Identity
Unique IDELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.100633
Element CodeAAABH01021
Record TypeSPECIES
ClassificationSpecies
Classification StatusStandard
Name CategoryVertebrate Animal
IUCNLeast concern
Endemicoccurs (regularly, as a native taxon) in multiple nations
KingdomAnimalia
PhylumCraniata
ClassAmphibia
OrderAnura
FamilyRanidae
GenusRana
SynonymsRana aurora auroraBaird and Girard, 1852
Other Common NamesGrenouille à pattes rouges (FR) northern red-legged frog (EN)
Concept ReferenceCollins, J. T. 1990. Standard common and current scientific names for North American amphibians and reptiles. 3rd ed. Society for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles. Herpetological Circular No. 19. 41 pp.
Taxonomic CommentsGenetic evidence supporting the recognition of Rana aurora and R. draytonii as distinct species is presented by Hayes and Miyamoto (1984), Shaffer et al. (2004), Conlon et al. (2006), and Pauly et al. (2008).
MtDNA data suggest that R. aurora, R. cascadae, and R. muscosa form a clade within the R. boylii species group (Macey et al. 2001).
Conservation Status
Rank MethodExpertise without calculation
Review Date2015-05-19
Change Date1996-11-01
Edition Date2008-06-26
Edition AuthorsHammerson, G.
Threat ImpactMedium
Range Extent200,000-2,500,000 square km (about 80,000-1,000,000 square miles)
Number of Occurrences81 - 300
Rank ReasonsLarge range in western North America; substantial declines in some areas; still widespread, common, and apparently secure in many areas; warrants rangewide monitoring.
Range Extent CommentsRange extends from southwestern British Columbia, including Vancouver Island in Canada, south along the coast of the United States (primarily west of Cascade-Sierran crest), to northwestern California (Shaffer et al. 2004). The species has been introduced and is well established and widely distributed on Graham Island, Queen Charlotte Islands (Haida Gwaii), British Columbia; it is unclear whether the species is native there or introduced many years ago (Ovaska et al. 2002). Rana aurora also is introduced and established on Chichagof Island, Alaska; the source of the frogs was Oregon (Hodge 2004).
Occurrences CommentsThis species is represented by a large number of occurrences.
Threat Impact CommentsFactors contributing to local declines include wetland destruction and degradation/fragmentation, urbanization, residential development, reservoir construction, stream channelization, livestock grazing of riparian vegetation, off-road vehicle activity, drought, overharvesting, and exotic fishes (bass, mosquitofish) and possibly bullfrogs (Kiesecker and Blaustein 1998; USFWS 1994, 1996, 2000; Adams 1999, 2000; Lawler et al. 1999; Cook and Jennings 2001; Kiesecker, Blaustein and Miller 2001a; Cook 2002). An important threat is the loss of wetlands in the Willamette Valley (Oregon) and Puget Lowlands (Washington), but populations remain in some urbanized areas (see Pearl, in Lannoo 2005). Conversion of habitat to more permanent ponds is an important threat (as this allows breeding waters to be invaded by non-native predators). Habitat characteristics and good leaping ability may render Rana aurora less vulnerable to bullfrog predation than is Rana pretiosa (Pearl et al. 2004). McAllister and Leonard (in Jones et al. 2005) noted that in many areas red-legged frogs coexist with bullfrogs.
Declines in the red-legged frog complex (including Rana draytonii) also have been attributed to global warming, UV-B radiation (Belden and Blaustein 2002), airborne contaminants (pesticide drift), and disease (see Davidson et al. 2001). Davidson et al. (2002) found support for the negative impact of wind-borne agrochemicals and weaker evidence for the widespread impact of habitat destruction and UV-B radiation; evidence did not support the hypothesis that declines have been caused by climate change.