» Articles » PMID: 38989507

Developments in Amphibian Parental Care Research: History, Present Advances, and Future Perspectives

Overview
Date 2024 Jul 11
PMID 38989507
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Despite rising interest among scientists for over two centuries, parental care behavior has not been as thoroughly studied in amphibians as it has in other taxa. The first reports of amphibian parental care date from the early 18th century, when Maria Sibylla Merian went on a field expedition in Suriname and reported frog metamorphs emerging from their mother's dorsal skin. Reports of this and other parental behaviors in amphibians remained descriptive for decades, often as side notes during expeditions with another purpose. However, since the 1980s, experimental approaches have proliferated, providing detailed knowledge about the adaptive value of observed behaviors. Today, we recognize more than 30 types of parental care in amphibians, but most studies focus on just a few families and have favored anurans over urodeles and caecilians. Here, we provide a synthesis of the last three centuries of parental care research in the three orders comprising the amphibians. We draw attention to the progress from the very first descriptions to the most recent experimental studies, and highlight the importance of natural history observations as a source of new hypotheses and necessary context to interpret experimental findings. We encourage amphibian parental care researchers to diversify their study systems to allow for a more comprehensive perspective of the behaviors that amphibians exhibit. Finally, we uncover knowledge gaps and suggest new avenues of research using a variety of disciplines and approaches that will allow us to better understand the function and evolution of parental care behaviors in this diverse group of animals.

Citing Articles

Clutch attendance and call parameters are linked to mating success in a glassfrog with paternal care.

Garrido-Priego M, Toszeghi M, Angiolani-Larrea F, Valencia-Aguilar A, Begue L, Nunez R Behav Ecol. 2024; 35(6):arae078.

PMID: 39502282 PMC: 11536337. DOI: 10.1093/beheco/arae078.


Comparative analysis of amphibian genomes: An emerging resource for basic and applied research.

Kosch T, Crawford A, Lockridge Mueller R, Wollenberg Valero K, Power M, Rodriguez A Mol Ecol Resour. 2024; 25(1):e14025.

PMID: 39364691 PMC: 11646304. DOI: 10.1111/1755-0998.14025.


Effects of parental care on skin microbial community composition in poison frogs.

Fischer M, Xue K, Costello E, Dvorak M, Raboisson G, Robaczewska A bioRxiv. 2024; .

PMID: 39314287 PMC: 11419107. DOI: 10.1101/2024.09.11.612488.


What Amphibians Can Teach Us About the Evolution of Parental Care.

Ringler E, Rojas B, Stynoski J, Schulte L Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst. 2024; 54:43-62.

PMID: 38989250 PMC: 7616154. DOI: 10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-102221-050519.


Contrasting nidification behaviors facilitate diversification and colonization of the Music frogs under a changing paleoclimate.

Lyu Z, Zeng Z, Wan H, Li Q, Tominaga A, Nishikawa K Commun Biol. 2024; 7(1):638.

PMID: 38796601 PMC: 11127999. DOI: 10.1038/s42003-024-06347-7.


References
1.
Corben C, Ingram G, Tyler M . Gastric brooding: unique form of parental care in an Australian frog. Science. 1974; 186(4167):946-7. DOI: 10.1126/science.186.4167.946. View

2.
Prohl H, Berke O . Spatial distributions of male and female strawberry poison frogs and their relation to female reproductive resources. Oecologia. 2014; 129(4):534-542. DOI: 10.1007/s004420100751. View

3.
Gower D, Giri V, Dharne M, Shouche Y . Frequency of independent origins of viviparity among caecilians (Gymnophiona): evidence from the first 'live-bearing' Asian amphibian. J Evol Biol. 2008; 21(5):1220-6. DOI: 10.1111/j.1420-9101.2008.01577.x. View

4.
Dugas M, Strickler S, Stynoski J . Tadpole begging reveals high quality. J Evol Biol. 2017; 30(5):1024-1033. DOI: 10.1111/jeb.13072. View

5.
Vergne A, Pritz M, Mathevon N . Acoustic communication in crocodilians: from behaviour to brain. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc. 2009; 84(3):391-411. DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-185X.2009.00079.x. View