Age structure and fecundity of the moor frog (Rana arvalis, Amphibia, Anura, Ranidae) in urban ecosystems of Moscow, Russia
https://doi.org/10.26897/2949-4710-2025-3-2-4-05
Abstract
The Moor Frog (Rana arvalis Nilsson, 1842) is of interest as a species exhibiting high plasticity in anthropogenically transformed environments. A comparative study was conducted on the age structure, body size, and fecundity of the Moor Frog in four Moscow populations representing different habitat types: Timiryazevsky Park and Ulyanovsky Lesopark, as well as low-rise residential areas (Brekhovo hamlet and Kuznetsovo village). Field research was carried out in April-May from 2021 to 2024. For individuals captured in amplexus, body length was measured, age was determined using skeletochronology, and eggs were counted to estimatу fecundity. Statistical analysis was performed using non-parametric tests (Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney). Significant differences were found between populations. Among males, differences were observed in body length (H = 10.32; p = 0.016) and age (H = 12.53; p = 0.006), while females differed in fecundity (H = 16.04; p = 0.001). The largest size and age of males, as well as the highest fecundity of females, were recorded in Timiryazevsky Park, which significantly exceeded values in low-rise residential areas. Large forest parks provide the most favorable conditions for the long-term persistence of moor frog populations, ensuring high survival rates and reproductive success. The decline in the studied parameters in low-rise residential areas indicates a negative impact from anthropogenic pressure
About the Authors
Irina V. Afrina
Russian State Agrarian University – Moscow Timiryazev Agricultural Academy
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Irina V. Afrina, Assistant at the Department of Zoology, Russian State Agrarian University – Moscow Timiryazev Agricultural Academy; 49 Timiryazevskaya St., Moscow, 127434, Russian Federation
Kirill A. Afrin
Russian State Agrarian University – Moscow Timiryazev Agricultural Academy
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Kirill A. Afrin, CSc (Bio), Associate Professor, Russian State Agrarian University – Moscow Timiryazev Agricultural Academy; 49 Timiryazevskaya St., Moscow, 127434, Russian Federation
Artem A. Kidov
Russian State Agrarian University – Moscow Timiryazev Agricultural Academy
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Artem A. Kidov, DSc (Bio), Associate Professor, Head of the Department of Zoology, Russian State Agrarian University – Moscow Timiryazev Agricultural Academy; 49 Timiryazevskaya St., Moscow, 127434, Russian Federation
References
1. Cushman S.A. Effects of habitat loss and fragmentation on amphibians: a review and prospectus. Biological Conservation. 2006;128(2):231-240. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2005.09.031
2. Pinto F.A.S., Clevenger A.P., Grilo C. Effects of roads on terrestrial vertebrate species in Latin America. Environmental Impact Assessment Review. 2020;81:106337. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2019.106337
3. Anđelković M., Bogdanović N. Amphibian and Reptile Road Mortality in Special Nature Reserve Obedska Bara, Serbia. Animals. 2022;12(5):561. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12050561
4. Rouse J.D., Bishop C.A., Struger J. Nitrogen pollution: an assessment of its threat to amphibian survival. Environmental Health Perspectives. 1999;107(10):799-803. https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.99107799
5. Hamer A.J. Exotic predatory fish reduce amphibian reproduction at wetlands in an urbanising landscape. Hydrobiologia. 2022;849:121-139. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10750-021-04716-5
6. Zaffaroni-Caorsi V., Both C., Márquez R., Llusia D. et al. Effects of anthropogenic noise on anuran amphibians. Bioacoustics. 2002;32(1):90-120. https://doi.org/10.1080/09524622.2022.2070543
7. Hamer A.J. A multi-scale, multi-species approach highlights the importance of urban greenspace and pond design for amphibian communities. Urban Ecosystems. 2022;25:393-409. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-021-01162-y
8. Vershinin V.L. Рemopoiesis of anurans – specific features of adaptiogenesis in species in recent ecosystems. Zoologicheskii Zhurnal. 2004;83(11):1367-1374. (In Russ.) EDN: OWFUOJ
9. Petrovskiy A.B., Shpagina A.A., Kidov A.A. Present distribution of the common frog, Rana temporaria and the moor frog, R. arvalis (Amphibia, Anura) in the “old” Moscow. Current Studies in Herpetology. 2021;21(1-2):55-62. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.18500/1814-6090-2021-21-1-2-55-62
10. Kosintseva A.Yu., Gashev S.N. Influence of urbanization factors on amphibia ecology and fauna. Vestnik of the Orenburg State University. 2006;4:70-72. (In Russ.) EDN: IUEPTN
11. Stepankova I.V., Afrin K.A., Ivolga R.A., Kidov A.A. Comparative Characteristics of Morphometric and Reproductive Parameters of the Common Brown Frog, Rana temporaria (Amphipia, Ranidae) from the Populations of Old and New Moscow. Current Studies in Herpetology. 2020;20(1-2):53-60. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.18500/1814-6090-2020-20-1-2-53-60
12. Ishchenko V.G. Life-time reproductive success and structure of population of moor frog, Rana arvalis Nilss., 1842: the non-traditional decision of general problem. Current Studies in Herpetology. 2007;7(1-2):76-87. (In Russ.) EDN: HGDOQO
13. Ibragimova D.V., Lyapkov S.M. Demographic and Morphometric Characteristics of the Moor Frog Rana arvalis from a Transformed Habitat in the Khanty-Mansi Autonomous Region-Yugra. Biology Bulletin. 2018;45(8):831-838. https://doi.org/10.1134/S1062359018080046
14. Severtsova E.A., Kormilitsin A.A., Severtsov A.S. The influence of anthropogenic factors on reproduction of Rana temporaria and Rana arvalis. Biology Bulletin. 2016;43(7):654-663. https://doi.org/10.1134/S1062359016070165
Supplementary files
Review
For citations:
Afrina I.V., Afrin K.A., Kidov A.A. Age structure and fecundity of the moor frog (Rana arvalis, Amphibia, Anura, Ranidae) in urban ecosystems of Moscow, Russia. Timiryazev Biological Journal. 2025;3(2):202532405. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.26897/2949-4710-2025-3-2-4-05
Views:
138
Email this article 