Roadless Areas
Home/Species/ Coquí

Eleutherodactylus coqui

Thomas, 1966

Coquí

G4Apparently Secure Found in 2 roadless areas NatureServe Explorer →
G4Apparently SecureGlobal Rank
Least concernIUCN
LowThreat Impact
Identity
Unique IDELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.105062
Element CodeAAABD04100
Record TypeSPECIES
ClassificationSpecies
Classification StatusStandard
Name CategoryVertebrate Animal
IUCNLeast concern
Endemicendemic to a single nation
KingdomAnimalia
PhylumCraniata
ClassAmphibia
OrderAnura
FamilyLeptodactylidae
GenusEleutherodactylus
Other Common Names
Common Coqui (EN) Puerto Rican Coqui (EN)
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
See Hedges (1989) for information on relationships of West Indian Eleutherodactylus.
Conservation Status
Review Date2004-04-20
Change Date1996-10-18
Edition Date2004-04-20
Edition AuthorsHammerson, G.
Threat ImpactLow
Range Extent1000-20,000 square km (about 400-8000 square miles)
Range Extent Comments
Native and present throughout Puerto Rico, though not common in arid southwest. Sea level to 1200 m (Toro Negro) (Schwartz and Henderson 1988).

Introduced on St. Thomas and St. Croix, Dominican Republic (Joglar and Rios-Lopez, 1998, Herpetol. Rev. 29:107), and Hawaii (Kraus et al. 1999). Also introduced in Florida, where this frog now exists apparently only in greenhouses; not clearly established (Bartlett and Bartlett 1999). Purported record from New Orleans, Louisiana (e.g., Conant and Collins 1991), is based only on a few males that lived in a greenhouse for a few years and do not constitute a legitimate occurrence (Dundee, 1991, Herpetol. Rev. 22:122).
Occurrences Comments
Represented by many and/or large occurrences throughout most of the range.
Threat Impact Comments
Tolerant of substantial habitat alteration. Burrowes et al. (2004) suggested that declines of this frog in parts of Puerto Rico may reflect a possible synergistic interaction between drought and the pathological effect of the chytrid fungus.
Ecology & Habitat

Habitat

Mesic broadleaf forest, suburbs, gardens, greenhouses (especially in Florida); in bromeliads, holes in cut banks, under logs, rocks, or trash, in palm axils, curled leaves, tree holes (Schwartz and Henderson 1991). Often climbs to forest canopy at dusk (except juveniles, which stay on or near ground, and calling males, which remain on understory call sites during night); drops to ground at dawn, retreats to cover on or near ground (Stewart 1985, 1993).

Terrestrial breeder; no aquatic larval stage. Male leads female to semi-enclosed nest site (e.g., dead curled leaf or palm petiole) (Townsend and Stewart 1986) on or near ground. Males call from perch averaging 2 m above ground (Narins and Hurley 1982); calling sites mostly open surfaces or shallow depressions lacking close cover, such as surfaces of leaves and tree trunks and axils of sierra palms (Townsend 1989); calling sites as high as 45 feet in mesic forest, from 20-30 feet in xeric forest (Schwartz and Henderson 1991). Readily uses artificial retreat and nest sites; such use can result in increased population size (Schwartz and Henderson 1991).

Ecology

Males defend diurnal shelters; feeding territories defended by females (Schwartz and Henderson 1991).

Small juveniles sometimes are preyed on by giant crab spiders (OLIOS) (Formanowicz et al. 1981). Viable eggs sometimes preyed on by flies (Diptera: Phoridae).

Density ranges as high as 20,570/ha; populations decline with drought (see Stewart 1995). In the central mountain of Puerto Rico, adult density was 8-25 per 100 sq m in the wet season, 3-19 per 100 sq m in the dry season; juvenile density was highest in the wet season, egg density highest in the dry season (Fogarty and Vilella 2002).

Populations increased after Hurricane Hugo (September 1989), perhaps due to an increase in retreat sites and a decrease in invertebrate predators (Woolbright 1991).

Annual mortality rate is more than 90% (Stewart 1995).

This species have an observable effect on forest nutrient dynamics (Beard et al. 2002).

Reproduction

Breeds throughout year, mostly in wet season (April-October). Up to 5 clutches per season (Townsend 1989). Mean interclutch interval about 8 weeks during wet season (Townsend and Stewart 1994). Male attends eggs throughout development, reducing desiccation and cannibalism. Eggs hatch in 17 (June-July) to 26 (January-February) days (Townsend and Stewart 1986). Sexually mature in about 1 year (Woolbright and Stewart 1987). Few adults survive to the following year (Stewart 1995). See Michael (1995, Herpetological Review 26:27-29) for information on captive breeding.
Terrestrial Habitats
Forest - HardwoodWoodland - HardwoodSuburban/orchard
Palustrine Habitats
Riparian
Other Nations (1)
United StatesNNA
ProvinceRankNative
LouisianaSNANo
HawaiiSNANo
FloridaSNANo
Roadless Areas (2)
Puerto Rico (2)
AreaForestAcres
El Toro AreaCaribbean National Forest12,584
Mameyes AreaCaribbean National Forest11,150
References (43)
  1. Bartlett, R. D., and P. P. Bartlett. 1999b. A field guide to Florida reptiles and amphibians. Gulf Publishing Company, Houston, Texas. xvi + 278 pp.
  2. Beard, K. H., K. A. Vogt, and A. Kulmatiski. 2002. Top-down effects of a terrestrial frog on forest nutrient dynamics. Oecologia 133:583-593.
  3. Burrowes, P.A., Joglar, R.L. and Green, D.E. 2004. Potential causes for amphibian declines in Puerto Rico. Herpetologica. 60(2):141-154.
  4. Burrowes, P. A., R. L. Joglar, and D. E. Green. 2004. Potential causes for amphibian declines in Puerto Rico. Herpetologica 60:141-154.
  5. Conant, R., and J. T. Collins. 1998. A field guide to reptiles and amphibians: eastern and central North America. Third edition, expanded. Houghton Mifflin Co., Boston, Massachusetts. 616 pp.
  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. Drewry, G. E., and A. S. Rand. 1983. Characteristics of anacoustic community: Puerto Rican frogs of the genus ELEUTHERODACTYLUS. Copeia 1983:941-953.
  8. Fogarty, J. H., and F. J. Vilella. 2002. Population dynamics of Eleutherodactylus coqui in cordillera forest reserves of Puerto Rico. Journal of Herpetology 36:193-201.
  9. Formanowicz, D. R., et al. 1981. Predation by giant crab spiders on the Puerto Rican frog ELEUTHERODACTYLUS COQUI. Herpetologica 37:125-129.
  10. 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.
  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. Hedges, S. B. 1989. Evolution and biogeography of West Indian frogs of the genus <i>Eleutherodactylus</i>: slow-evolving loci and the major groups. Pages 305-370 in C. A. Woods, ed. Biogeography of the West Indies, Sandhill Crane Press, Gainesville, Florida.
  13. Hedges, S.B. 1993. Global amphibian declines: a perspective from the Caribbean. Biodiversity and Conservation. 2:290-303.
  14. Hedges, S.B. 1999. Distribution of amphibians in the West Indies. Patterns of Distribution of Amphibians. A Global Perspective. Duellman, W.E.,editor. The Johns Hopkins Press. Baltimore, Maryland.
  15. Hedges, S.B. 2001. Caribherp: database of West Indian amphibians and reptiles (http://www.caribherp.net). Pennsylvania State University. University Park, PA.
  16. Hedges, S. B., R. Powell, R. W. Henderson, S. Hanson, and J. C. Murphy. 2019. Definition of the Caribbean Islands biogeographic region, with checklist and recommendations for standardized common names of amphibians and reptiles. Caribbean Herpetology 67: 1-53.
  17. Hedges, S.B., W.E. Duellman, and M.P. Heinicke. 2008. New World direct-developing frogs (Anura: Terrarana): Molecular phylogeny, classification, biogeography, and conservation. Zootaxa 1737:1-182.
  18. Henderson, R.W. and Powell, R 1999. West Indian herpetoecology. Caribbean Amphibians and Reptiles. Crother, B.I.,editor. 223-226. Academic Press. San Diego, California.
  19. Henderson, R.W. and Powell, R. 2001. Responses by the West Indian herpetofauna to human-influenced resources. Caribbean Journal of Science. 37:41-54.
  20. Henderson, R. W., and R. Powell. 2009. Natural History of West Indian Reptiles and Amphibians : xxiv + 496.
  21. Joglar, R.L. 1999. Que Cante el Coquí Ensayos, Cartas y Otros Documentos Sobre la Conservación de la Biodiversidad en Puerto Rico (1987-1999). Proyecto Coquí. Puerto Rico.
  22. Joglar, R.L. and Burrowes, P.A. 1996. Declining amphibian populations in Puerto Rico. Contributions to West Indian Herpetology: A Tribute to Albert Schwartz. Powell, R. and Henderson, R.W.,editor. 371-380. Society for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles.
  23. Joglar, R.L. and Rios, N. 1998. Eleutherodactylus coqui (Puerto Rican Coqui, Coquí Común) in Dominican Republic. Herpetological Review. 29:107.
  24. Joglar, R.L., Burrowes, P.A. and Rios, N. 1996. Biology of the Puerto Rican cave-dwelling frog, Eleutherodactylus cooki, and some recommendations for its conservation. Contributions to West Indian Herpetology: A Tribute to Albert Schwartz. Powell, R. and Henderson, R.W.,editor. 12:251-258. Society for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles. Ithaca.
  25. Kraus, F., E. W. Campbell, A. Allison, and T. Pratt. 1999. ELEUTHERODACTYLUS frog introductions to Hawaii. Herpetological Review 30:21-25.
  26. Krysko, K. L., J. P. Burgess, M. R. Rochford, C. R. Gillette, D. Cueva, K. M. Enge, L. A. Somma, J. L. Stabile, D. C. Smith, J. A. Wasilewski, and G. N. Kieckhefer III. 2011. Verified non-indigenous amphibians and reptiles in Florida from 1863 through 2010: outlining the invasion process and identifying invasion pathways and stages. Zootaxa 3028: 1-64.
  27. Loftus, W. F., and R. Herndon. 1984. Reestablishment of the coqui, ELEUTHERODACTYLUS COQUI Thomas, in southern Florida. SSAR Herpetol. Rev. 15:23.
  28. Narins, P. M., and D. D. Hurley. 1982. The relationship between call intensity and function in the Puerto Rican coqui (Anura: Leptodactylidae). Herpetologica 38:287-295.
  29. Padial, J. M., T. Grant, and D. R. Frost. 2014. Molecular systematics of terraranas (Anura: Brachycephaloidea) with an assessment of the effects of alignment and optimality criteria . Zootaxa 3825:1-132.
  30. Rivero, J.A. 1998. Los Anfibios y Reptiles de Puerto Rico (The Amphibians and Reptiles of Puerto Rico). Second edition. Editorial de la Universidad de Puerto Rico, San Juan.
  31. Schwartz, A., and R. W. Henderson. 1988. West Indian amphibians and reptiles: a check-list. Milwaukee Pub. Mus., Contrib. Biological Geology No. 74:1-264.
  32. Schwartz, A., and R. W. Henderson. 1991. Amphibians and Reptiles of the West Indies: Descriptions, Distributions, and Natural History. University of Florida Press, Gainesville, Florida. xvi + 720 pp.
  33. Stewart, M. M. 1985. Arboreal habitat use and parachuting by a subtropical forest frog. J. Herpetol. 19:391-401.
  34. Stewart, M. M. 1993. Frequent fliers. Natural History, 2/93:42-48.
  35. Stewart, M. M. 1995. Climate driven population fluctuations in rain forest frogs. Journal of Herpetology 29:437-446.
  36. Townsend, D. S. 1989. The consequences of microhabitat choise for male reproductive success in a tropical frog (ELEUTHERODACTYLUS COQUI). Herpetologica 45:451-458.
  37. Townsend, D. S., and M. M. Stewart. 1985. Direct development in ELEUTHERODACTYLUS COQUI (Anura: Leptodactylidae): a staging table. Copeia 1985:423-436.
  38. Townsend, D. S., and M. M. Stewart. 1986a. Courtship and mating behavior of a Puerto Rican frog, <i>Eleutherodactylus coqui</i>. Herpetologica 42:165-170.
  39. Townsend, D. S., and M. M. Stewart. 1986b. The effect of temperature on direct development in a terrestrial-breeding neotropical frog. Copeia 1986:520-523.
  40. Townsend, D. S., and M. M. Stewart. Reproductive ecology of the Puerto Rican frog ELEUTHERODACTYLUS COQUI. J. Herpetol. 28:34-40.
  41. Woolbright, L. L. 1985. Patterns of nocturnal movement andcalling by the tropical frog ELEUTHERODACTYLUS COQUI. Herpetologica 41:1-9.
  42. Woolbright, L. L. 1991. The impact of Hurricane Hugo on forest frogs in Puerto Rico. Biotropica 23:462-467.
  43. Woolbright, L. L., and M. M. Stewart. 1987. Foraging success of the tropical frog, ELEUTHERODACTYLUS COQUI: the cost of calling. Copeia 1987:69-75.