior in Anuran eye size evolution. Evol. Ecol. 2019, 33, 585–598. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Mai, C.L.; Liao, W.B.; Kotrschal, A.; Lüpold, S. Relative brain size is predicted by the intensity of intrasexual competition in frogs. Am. Nat. 2020, 196, 169–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Huang, Y.; Mai, C.L.; Liao, W.B.; Kotrschal, A. Body mass variation is negatively associated with brain size: Evidence for the fat-brain trade-off in Anurans. Evolution 2020, 74, 1551–1557. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Balciauskas, L.; Amshokova, A.; Balciauskiene, L.; Benedek, A.M.; Cichocki, J.; Csanady, A.; De Mendonca, P.G.; Nistreanu, V. Geographical clines in the size of the herb field mouse (Apodemus uralensis). Integr. Zool. 2020, 15, 55–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Donihue, C.M.; Daltry, J.C.; Challenger, S.; Herrel, A. Population increase and changes in behavior and morphology in the Critically Endangered Redonda ground lizard (Pholidoscelis atratus) following the successful removal of alien rats and goats. Integr. Zool. 2021, 16, 379–389. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Chen, C.; Jiang, Y.; Jin, L.; Liao, W.B. No evidence for effects of ecological and behavioral factors on eye size evolution in Anurans. Front. Ecol. Evol. 2021, 9, 755818. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Liao, W.B.; Jiang, Y.; Li, D.Y.; Jin, L.; Zhong, M.J.; Qi, Y.; Lüpold, S.; Kotrschal, A. Cognition contra camouflage: How the brain mediates predator–driven crypsis evolution. Sci. Adv. 2022, 8, eabq1878. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Jiang, Y.; Chen, C.; Liao, W.B. Anuran interorbital distance variation: The role of ecological and behavioral factors. Integr. Zool. 2022, 17, 777–786. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Jiang, Y.; Luan, X.F.; Liao, W.B. Anuran brain size predicts food availability-driven population density. Sci. China Life Sci. 2022, 65, 1–3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Hu, J.; Hu, H.; Jiang, Z. The impacts of climate change on the wintering distribution of an endangered migratory bird. Oecologia 2010, 164, 555–565. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Deme, G.G.; Hao, X.; Ma, L.; Sun, B.J.; Du, W.G. Elevational variation in reproductive strategy of a widespread lizard: High-elevation females lay fewer but larger eggs. Asian Herpetol. Res. 2022, 13, 198–204. [Google Scholar]
  22. Liao, W.B.; Luo, Y.; Lou, S.L.; Lu, D.; Jehle, R. Geographic variation in life-history traits: Growth season affects age structure, egg size and clutch size in Andrew’s toad (Bufo andrewsi). Front. Zool. 2016, 13, 6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  23. Xiong, J.L.; Guo, J.P.; Huang, Y.; Zhang, B.W.; Ren, H.T.; Pan, T. Age and body size of the Shangcheng Stout Salamander Pachyhynobius shangchengensis (Caudata: Hynobiidae) from Southeastern China. Asian Herpetol. Res. 2020, 11, 219–224. [Google Scholar]
  24. Liao, W.B.; Liu, W.C.; Merilä, J. Andrew meets Rensch: Sexual size dimorphism and the inverse of Rensch’s rule in Andrew’s toad (Bufo andrewsi). Oecologia 2015, 177, 389–399. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Li, S.R.; Hao, X.; Sun, B.J.; Bi, J.H.; Zhang, Y.P.; Du, W.G. Phenotypic consequences of maternally selected nests: A cross-fostering experiment in a desert lizard. Integr. Zool. 2021, 16, 741–754. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Kamdem, M.M.; Ngakou, A.; Yanou Njintang, N.; Otomo Voua, P. Habitat components and population density drive plant litter consumption by Eudrilus eugeniae (Oligochaeta) under tropical conditions. Integr. Zool. 2021, 16, 255–269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Gaston, K.J.; Chown, S.L.; Evans, K.L. Ecogeographical rules: Elements of a synthesis. J. Biogeogr. 2008, 35, 483–500. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Alho, J.S.; Herczeg, G.; Laugen, A.T.; Räsänen, K.; Laurila, A.; Merilä, J. Allen’s rule revisited: Quantitative genetics of extremity length in the common frog along a latitudinal gradient. J. Evol. Biol. 2011, 24, 59–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Mcwhinnie, R.B.; Sckrabulis, J.P.; Raffel, T.R. Temperature and mass scaling affect cutaneous and pulmonary respiratory performance in a diving frog. Integr. Zool. 2021, 16, 712–728. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Lindsey, C.C. Body sizes of poikilotherm vertebrates at different latitudes. Evolution 1966, 20, 456–465. [Google Scholar]
  31. Angilletta, M.J., Jr.; Dunham, A.E. The temperature-size rule in ectotherms: Simple evolutionary explanations may not be general. Am. Nat. 2003, 162, 332–342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  32. Li, P.; Tan, S.; Yao, Z.Y.; Liu, G.F.; Fu, J.Z.; Chen, J.F. Sex but not altitude, modulates phenotypic covariations between growth and physiological traits in adult Asiatic toads. Asian Herpetol. Res. 2022, 13, 34–42. [Google Scholar]
  33. Roff, D.A. Life History Evolution; Sunderland, M.A., Ed.; Sinauer Associates, Inc.: Sunderland, MA, USA, 2002. [Google Scholar]
  34. Lüpold, S.; Jin, L.; Liao, W.B. Population density and structure drive differential investment in pre- and postmating sexual traits in frogs. Evolution 2017, 71, 1686–1699. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Wu, Y.T.; Bao, J.H.; Lee, P.S.; Wang, J.; Wang, S.; Zhang, F. Nonlinear phenomena conveying body size information and improving attractiveness of the courtship calls in the males of Odorrana tormota. Asian Herpetol. Res. 2021, 12, 117–123. [Google Scholar]
  36. Bláha, M.; Patoka, J.; Japoshvili, B.; Let, M.; Buric, M.; Kouba, A.; Mpumladze, L. Genetic diversity, phylogenetic position and morphometric analysis of Astacus colchicus (Decapoda, Astacidae): A new insight into Eastern European crayfish fauna. Integr. Zool. 2021, 16, 368–378. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Krasnov, B.R.; Surkova, E.N.; Shenbrot, G.I.; Khokhlova, I.S. Latitudinal gradients in body size and sexual size dimorphism in fleas: Males drive Bergmann’s pattern. Integr. Zool. 2022, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Peters, R.H. The Ecological Implications of Body Size; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1983. [Google Scholar]
  39. Brown, J.H. Macroecology; University of Chicago Press: Chicago, IL, USA, 1995. [Google Scholar]
  40. Gaston, K.J.; Blackburn, T.M. Pattern and Process in Macroecology; Blackwell Science: Oxford, UK, 2000. [Google Scholar]
  41. Smith, F.A.; Lyons, K. On being the right size: The importance of size in life history, ecology and evolution. In Animal Body Size: Linking Pattern and Process across Space, Time, and Taxonomic Group; Smith, F.A., Lyons, K., Eds.; University of Chicago Press: Chicago, IL, USA, 2013; pp. 1–12. [Google Scholar]
  42. Scheun, J.; Neller, S.; Bennett, N.C.; Kemp, L.V.; Ganswindt, A. Endocrine correlates of gender and throat coloration in the southern ground-hornbill (Bucorvus leadbeateri). Integr. Zool. 2021, 16, 189–201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Stellatelli, O.A.; Vega, L.E.; Block, C.; Rocca, C.; Bellagamba, P.; Daji, J.E.; Cruz, F.B. Latitudinal pattern of the thermal sensitivity of running speed in the endemic lizard Liolaemus multimaculatus. Integr. Zool. 2022, 17, 619–637. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Rodriguez, M.A.; Lopez-Sanudo, I.L.; Hawkins, B.A. The geographic distribution of mammal body size in Europe. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 2006, 15, 173–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  45. Liao, W.B.; Lu, X. Adult body size = f (initial size + growth rate × age): Explaining the proximate cause of Bergman’s cline in a toad along altitudinal gradients. Evol. Ecol. 2012, 26, 579–590. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Adams, D.C.; West, M.E.; Collyer, M.L. Location-specific sympatric morphological divergence as a possible response to species interactions in West Virginia Plethodon salamander communities. J. Anim. Ecol. 2007, 76, 289–295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Kozak, K.H.; Mendyk, R.W.; Wiens, J.J. Can parallel diversification occur in sympatry? Repeated patterns of body-size evolution in coexisting clades of north American salamanders. Evolution 2010, 63, 1769–1784. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Clifton, I.T.; Chamberlain, J.D.; Gifford, M.E. Role of phenotypic plasticity in morphological differentiation between water snake populations. Integr. Zool. 2020, 15, 329–337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Bergmann, C. Ueber die Verhältnisse der Wärmeökonomie der Thiere zu ihrer Größe. Göttinger. Studien. 1847, 3, 595–708. [Google Scholar]
  50. Mayr, E. Geographical character gradients and climatic adaptation. Evolution 1956, 10, 105–108. [Google Scholar]
  51. Atkinson, D.; Sibly, R.M. Why are organisms usually bigger in colder environments? Making sense of a life history puzzle. Trends Ecol. Evol. 1997, 12, 235–239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  52. Kearney, M.; Shine, R.; Porter, W.P. The potential for behavioral thermoregulation to buffer “cold-blooded” animals against climate warming. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2009, 106, 3835–3840. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Adams, D.C.; Church, J.O. Amphibians do not follow Bergmann’s rule. Evolution 2008, 62, 413–420. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Ashton, K.G. Sensitivity of intraspecific latitudinal clines of body size for tetrapods to sampling, latitude and body size. Integr. Comp. Biol. 2004, 44, 403–412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  55. Laugen, A.T.; Jönsson, I.; Laurila, A.; Söderman, F.; Merilä, J. Do common frogs (Rana temporaria) follow Bermann’s rule? Evol. Ecol. Res. 2005, 7, 717–731. [Google Scholar]
  56. Ashton, K.G.; Feldman, C.R. Bergmann’s rule in nonavian reptiles: Turtles follow it, lizards and snakes reverse it. Evolution 2003, 57, 1151–1163. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  57. Ma, X.Y.; Lu, X.; Merilä, J. Altitudinal decline of body size in a Tibetan frog Nanorana parkeri. J. Zool. 2009, 279, 364–371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Servino, L.M.; Verdade, V.K.; Sawaya, R.J. For neither heat nor water conservation: Body size variation in Atlantic Forest frogs does not follow a general mechanism. J. Biogeogr. 2022, 49, 460–468. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Nevo, E. Adaptive variation in size of cricket frogs. Ecology 1973, 54, 1271–1278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Valenzuela-Sánchez, A.; Cunningham, A.A.; Soto-Azat, C. Geographic body size variation in ectotherms: Effects of seasonality on an Anuran from the southern temperate forest. Front. Zool. 2015, 12, 37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  61. Olalla-Tárraga, M.A.; Rodríguez, M.A. Energy and interspecific body size patterns of amphibian faunas in Europe and North America: Anurans follow Bergmann’s rule, urodeles its converse. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 2007, 16, 606–617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Kozłowski, J.; Czarnołeski, M.; Dańko, M. Can optimal resource allocation models explain why ectotherms grow larger in cold? Integr. Comp. Biol. 2004, 44, 480–493. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  63. Peng, Z.W.; Zhang, L.X.; Lu, X. Global gaps in age data based on skeletochronology for amphibians. Integr. Zool. 2022, 17, 752–763. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Guo, C.; Gao, S.; Krzton, A.; Zhang, L. Geographic body size variation of a tropical Anuran: Effects of water deficit and precipitation seasonality on Asian common toad from southern Asia. BMC Evol. Biol. 2019, 19, 208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Lu, X.; Li, B.; Liang, J.J. Comparative demography of a temperate Anuran, Rana chensinensis, along a relatively fine altitudinal gradient. Can. J. Zool. 2006, 84, 1789–1795. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Martin, A.K.; Sheridan, J.A. Body size responses to the combined effects of climate and land use changes within an urban framework. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2022, 28, 5385–5398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  67. Olarte, O.; Sanchez-Montes, G.; Martinez-Solano, I. Integrative demographic study of the Iberian painted frog (Discoglossus galganoi): Inter-annual variation in the effective to census population size ratio, with insights on mating system and breeding success. Integr. Zool. 2020, 15, 498–510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  68. Blaustein, A.R.; Kiesecker, J.M. Complexity in conservation: Lessons from the global decline of amphibian populations. Ecol. Lett. 2002, 5, 597–608. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  69. Xu, F.; Li, J.; Yang, W.K. Invasive American bullfrogs age, body size, and sexual size dimorphism geographical variation in Northwestern China. Diversity 2022, 14, 953. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Ashton, K.G. Patterns of within-species body size variation of birds: Strong evidence for Bergmann’s rule. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 2002, 11, 505–523. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Schäuble, C.S. Variation in body size and sexual dimorphism across geographical and environmental space in the frogs Limnodynastes tasmaniensis and L. peronii. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 2004, 82, 39–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Adams, D.C.; Church, J.O. The evolution of large-scale body size clines in Plethodon salamanders: Evidence of heat-balance or species-specific artifact? Ecography 2011, 34, 1067–1075. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Marangoni, F.; Tejedo, M. Variation in body size and metamorphic traits of Iberian spadefoot toads over a short geographic distance. J. Zool. 2008, 275, 97–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Marangoni, F.; Tejedo, M.; Gomez-Mestre, I. Extreme reduction in body size and reproductive output associated with sandy substrates in two Anuran species. Amphib. Reptil. 2008, 29, 541–553. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  75. Bidau, C.J.; Martí, D.A.; Baldo, D. Inter-and intraspecific geographic variation of body size in South American redbelly toads of the genus Melanophryniscus Gallardo, 1961 (Anura: Bufonidae). J. Herpetol. 2011, 45, 66–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Gouveia, S.F.; Dobrovolski, R.; Lemes, P.; Cassemiro, F.A.; Diniz-Filho, J.A.F. Environmental steepness, tolerance gradient, and ecogeographical rules in glassfrogs (Anura: Centrolenidae). Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 2013, 108, 773–783. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  77. Boaratti, A.Z.; Da Silva, F.R. Relationships between environmental gradients and geographic variation in the intraspecific body size of three species of frogs (Anura). Austral Ecol. 2015, 40, 869–876. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Eaton, B.R.; Paszkowski, C.A.; Kristensen, K.; Hiltz, M. Life-history variation among populations of Canadian toads in Alberta, Canada. Can. J. Zool. 2005, 83, 1421–1430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Ma, X.Y.; Tong, L.N.; Lu, X. Variation of body size, age structure and growth of a temperate frog, Rana chensinensis, over an altitudinal gradient in northern China. Amphib. Reptil. 2009, 30, 111–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Matthews, R.K.; Miaud, C. A skeletochronological study of the age structure, growth, and longevity of the mountain yellow-legged frog, Rana muscosa, in the sierra Nevada, California. Copeia 2007, 4, 986–993. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Cvetković, D.; Tomašević, N.; Ficetola, G.F.; Crnobrnja-Isailović, J.; Miaud, C. Bergmann’s rule in amphibians: Combining demographic and ecological parameters to explain body size variation among populations in the common toad Bufo bufo. J. Zool. Syst. Evol. Res. 2009, 47, 171–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Sinsch, U.; Marangoni, F.; Oromi, N.; Leskovar, C.; Sanuy, D.; Tejedo, M. Proximate mechanisms determining size variability in natterjack toads. Zoology 2010, 281, 272–281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  83. McGill, B.J.; Enquist, B.J.; Weiher, E.; Westoby, M. Rebuilding community ecology from functional traits. Trends Ecol. Evol. 2006, 21, 178–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Ficetola, G.F.; Maiorano, L. Contrasting effects of temperature and precipitation change on amphibian phenology, abundance and performance. Oecologia 2016, 181, 683–693. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  85. Fu, L.; Wang, X.; Yang, S.; Li, C.; Hu, J. Morphological variation and its environmental correlates in the Taihangshan swelled-vented frog across the Qinling mountains. Animals 2022, 12, 2328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  86. Wells, K.D. The Ecology and Behavior of Amphibians; University of Chicago Press: Chicago, IL, USA, 2007. [Google Scholar]
  87. Hakkinen, J.; Pasanen, S.; Kukkonen, J.V.K. The effects of solar UV-B radiation on embryonic mortality and development in three boreal Anurans (Rana temporaria, Rana arvalis and Bufo bufo). Chemosphere 2001, 44, 441–446. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  88. Verschooren, E.; Brown, R.K.; Vercammen, F.; Pereboom, J. Ultraviolet B radiation (UV-B) and the growth and skeletal development of the Amazonian milk frog (Trachycephalus resinifictrix) from metamorphsis. J. Physiol. Pathophysiol. 2011, 2, 34–42. [Google Scholar]
  89. Fei, L.; Ye, C.Y. The Colour Handbook of Amphibians of Sichuan; China Forestry Publishing House: Beijing, China, 2001. [Google Scholar]
  90. Liao, W.B.; Lu, X. Male mate choice in the Andrew’s toad Bufo andrewsi: A preference for larger females. J. Ethol. 2009, 27, 413–417. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Liao, W.B.; Lu, X. Sex recognition by male Andrew’s toad Bufo andrewsi in a subtropical montane region. Behav. Proc. 2009, 82, 100–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  92. Liao, W.B.; Lu, X. Proximate mechanisms leading to large male-mating advantage in the Andrew’s toad Bufo andrewsi. Behaviour 2011, 148, 1087–1102. [Google Scholar]
  93. Guo, B.C.; Lu, D.; Liao, W.B.; Merilä, J. Genome-wide scan for adaptive differentiation along altitudinal gradient in the Andrew’s toad Bufo andrewsi. Mol. Ecol. 2016, 25, 3884–3900. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Jiang, Y.; Zhao, L.; Luan, X.F.; Liao, W.B. Testis size variation and its environmental correlates in Andrew’s toad (Bufo andrewsi). Animals 2022, 12, 3011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  95. Zhu, X.; Chen, C.; Jiang, Y.; Zhao, L.; Jin, L. Geographical variation of organ size in Andrew’s toad (Bufo andrewsi). Front. Ecol. Evol. 2022, 10, 972942. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Zhao, L.; Mai, C.L.; Liu, G.H.; Liao, W.B. Altitudinal implications in organ size in the Andrew’s toad (Bufo andrewsi). Anim. Biol. 2019, 69, 365–376. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Norris, J.; Tingley, R.; Meiri, S.; Chapple, D.G. Environmental correlates of morphological diversity in Australian geckos. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 2021, 30, 1086–1100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Buckley, L.B.; Jetz, W. Environmental and historical constraints on global patterns of amphibian richness. Proc. R. Soc. B 2007, 274, 1167–1173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  99. Beckmann, M.; Vaclavik, T.; Manceur, A.M.; Sprtova, L.; von Wehrden, H.; Welk, E.; Cord, A.F. glUV: A global UV-B radiation data set for macroecological studies. Methods Ecol. Evol. 2014, 5, 372–383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Fick, S.E.; Hijmans, R.J. WorldClim 2: New 1-km spatial resolution climate surfaces for global land areas. Int. J. Climatol. 2017, 37, 4302–4315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Environmental Systems Research Institute (ESRI). ArcGIS Desktop 10.8. Environmental Systems; Environmental Systems Research Institute: Redlands, CA, USA, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  102. Hu, J.H.; Huang, Y.; Clifton, J.P.; Guisan, A. Genetic diversity in frogs linked to past and future climate changes on the roof of the world. J. Anim. Ecol. 2019, 88, 953–963. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  103. R Project for Statistical Computing. Available online: https://www.R–project.org/ (accessed on 1 November 2022).
  104. Bates, D.; Maechler, M.; Bolker, B.; Walker, S. Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. J. Stat. Soft. 2015, 67, 1–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Adolph, S.C.; Porter, W.P. Growth, seasonality and lizard life histories: Age and size at maturity. Oikos 1996, 77, 267–278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Angilletta, M.J.; Niewiarowski, H.P.; Dunham, A.E.; Leaché, A.D.; Porter, W.P. Bergmann’s clines in ectotherms: Illustrating a life-history perspective with sceloporine lizards. Am. Nat. 2004, 164, 168–183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  107. Gvoždík, V.; Moravec, J.; Kratochvíl, L. Geographic morphological variation in parapatric Western Palearctic tree frogs, Hyla arborea and Hyla savignyi: Are related species similarly affected by climatic conditions? Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 2008, 95, 539–556. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Yu, X.; Zhong, M.J.; Li, D.Y.; Jin, L.; Liao, W.B.; Kotrschal, A. Large-brained frogs mature later and live longer. Evolution 2018, 72, 1174–1183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Lessard, J.P.; Sackett, T.E.; Reynolds, W.N.; Fowler, D.A.; Sanders, N.J. Determinants of the detrital arthropod community structure: The effects of temperature, resources, and environmental gradients. Oikos 2010, 120, 333–343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Beck, E.; Kottke, I.; Bendix, J.; Makeschin, F.; Mosandl, R. Gradients in a tropical mountain ecosystem—A synthesis. In Gradients in A Tropical Mountain Ecosystem of Ecuador; Beck, E., Bendix, J., Kottke, I., Makeschin, F., Mosandl, R., Eds.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2008; pp. 451–463. [Google Scholar]
  111. Gliwicz, Z.M.; Guisande, C. Family-planning in Daphnia: Resistance to starvation in offspring born to mothers grown at different food levels. Oecologia 1992, 91, 463–467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  112. Özdemir, N.; Altunısık, A.; Ergül, T.; Gül, S.; Tosunoğlu, M.; Cadeddu, G.; Giacoma, C. Variation in body size and age structure among three Turkish populations of the treefrog Hyla arborea. Amphib. Reptil. 2012, 33, 25–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. Reniers, J.; Brendonck, L.; Roberts, J.D.; Verlinden, W.; Vanschoenwinkel, B. Environmental harshness shapes life-history variation in an Australian temporary pool breeding frog: A skeletochronological approach. Oecologia 2015, 178, 931–941. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  114. Belden, L.K.; Wildy, E.L.; Blaustein, A.R. Growth, survival and behaviour of larval long-toed salamanders (Ambystoma macrodactylum) exposed to ambient levels of UV-B radiation. J. Zool. 2000, 251, 473–479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Laugen, A.T.; Laurila, A.; Räsänen, K.; Merilä, J. Latitudinal countergradient variation in the common frog (Rana temporaria) developmental rates–evidence for local adaptation. J. Evol. Biol. 2003, 16, 996–1005. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Lindgren, B.; Laurila, A. Proximate causes of adaptive growth rates: Growth efficiency variation among latitudinal populations of Rana temporaria. J. Evol. Biol. 2005, 18, 820–828. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  117. Muir, A.P.; Biek, R.; Thomas, R.; Mable, B.K. Local adaptation with high gene flow: Temperature parameters drive adaptation to altitude in the common frog (Rana temporaria). Mol. Ecol. 2014, 23, 561–574. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Biology 11 01766 g001 550
Figure 1. Geographic distribution of the studied populations for B. andrewsi at Hengduan Mountains in western China.
Figure 1. Geographic distribution of the studied populations for B. andrewsi at Hengduan Mountains in western China.
Biology 11 01766 g001
Table
Table 1. The influences of geographic gradients and population on variation in age and body size across 14 populations of Andrew’s toads (B. andrewsi) using GLMMs.
Table 1. The influences of geographic gradients and population on variation in age and body size across 14 populations of Andrew’s toads (B. andrewsi) using GLMMs.
SourceRandom Fixed
VARSDpEstimatedfFp
Age at sexual maturity
Population0.0100.0990.203
Residual0.0180.134
Altitude 0.19211.0250.1820.678
Latitude 1.75211.1492.0090.184
Sex 0.19612.99414.9650.002
Longevity
Population0.0050.0730.044
Residual0.0050.069
Altitude −0.01811.0030.0040.952
Latitude 1.64311.1964.2970.062
Sex 0.01812.9540.4760.503
Mean age
Population0.0070.0820.029
Residual0.0050.072
Altitude 0.13411.0460.1780.682
Latitude 1.32011.2602.2840.158
Sex 0.06812.9916.2270.027
Body size
Population0.0010.033
Residual0.0010.025
Sex 0.08513.00079.056<0.001
Body size
Mean age: Population<0.0010.0181.000
Population0.0010.0340.015
Residual<0.0010.018
Sex 0.05913.5981.4550.248
Mean age −0.09318.7930.1640.690
Mean age: Sex 0.06114.5650.2750.608
Body size
Population0.0010.0350.009
Residual0.0010.025
Altitude 0.09111.0000.4990.495
Latitude 0.07411.2860.0440.838
Sex 0.08512.92878.151<0.001
Table
Table 2. The influences of environmental factors on variation in age and body size across 31 populations of Andrew’s toads (B. andrewsi) using GLMs.
Table 2. The influences of environmental factors on variation in age and body size across 31 populations of Andrew’s toads (B. andrewsi) using GLMs.
VariableβSEtp
Age at sexual maturityAnnual mean temperature−0.2360.089−2.6440.011
Temperature seasonality0.7070.3541.9980.050
Sex0.2250.0415.458<0.001
Age at sexual maturityAnnual precipitation−0.9090.651−1.3970.168
Precipitation of the driest month−0.0780.175−0.4450.658
Precipitation seasonality−0.3270.555−0.5890.558
Sex0.2250.0425.387<0.001
Age at sexual maturityUV-B seasonality0.8230.2972.7690.008
Mean UV-B of the lowest month−0.6430.288−2.2320.029
Sex0.2250.0435.285<0.001
LongevityAnnual mean temperature−0.2400.094−2.5480.014
Temperature seasonality0.5750.3731.5420.128
Sex0.0430.0430.9910.326
LongevityAnnual precipitation−0.5920.559−1.0600.294
Precipitation of the driest month−0.0180.150−0.1180.906
Precipitation seasonality−1.6180.476−3.3960.001
Sex0.0430.0361.2020.234
LongevityUV-B seasonality0.9280.3013.0810.003
Mean UV-B of the lowest month−0.5580.292−1.9100.061
Sex0.0430.0430.9980.322
Mean ageAnnual mean temperature−0.2470.083−2.9830.004
Temperature seasonality0.4290.3291.3060.197
Sex0.1000.0382.5990.012
Mean ageAnnual precipitation−0.1360.517−0.2630.794
Precipitation of the driest month−0.1400.139−1.0120.316
Precipitation seasonality−1.6580.440−3.766<0.001
Sex0.1000.0333.0060.004
Mean ageUV-B seasonality0.7860.2712.9020.005
Mean UV-B of the lowest month−0.4520.263−1.7210.091
Sex0.1000.0392.5670.013
Body sizeAnnual mean temperature0.0150.0250.6070.546
Temperature seasonality0.0290.0940.3060.761
Sex0.0850.0117.477<0.001
Mean age0.0530.0371.4500.152
Body sizeAnnual precipitation−0.2590.146−1.7780.081
Precipitation of the driest month0.0920.0392.3390.023
Precipitation seasonality−0.0940.139−0.6800.500
Sex0.0920.0109.149<0.001
Mean age−0.0190.037−0.4990.620
Body sizeUV-B seasonality0.1910.0762.5060.015
Mean UV-B of the lowest month−0.1260.071−1.7750.081
Sex0.0890.0118.238<0.001
Mean age0.0140.0350.4040.688
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Jiang, Y.; Zhao, L.; Luan, X.; Liao, W. Geographical Variation in Body Size and the Bergmann’s Rule in Andrew’s Toad (Bufo andrewsi). Biology 2022, 11, 1766. https://doi.org/10.3390/biology11121766

AMA Style

Jiang Y, Zhao L, Luan X, Liao W. Geographical Variation in Body Size and the Bergmann’s Rule in Andrew’s Toad (Bufo andrewsi). Biology. 2022; 11(12):1766. https://doi.org/10.3390/biology11121766

Chicago/Turabian Style

Jiang, Ying, Li Zhao, Xiaofeng Luan, and Wenbo Liao. 2022. "Geographical Variation in Body Size and the Bergmann’s Rule in Andrew’s Toad (Bufo andrewsi)" Biology 11, no. 12: 1766. https://doi.org/10.3390/biology11121766

APA Style

Jiang, Y., Zhao, L., Luan, X., & Liao, W. (2022). Geographical Variation in Body Size and the Bergmann’s Rule in Andrew’s Toad (Bufo andrewsi). Biology, 11(12), 1766. https://doi.org/10.3390/biology11121766

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop