Plethodon ouachitae

Dunn and Heinze, 1933

Rich Mountain Salamander

G3Vulnerable Found in 1 roadless area NatureServe Explorer →
G3VulnerableGlobal Rank
Near threatenedIUCN
High - mediumThreat Impact
Identity
Unique IDELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.104184
Element CodeAAAAD12130
Record TypeSPECIES
ClassificationSpecies
Classification StatusStandard
Name CategoryVertebrate Animal
IUCNNear threatened
Endemicendemic to a single nation
KingdomAnimalia
PhylumCraniata
ClassAmphibia
OrderCaudata
FamilyPlethodontidae
GenusPlethodon
Concept Reference
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.
Taxonomic Comments
Shepard and Burbrink (2008) sequenced two mitochondrial genes in a study of geographic variation in the species and found seven subgroups but did not suggest changes in the taxonomy (Crother 2017).
Conservation Status
Rank MethodLegacy Rank calculation - Excel v3.1x
Review Date2017-12-15
Change Date2017-12-15
Edition Date2017-12-15
Edition AuthorsHammerson, G. (2002), Smith-Patten, B. and D. B. Shepard (2017)
Threat ImpactHigh - medium
Range Extent1000-5000 square km (about 400-2000 square miles)
Number of Occurrences21 - 80
Rank Reasons
Regional endemic, found only in a portion of the Ouachita Mountains of Oklahoma and Arkansas (currently known only from four counties). Small range, even if treating Plethodon fourchensis as a conspecific and including its occurrences as part of P. ouachitae’s range. Generally locally abundant with moderate, or possibly, high threat risk.
Range Extent Comments
Restricted to the Ouachita Mountains of Arkansas and Oklahoma. Primarily found within the Winding Stair, Rich, and Black Fork Mountains, and the eastern portion of the Kiamichi Mountains. Also found on Buffalo Mountain, in Latimer County, Oklahoma. Minimum range is about 1650 km sq. when encompassing all known occurrences of Plethodon ouachitae. Maximum range is likely only about 2500 km sq., which includes known occurrences of P. ouachitae as well as the range of P. fourchensis, in case that species is downgraded to a subspecies or variant of P. ouachitae. Maximum range extent could have been calculated at about 19000 km sq. if all mountains in the Ouachita Highlands are included, but that inclusion does not appear to be warranted for this species, as it is likely that the species does not occur on additional mountains, nor in areas below about 250 meters elevation.
Occurrences Comments
Blair and Lindsay (1965) divided the species into four distinct populations based on size and color pattern; one of those populations is now considered to be Plethodon fourchensis. More recently, sequencing of two mitochondrial genes indicated there are seven well-supported lineages within the species, geographically structured across 5-6 major mountains, depending upon how one wants to divide the topography within the species’ range (Shepard and Burbrink 2008). There are 29 distinct occurrences for this species when calculated using separation distances suggested by NatureServe (1km for suitable habitat, 3km for unsuitable).
Threat Impact Comments
The majority of the species’ range is protected within the Ouachita National Forest. A major threat with mesic forest salamanders is logging that causes direct habitat loss as well as soil desiccation from a more open canopy and edge effects. Self-reported logging records within the Ouachita National Forest indicate that there has been minimal overlap of logging with known occurrences for Plethodon ouachitae (USFS Timber Harvest, reported years 1820-present; https://data.fs.usda.gov/geodata/edw/datasets.php). Future logging in the National Forest should continue to avoid areas where P. ouachitae is found. If that is not done, then the threat level should be raised. Additional threats to the species include herbicide, pesticide, and other chemical use, and being killed on roadways. Climate change will likely be a future threat if it produces more xeric conditions and the species is unable to find sufficient refugia. More erratic temperatures, droughts, and storms would also impact this species, the latter by causing flash flooding that may wash away the softer topsoils upon which this species appears to depend.

Particular conservation attention should be paid to the genetically distinct population on Buffalo Mountain, Latimer County, Oklahoma. Currently the mountain appears to be privately owned and remains undeveloped and unlogged, but there is no guarantee that land use will not change in the future.
Ecology & Habitat

Description

Much morphological variation has been reported for this species (e.g., Pope and Pope 1951, Blair and Lindsay 1965, Duncan and Highton 1979, Shepard et al. 2011). Generally the species has a dark ground color, exhibits light spotting dorsally (on the back) with a concentration laterally (on the sides) that can form a solid band ventrolaterally (on the side, but toward the belly), and has a white throat. There are three color forms that differ primarily in the amount of chocolate brown coloration on the dorsum (back): 1) Rich Mountain (Rich and Black Fork Mountains), with large amounts of brown coloration, 2) Kiamichi Mountain (Kiamichi and Round Mountains), with no brown coloration, and 3) Winding Stair (Winding Stair and Buffalo Mountains), with small amounts of brown coloration. See Sievert (1986), Sievert and Sievert (2011), and Shepard et al. (2011) for details.

Diagnostic Characteristics

Length: 4-5 inches (10.2-12.7 cm; Sievert and Sievert 2011)

Habitat

Generally found on northerly facing slopes having mesic oak-hickory forest with many decaying logs, lush understory, and Jackfork Sandstone talus (Sievert 1986). The shortleaf pine-dominated southerly facing slopes and the valleys between ranges are considered dispersal barriers for the species (Shepard and Burbrink 2008). Also reported from areas near seeps and occasionally at cave entrances (Black 1974, Anthony 2005). Found under boards, roofing materials, leaf litter, and rocks, especially sandstone slabs. Also found under and in rotting logs.

Reproduction

Terrestrial breeder. Females probably reproduce biennially and mean clutch size has been reported as 15.4 +/- 1.1 (17 females, Taylor et al. 1990) and 16.7 +/- 0.95 with “extremes of 13 and 23” (22 females, Pope and Pope 1951:142). Size at sexual maturity is 45–49 mm SVL for males and 52–54 mm SVL for females (Highton 1962; Pope and Pope 1951). Females guard eggs and development is direct, meaning that larvae develop within the egg and then emerge as a miniature adults.
Terrestrial Habitats
Forest - HardwoodBare rock/talus/scree
Other Nations (1)
United StatesN2
ProvinceRankNative
ArkansasS2Yes
OklahomaS2Yes
Threat Assessments
ThreatScopeSeverityTiming
4 - Transportation & service corridorsRestricted (11-30%)Negligible or <1% pop. declineHigh (continuing)
4.1 - Roads & railroadsRestricted (11-30%)Negligible or <1% pop. declineHigh (continuing)
5 - Biological resource useRestricted (11-30%)Slight or 1-10% pop. declineHigh (continuing)
5.1 - Hunting & collecting terrestrial animalsSmall (1-10%)UnknownUnknown
5.3 - Logging & wood harvestingRestricted (11-30%)Slight or 1-10% pop. declineHigh (continuing)
9 - PollutionRestricted (11-30%)Negligible or <1% pop. decline
9.3 - Agricultural & forestry effluentsRestricted (11-30%)Negligible or <1% pop. decline
11 - Climate change & severe weatherPervasive (71-100%)Serious - moderateHigh (continuing)
11.2 - DroughtsPervasive (71-100%)Serious - moderateHigh (continuing)
11.3 - Temperature extremesPervasive (71-100%)Serious - moderateHigh (continuing)
11.4 - Storms & floodingLarge (31-70%)Moderate - slightHigh (continuing)

Roadless Areas (1)
Oklahoma (1)
AreaForestAcres
Beech CreekOuachita National Forest8,303
References (28)
  1. Anthony, C. D. 2005b. <i>Plethodon ouachitae</i> Dunn and Heinze, 1933, Rich Mountain Salamander. Pages 831-833 in M. Lannoo, editor. Amphibian Declines: The Conservation Status of United States Species. University of California Press, Berkeley, California, USA.
  2. Anthony, C. D., J. A. Wicknick, and R. G. Jaeger. 2002. Site tenacity and homing in the Rich Mountain salamander, Plethodon ouachitae (Caudata: Plethodontidae). Southwestern Naturalist 47:401-408.
  3. Black, J. H. 1974. Notes on <i>Plethodon ouachitae</i> in Oklahoma. Proceedings of the Oklahoma Academy of Science 54:88-89.
  4. Blair, A.P. 1967. Plethodon ouachitae. Catalogue of American Amphibians and Reptiles. 40:1-2.
  5. Blair, A. P., and H. L. Lindsay, Jr. 1965. Color pattern variation and distribution of two large <i>Plethodon </i>salamanders endemic to the Ouachita Mountains of Oklahoma and Arkansas. Copeia 1965:331-335.
  6. 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]
  7. Duncan, R., and R. Highton. 1979. Genetic relationships of the eastern large <i>Plethodon </i>of the Ouachita Mountains. Copeia 1979:95-110.
  8. Dunn, E. R., and A. A. Heinze. 1933. A new salamander from the Ouachita Mountains. Copeia 1933(3):121-122.
  9. 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.
  10. Frost, D. R. 2017. Amphibian Species of the World: an Online Reference. Version 6.0. Electronic Database accessible at http://research.amnh.org/herpetology/amphibia/index.html. American Museum of Natural History, New York, USA.
  11. 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
  12. Highton, R. 1986. Plethodon fourchensis. Catalogue of American Amphibians and Reptiles. 391:1.
  13. Highton, R. 2005. Declines of eastern North American woodland salamanders (<i>Plethodon</i>). Pages 34-46 in M. Lannoo, editor. Amphibian declines: the conservation status of United States species. University of California Press, Berkeley.
  14. Highton, R., R. M. Bonett, and E. L. Jockusch. 2017. Caudata - Salamanders. In Scientific and standard English names of amphibians and reptiles of North America north of Mexico, with comments regarding confidence in our understanding. Eighth edition. Society for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles, Herpetological Circular No. 43.
  15. Kozak, K. H., D. W. Weisrock, and A. Larson. 2006. Rapid lineage accumulation in a nonadaptive radiation: Phylogenetic analysis of diversification rates in eastern North American woodland salamanders (Plethodontidae: Plethodon). Proceedings of the Royal Society B-Biological Sciences 273:539-546.
  16. Kozak, K. H., R. W. Mendyk, and J. J. Wiens. 2009. Can parallel diversification occur in sympatry? Repeated patterns of body-size evolution in coexisting clades of North American salamanders. Evolution 63:1769-1784.
  17. Petranka, J. W. 1998. Salamanders of the United States and Canada. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C.
  18. Pope, C. H., and S. H. Pope. 1951. A study of the salamander <i>Plethodon ouachitae</i> and the description of an allied form. Bull. Chicago Acad. Sci. 9:129-152.
  19. Powell, R., R. Conant, and J. T. Collins. 2016. Peterson Field Guide to Reptiles and Amphibians of Eastern and Central North America, fourth edition. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, Boston and New York. 512 pp.
  20. Shepard, D. B., and F. T. Burbrink. 2008. Lineage diversification and historical demography of a sky island salamander, <i>Plethodon ouachitae</i>, from the Interior Highlands. Molecular Ecology 17(24):5315-5335.
  21. Shepard, D. B., and F. T. Burbrink. 2009. Phylogeographic and demographic effects of Pleistocene climatic fluctuations in a montane salamander, <i>Plethodon fourchensis</i>. Molecular Ecology 18(10):2243-2262.
  22. Shepard, D. B., and F. T. Burbrink. 2011. Local-scale environmental variation generates highly divergent lineages associated with stream drainages in a terrestrial salamander, <i>Plethodon caddoensis</i>. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 59(2):399-411.
  23. Shepard, D. B., K. J. Irwin, and F. T. Burbrink. 2011. Morphological differentiation in Ouachita Mountain endemic salamanders. Herpetologica 67(4):355-368.
  24. Sievert, G. 1986. An investigation of the distribution and population status of the Rich Mountain salamander (<i>Plethodon ouachitae</i>) in Oklahoma. Report prepared for the Oklahoma Department of Wildlife Conservation.
  25. Sievert, G., and L. Sievert. 2011. A field guide to Oklahoma’s Amphibians and Reptiles. Oklahoma Department of Wildlife Conservation, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, USA.
  26. Spotila, J. R. 1972. Role of temperature and water in the ecology of lungless salamanders. Ecological Monographs 42:95-125.
  27. Taylor, C. L., R. F. Wilkinson, Jr., and C. L. Peterson. 1990. Reproductive patterns of five plethodontid salamanders from the Ouachita Mountains. Southwestern Naturalist 35:468-472.
  28. Wiens, J. J., T. N. Engstrom, and P. T. Chippindale. 2006. Rapid diversification, incomplete isolation, and the "speciation clock" in North American salamanders (genus <i>Plethodon</i>): testing the hybrid swarm hypothesis of rapid radiation. Evolution 60(12):2585-2603.