This turned up in my junk mail. Thought you might like it.

The findings from the first 12-months of FrogID are in!

In just one year, FrogID has generated the equivalent of 13% of all frog records collected in Australia over the last 240 years. The submitted recordings have resulted in over 66,000 validated calls and detected 175 of Australia’s 240 known native frogs. The data has informed scientists on the impacts of climate change and pollution on Australia’s frogs including the first evidence of the decline in Sydney of the Australian Green Tree Frog; the spread of the invasive Cane Toad; and information on the breeding populations of 28 globally threatened and 13 nationally threatened frog species.

Due to FrogID and the thousands of people recording the calls of frogs across Sydney, we have enough data for the first compelling evidence of the disappearance of the Green Tree Frog from most of Sydney.

A surprising result from the first year of the project has been the number of records of native frog species detected calling from well outside their known range, including the Eastern Dwarf Tree Frog (Litoria fallax) found up to 400km from the known edge of the native range near the NSW/Victoria border.

You can read our first publication using FrogID data in the latest Herpetological Conservation and Biology Journal here.
FrogID: Citizen Scientists Provide Validated Biodiversity Data on Frogs of Australia

Excellent, thanks Moll.

Peak Warming Man said:

Excellent, thanks Moll.

Indeed. :)

mollwollfumble said:

This turned up in my junk mail. Thought you might like it.

The findings from the first 12-months of FrogID are in!

In just one year, FrogID has generated the equivalent of 13% of all frog records collected in Australia over the last 240 years. The submitted recordings have resulted in over 66,000 validated calls and detected 175 of Australia’s 240 known native frogs. The data has informed scientists on the impacts of climate change and pollution on Australia’s frogs including the first evidence of the decline in Sydney of the Australian Green Tree Frog; the spread of the invasive Cane Toad; and information on the breeding populations of 28 globally threatened and 13 nationally threatened frog species.

Due to FrogID and the thousands of people recording the calls of frogs across Sydney, we have enough data for the first compelling evidence of the disappearance of the Green Tree Frog from most of Sydney.

A surprising result from the first year of the project has been the number of records of native frog species detected calling from well outside their known range, including the Eastern Dwarf Tree Frog (Litoria fallax) found up to 400km from the known edge of the native range near the NSW/Victoria border.

You can read our first publication using FrogID data in the latest Herpetological Conservation and Biology Journal here.
FrogID: Citizen Scientists Provide Validated Biodiversity Data on Frogs of Australia

Devil’s Advocate mode on:- If 13% of the data is from this most recent collection, this statement is possibly rather broader than warranted.

>>The data has informed scientists on the impacts of climate change and pollution on Australia’s frogs including the first evidence of the decline in Sydney of the Australian Green Tree Frog; the spread of the invasive Cane Toad; and information on the breeding populations of 28 globally threatened and 13 nationally threatened frog species.<<

buffy said:

mollwollfumble said:

This turned up in my junk mail. Thought you might like it.

The findings from the first 12-months of FrogID are in!

In just one year, FrogID has generated the equivalent of 13% of all frog records collected in Australia over the last 240 years. The submitted recordings have resulted in over 66,000 validated calls and detected 175 of Australia’s 240 known native frogs. The data has informed scientists on the impacts of climate change and pollution on Australia’s frogs including the first evidence of the decline in Sydney of the Australian Green Tree Frog; the spread of the invasive Cane Toad; and information on the breeding populations of 28 globally threatened and 13 nationally threatened frog species.

Due to FrogID and the thousands of people recording the calls of frogs across Sydney, we have enough data for the first compelling evidence of the disappearance of the Green Tree Frog from most of Sydney.

A surprising result from the first year of the project has been the number of records of native frog species detected calling from well outside their known range, including the Eastern Dwarf Tree Frog (Litoria fallax) found up to 400km from the known edge of the native range near the NSW/Victoria border.

You can read our first publication using FrogID data in the latest Herpetological Conservation and Biology Journal here.
FrogID: Citizen Scientists Provide Validated Biodiversity Data on Frogs of Australia

Devil’s Advocate mode on:- If 13% of the data is from this most recent collection, this statement is possibly rather broader than warranted.

>>The data has informed scientists on the impacts of climate change and pollution on Australia’s frogs including the first evidence of the decline in Sydney of the Australian Green Tree Frog; the spread of the invasive Cane Toad; and information on the breeding populations of 28 globally threatened and 13 nationally threatened frog species.<<

They compare it with results archived in the Atlas of Living Australia.

Neither can be considered all that comprehensive.

It’s a bit tough to compare because for instance, the Atlas has a record of the cane toad living in Melbourne, Adelaide and Perth, all of which seem unlikely, and not supported by the new FrogID data. There was a single confirmed recording of Cane Toad from the Sydney area on FrogID, which is way down on the 18 plus records from the AoLA.

When you have only three cane toad calls from FrogID recorded in WA, two from the same place, it’s tough to draw distribution maps. But the experts are looking into that.

The decline in Sydney of the Green Tree Frog is statistical, rather than solid. FrogID did still record 23 different Green Tree Frog sites in the Sydney area. But that was fewer than expected, and none of those was close to the Sydney Harbour foreshore.

mollwollfumble said:

buffy said:

mollwollfumble said:

This turned up in my junk mail. Thought you might like it.

The findings from the first 12-months of FrogID are in!

In just one year, FrogID has generated the equivalent of 13% of all frog records collected in Australia over the last 240 years. The submitted recordings have resulted in over 66,000 validated calls and detected 175 of Australia’s 240 known native frogs. The data has informed scientists on the impacts of climate change and pollution on Australia’s frogs including the first evidence of the decline in Sydney of the Australian Green Tree Frog; the spread of the invasive Cane Toad; and information on the breeding populations of 28 globally threatened and 13 nationally threatened frog species.

Due to FrogID and the thousands of people recording the calls of frogs across Sydney, we have enough data for the first compelling evidence of the disappearance of the Green Tree Frog from most of Sydney.

A surprising result from the first year of the project has been the number of records of native frog species detected calling from well outside their known range, including the Eastern Dwarf Tree Frog (Litoria fallax) found up to 400km from the known edge of the native range near the NSW/Victoria border.

You can read our first publication using FrogID data in the latest Herpetological Conservation and Biology Journal here.
FrogID: Citizen Scientists Provide Validated Biodiversity Data on Frogs of Australia

Devil’s Advocate mode on:- If 13% of the data is from this most recent collection, this statement is possibly rather broader than warranted.

>>The data has informed scientists on the impacts of climate change and pollution on Australia’s frogs including the first evidence of the decline in Sydney of the Australian Green Tree Frog; the spread of the invasive Cane Toad; and information on the breeding populations of 28 globally threatened and 13 nationally threatened frog species.<<

They compare it with results archived in the Atlas of Living Australia.

Neither can be considered all that comprehensive.

It’s a bit tough to compare because for instance, the Atlas has a record of the cane toad living in Melbourne, Adelaide and Perth, all of which seem unlikely, and not supported by the new FrogID data. There was a single confirmed recording of Cane Toad from the Sydney area on FrogID, which is way down on the 18 plus records from the AoLA.

When you have only three cane toad calls from FrogID recorded in WA, two from the same place, it’s tough to draw distribution maps. But the experts are looking into that.

The decline in Sydney of the Green Tree Frog is statistical, rather than solid. FrogID did still record 23 different Green Tree Frog sites in the Sydney area. But that was fewer than expected, and none of those was close to the Sydney Harbour foreshore.

There is something very wrong with what’s inside your head.

PermeateFree said:

mollwollfumble said:

buffy said:

Devil’s Advocate mode on:- If 13% of the data is from this most recent collection, this statement is possibly rather broader than warranted.

>>The data has informed scientists on the impacts of climate change and pollution on Australia’s frogs including the first evidence of the decline in Sydney of the Australian Green Tree Frog; the spread of the invasive Cane Toad; and information on the breeding populations of 28 globally threatened and 13 nationally threatened frog species.<<

They compare it with results archived in the Atlas of Living Australia.

Neither can be considered all that comprehensive.

It’s a bit tough to compare because for instance, the Atlas has a record of the cane toad living in Melbourne, Adelaide and Perth, all of which seem unlikely, and not supported by the new FrogID data. There was a single confirmed recording of Cane Toad from the Sydney area on FrogID, which is way down on the 18 plus records from the AoLA.

When you have only three cane toad calls from FrogID recorded in WA, two from the same place, it’s tough to draw distribution maps. But the experts are looking into that.

The decline in Sydney of the Green Tree Frog is statistical, rather than solid. FrogID did still record 23 different Green Tree Frog sites in the Sydney area. But that was fewer than expected, and none of those was close to the Sydney Harbour foreshore.

There is something very wrong with what’s inside your head.

I’ll say! What’s been inside my head for the past four days is quantum mechanics.

And that’s been turning my brain inside out.

mollwollfumble said:

PermeateFree said:

mollwollfumble said:

They compare it with results archived in the Atlas of Living Australia.

Neither can be considered all that comprehensive.

It’s a bit tough to compare because for instance, the Atlas has a record of the cane toad living in Melbourne, Adelaide and Perth, all of which seem unlikely, and not supported by the new FrogID data. There was a single confirmed recording of Cane Toad from the Sydney area on FrogID, which is way down on the 18 plus records from the AoLA.

When you have only three cane toad calls from FrogID recorded in WA, two from the same place, it’s tough to draw distribution maps. But the experts are looking into that.

The decline in Sydney of the Green Tree Frog is statistical, rather than solid. FrogID did still record 23 different Green Tree Frog sites in the Sydney area. But that was fewer than expected, and none of those was close to the Sydney Harbour foreshore.

There is something very wrong with what’s inside your head.

I’ll say! What’s been inside my head for the past four days is quantum mechanics.

And that’s been turning my brain inside out.

Perhaps you should stick to quantum mechanics, because you are making quite a mess of everything else. To get things straight If you were expressing an opinion I would not have a problem, but you constantly state facts that are simply incorrect. This not only throws mud at the scientific researchers, but unfairly criticises the scientific papers that you have not read or understood and therefore not equipped to comment as if you were an authority.

PermeateFree said:

Perhaps you should stick to quantum mechanics, because you are making quite a mess of everything else. To get things straight If you were expressing an opinion I would not have a problem, but you constantly state facts that are simply incorrect. This not only throws mud at the scientific researchers, but unfairly criticises the scientific papers that you have not read or understood and therefore not equipped to comment as if you were an authority.

It takes one to know one.

Read the original paper.

Typical environment news:

Overall, very little change – of 175 species detected, only 6 have changed range.

Of the 6, two of the changes have been bad and four (range increases of native frogs) is good.

The bad changes have been minor

• only a single recording of the cane toad outside its previously known range.
• the green tree frog is still common around Sydney, just not around Sydney Harbour.

Slightly spun – the four good changes are presented as bad.

Slightly hyped.

No indications of any catastrophe.

News to me, although not perhaps to everyone else:

• In the whole of Australia, only one introduced frog species.
• The cane toad is not among the most common 25 frog species in Australia.
• The overall range of the cane toad may even have shrunk slightly. Too soon to tell.

Across the Andes by frog