Scaphiopus holbrookii

(Harlan, 1835)

Eastern Spadefoot

G4Apparently Secure (G4G5) Found in 6 roadless areas NatureServe Explorer →
G4Apparently SecureGlobal Rank
Least concernIUCN
High - mediumThreat Impact
Identity
Unique IDELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.100521
Element CodeAAABF01040
Record TypeSPECIES
ClassificationSpecies
Classification StatusStandard
Name CategoryVertebrate Animal
IUCNLeast concern
Endemicendemic to a single nation
KingdomAnimalia
PhylumCraniata
ClassAmphibia
OrderAnura
FamilyScaphiopodidae
GenusScaphiopus
Synonyms
Scaphiopus holbrookii holbrookii(Harlan, 1835)
Other Common Names
eastern spadefoot (EN)
Concept Reference
Collins, 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 Comments
Garcia-Paris et al. (2003) used mtDNA to examine the phylogentic relationships of Pelobatoidea and found that the family Pelobatidae, as previously defined, is not monophyletic (Pelobates is sister to Megophryidae, not to Spea/Scaphiopus). They split the Pelobatidae into two families: Eurasian spadefoot toads (Pelobates), which retain the name Pelobatidae, and North American spadefoot toads (Scaphiopus, Spea), which make up the revived family Scaphiopodidae.
Conservation Status
Rank Method Rank calculation - Biotics v2
Review Date2025-10-06
Change Date2025-10-06
Edition Date2025-10-06
Edition AuthorsHammerson, G., and F. Dirrigl, Jr. (2011); rev. R. L. Gundy (2025)
Threat ImpactHigh - medium
Range Extent200,000-2,500,000 square km (about 80,000-1,000,000 square miles)
Number of Occurrences> 300
Rank Reasons
This species is widespread in the eastern U.S. The population has declined due to habitat loss and habitat degradation. The population is threatened by development, conversion to pine plantation or agriculture, predation by invasive feral pigs, and road mortality.
Range Extent Comments
This species is endemic to the eastern United States. The range extends from southern Vermont and New Hampshire across the southern Great Lakes states to southeastern Missouri and northeastern Arkansas, and south to the Gulf Coast, from eastern Louisiana to southern Florida (absent at higher elevations in Appalachians) (Powell et al. 2016, Dodd Jr. 2023). Using Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF) (2025) records from 2000-2025, range extent is estimated to be 2 million km² (RARECAT 2025).
Occurrences Comments
Represented by many and/or large occurrences throughout most of the range. Probably there are many undiscovered occurrences; this species evades detection via erratic nocturnal activity.
Threat Impact Comments
This species is primarily threatened by habitat loss and degradation. Habitat loss occurs in the form of urbanization (Klemens 1993, Dodd Jr. 2023). Habitat degradation is caused by conversion to pine plantation, conversion to agriculture, ground disturbances associated with habitat management, and rooting by invasive feral pigs (Sus scrofa) (Jolley et al. 2010, Dodd Jr. 2023). Ranavirus has caused mass mortality events in developing tadpoles and metamorphs in some populations (Kirschman et al. 2017). Pesticide use in conjunction with forest pest management is a potential threat.
Ecology & Habitat

Description

The upper surface is brown, olive, gray, or blackish. A curved yellow line often extends from each eye and down the back. The pupil of the eye is vertically elliptical in bright light (like a cat's eye). A single hard sickle-shaped spade is on the inner underside of each hind foot. Maximum snout-vent length is about 2.9 inches (7.3 cm). Breeding males have black pads on the thumbs and inner toes of the front feet. Breeding calls are loud, nasal "quonk" or "wank" sounds, repeated every few seconds. Larvae are brown to bronze on top; the belly skin is clearish; the tail fins are clear; the tail musculature is not conspicuously spotted or blotched; and the eyes are very close together on the top of the head. Larvae are up to 2 inches (5 cm) in total length. Eggs are deposited in strings that may break apart, in masses of up to a few thousand eggs, attached to submerged plant material.

Habitat

Eastern spadefoots occur in areas of sandy, gravelly, or soft, light soils in wooded or unwooded terrain. On land, they range up to at least several hundred meters from breeding sites. When inactive, they remain burrowed in the ground. Eggs and larvae develop in temporary pools formed by heavy rains. Breeding sites include temporary pools and areas flooded by heavy rains.

Reproduction

Eastern spadefoots do not have a well-defined breeding season. Instead, they breed whenever heavy rains produce suitable breeding pools and temperatures are above about 45 degrees (F). Breeding occurs often in spring or summer in the north but in any month in the far south (for example, recorded in February, March, June, September, and October in Florida) (Greenberg and Tanner 2004). Breeding aggregations in single pools include dozens to hundreds of adults. Individual females produce a clutch of up to about 2,500 eggs (in several batches). Eggs laid in summer may hatch in 1 day, whereas eggs laid in colder conditons may take 2 weeks or more. The aquatic larvae may form huge aggregations. They metamorphose into the terrestrial form in as little as 2 weeks when conditions are warm and in 8 weeks or more if it is cold (e.g., first emigration 16-29 days after breeding in Florida; Greenberg and Tanner 2004). Over a period of several years, individual breeding pools may produce metamorphs infrequently and at irregular intervals (Greenberg and Tanner 2005). In Florida, maximum lifespan was estimated to be 7 years (Greenberg and Tanner 2005).
Terrestrial Habitats
Forest - HardwoodForest - ConiferForest - MixedWoodland - HardwoodWoodland - ConiferWoodland - MixedShrubland/chaparralSavannaGrassland/herbaceousCropland/hedgerowSuburban/orchard
Palustrine Habitats
TEMPORARY POOLRiparian
Other Nations (1)
United StatesN5
ProvinceRankNative
VirginiaS4Yes
KentuckyS5Yes
New YorkS2Yes
South CarolinaS5Yes
GeorgiaS5Yes
Rhode IslandS1Yes
DelawareS4Yes
North CarolinaS5Yes
MissouriS2Yes
ConnecticutS1Yes
LouisianaS2Yes
West VirginiaS2Yes
AlabamaS5Yes
OhioS1Yes
New JerseyS3Yes
ArkansasS2Yes
PennsylvaniaS2Yes
MassachusettsS2Yes
MarylandS4Yes
District of ColumbiaSHYes
IllinoisS3Yes
MississippiS5Yes
TennesseeS5Yes
IndianaS4Yes
FloridaS4Yes
Threat Assessments
ThreatScopeSeverityTiming
1 - Residential & commercial developmentRestricted - smallSerious or 31-70% pop. declineHigh (continuing)
1.1 - Housing & urban areasSmall (1-10%)Serious or 31-70% pop. declineHigh (continuing)
1.2 - Commercial & industrial areasSmall (1-10%)Serious or 31-70% pop. declineHigh (continuing)
2 - Agriculture & aquacultureRestricted (11-30%)Serious - moderateHigh (continuing)
2.2 - Wood & pulp plantationsRestricted (11-30%)Serious - moderateHigh (continuing)
4 - Transportation & service corridorsRestricted (11-30%)Slight or 1-10% pop. declineHigh (continuing)
4.1 - Roads & railroadsRestricted (11-30%)Slight or 1-10% pop. declineHigh (continuing)
5 - Biological resource useSmall (1-10%)Serious or 31-70% pop. declineHigh (continuing)
5.3 - Logging & wood harvestingSmall (1-10%)Serious or 31-70% pop. declineHigh (continuing)
8 - Invasive & other problematic species, genes & diseasesSmall (1-10%)Serious or 31-70% pop. declineHigh (continuing)
8.2 - Problematic native species/diseasesSmall (1-10%)Serious or 31-70% pop. declineHigh (continuing)

Roadless Areas (6)
Florida (3)
AreaForestAcres
Alexander Springs CreekOcala National Forest2,954
Gum BayApalachicola National Forest11,645
Long BayApalachicola National Forest5,726
Tennessee (1)
AreaForestAcres
Bald MountainCherokee National Forest11,743
Virginia (2)
AreaForestAcres
Hoop HoleJefferson National Forest4,652
North MountainJefferson National Forest8,377
References (22)
  1. Barbour, R. W. 1971. Amphibians and reptiles of Kentucky. Univ. Press of Kentucky, Lexington. x + 334 pp.
  2. Behler, J. L., and F. W. King. 1979. The Audubon Society field guide to North American reptiles and amphibians. Alfred A. Knopf, New York. 719 pp.
  3. Blackburn, L., P. Nanjappa, and M. J. Lannoo. 2001. An Atlas of the Distribution of U.S. Amphibians. Copyright, Ball State University, Muncie, Indiana, USA.
  4. Bragg, A.N. 1965. Gnomes of the night. the spadefoot toads. 127 pp.
  5. Collins, 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.
  6. Collins, J. T. 1991. Viewpoint: a new taxonomic arrangement for some North American amphibians and reptiles. SSAR Herpetol. Review 22:42-43.
  7. Collins, J. T., and T. W. Taggart. 2002. Standard common and current scientific names for North American amphibians, turtles, reptiles, & crocodilians. Fifth edition. Publication of The Center for North American Herpetology, Lawrence, Kansas. iv + 44 pp.
  8. Conant, R. and J. T. Collins. 1991. A field guide to reptiles and amphibians: eastern and central North America. Third edition. Houghton Mifflin Co., Boston, Massachusetts. 450 pp.
  9. Crother, B. I. (editor). 2017. Scientific and standard English names of amphibians and reptiles of North America north of Mexico, with comments regarding confidence in our understanding. 8th edition. SSAR Herpetological Circular 43:1-104. [Updates in SSAR North American Species Names Database at: https://ssarherps.org/cndb]
  10. Crother, B. I., J. Boundy, J. A. Campbell, K. de Queiroz, D. R. Frost, R. Highton, J. B. Iverson, P. A. Meylan, T. W. Reeder, M. E. Seidel, J. W. Sites, Jr., T. W. Taggart, S. G. Tilley, and D. B. Wake. 2000 [2001]. Scientific and standard English names of amphibians and reptiles of North America north of Mexico, with comments regarding confidence in our understanding. Society for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles, Herpetological Circular No. 29. 82 pp.
  11. DeGraaf, R. M., and D. D. Rudis. 1983a. Amphibians and reptiles of New England. Habitats and natural history. Univ. Massachusetts Press. vii + 83 pp.
  12. Frost, D. R. 1985. Amphibian species of the world. A taxonomic and geographical reference. Allen Press, Inc., and The Association of Systematics Collections, Lawrence, Kansas. v + 732 pp.
  13. Frost, D.R. 2020. Amphibian Species of the World: an Online Reference. Version 6.0. American Museum of Natural History, New York, USA. Online: http://research.amnh.org/herpetology/amphibia/index.html
  14. García-París, M., D.R. Buchholtz, and G. Parra-Olea. 2003. Phylogenetic relationships of Pelobatoidea re-examined using mtDNA. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 28:12-23.
  15. Greenberg, C. H., and G. W. Tanner. 2004. Breeding pond selection and movement patterns by eastern spadefoot toads (<i>Scaphiopus holbrookii</i>) in relation to weather and edaphic conditions. Journal of Herpetology 38:569-577.
  16. Greenberg, C. H., and G. W. Tanner. 2005. Spatial and temproal ecology of easterb spadefoot toads on a Florida landscape. Herpetologica 61:20-28.
  17. Green, N. B., and T. K. Pauley. 1987. Amphibians and reptiles in West Virginia. University of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. xi + 241 pp.
  18. Johnson, T.R. 1977. The Amphibians of Missouri. University of Kansas Museum of Natural History, Public Education Series 6: ix + 134 pp.
  19. Klemens, M. W. 1993. Amphibians and reptiles of Connecticut and adjacent regions. State Geological and Natural History Survey of Connecticut, Bulletin 112. xii + 318 pp.
  20. Minton, S. A., Jr. 1972. Amphibians and reptiles of Indiana. Indiana Academy Science Monographs 3. v + 346 pp.
  21. Mount, R. H. 1975. The reptiles and amphibians of Alabama. Auburn University Agricultural Experiment Station, Auburn, Alabama. vii + 347 pp.
  22. Wasserman. A. O. 1968. <i>Scaphiopus holbrookii</i>. Cat. Am. Amph. Rep. 70.1-70.4.