Abstract:
Aim
There is substantial residual scatter about the positive range size–body size
relationship in Australian frogs. We test whether species’ life history and abundance
can account for this residual scatter.
Location
Australia.
Methods
Multiple regressions were performed using both cross-species and independent
contrasts analyses to determine whether clutch size, egg size and species
abundance account for variation in range size over and above the effects of body size.
Results
In both cross-species and independents contrasts models with body size,
clutch size and egg size as predictors, partial
r
2
values revealed that only egg size was
significantly and uniquely related to range size. Contrary to expectation, neither
body size nor clutch size could account for significant variation in range size. Incorporating
species abundance as a predictor in further multiple regression analysis
demonstrated that while abundance accounted for a significant proportion of range
size variation, the contribution of egg size was reduced but still significant. Notably,
non-significant relationships persisted between range size and both body size and
clutch size.
Conclusions
The weak positive correlation between body size and range size in
Australian frogs disappears after accounting for species abundance and egg size. Our
findings demonstrate that species with both high local abundance and small eggs
occupy comparatively wider geographical ranges than species with low abundance
and large eggs.
