# Tapole and Frog ID



## teapotzombie (Mar 22, 2012)

Hi!
Im new to this, Just wanting some sort of idea what kind of tadpoles i have found, one has just morphed into a frog!  They are from the northside of brisbane!


----------



## GeckPhotographer (Mar 22, 2012)

It is extremely difficult to IDentify tadpoles even in real life, from photos near impossible. The frog looks like either L.peronii or L.tylerii though so I assume most tadpoles are probably the same?


----------



## teapotzombie (Mar 22, 2012)

GeckPhotographer said:


> It is extremely difficult to IDentify tadpoles even in real life, from photos near impossible. The frog looks like either L.peronii or L.tylerii though so I assume most tadpoles are probably the same?






Here are some more... can i please get "laymans terms" for the frog names?


----------



## Raymonde (Mar 22, 2012)

GeckPhotographer said:


> It is extremely difficult to IDentify tadpoles even in real life, from photos near impossible. The frog looks like either L.peronii or L.tylerii though so I assume most tadpoles are probably the same?



I don't think that it would be L. peronii or L. tylerii at all. Firstly neither are very common in suburban brisbane, particularly not tylerii, you do occasionally find peronii if it is near some bushland. (i have studied the occurrence of frogs around parks in southern brisbane). It is actually possible to ID tadpoles if you know what to look for, teeth rows and differences in the tail and belly are generally used very effectively but you do need to know what you are doing and what to look for. 

Litoria peronii is Emerald spotted tree frog, Litoria tylerii is the southern laughing frog

I actually think that is way more likely to be Litoria gracilenta (dainty green tree frog or graceful treefrog). They are more common in brisbane. But honestly it is really hard to tell from a photo. If you had a recording of their call it would be easier (to at least narrow it down). 

Also as frogs (verse tadpole life stage) they need branches or plants to perch on as they don't spend heaps of time submerged in water. They do still need water, they just also need to have things to hide in or perch on out of the water.

i am hoping you have already looked up the rules about collecting wild frogs (i believe that you are allowed to collect up to 10 tadpoles from you property and raise them into adults, but i don't know much about the details of the laws or whether that is even correct), and a caresheet on how to take care of them if you intend on keeping them.


----------



## richoman_3 (Mar 22, 2012)

how the hell is how common something a sign of ID ???????


----------



## Raymonde (Mar 22, 2012)

richoman_3 said:


> how the hell is how common something a sign of ID ???????



I agree its not but it is something you should take into consideration. I also used the speckled pattern that you can see on some of the tadpoles, and the lack of any visible (i know the photos aren't great) strip down the side of the tadpoles which both peronii and tylerii have. At first i though it might be L. fallax but the head shape in the second lot of photos doesn't really look like fallax. I am not saying its 100% gracilenta, its just an educated guess. without a call or adult photos or seeing them in person i can't be sure what they are. Teapotzombie asked for opinions and this is mine. What do you think it could be?

edit: unless the frogs were found in bushland it really is very unlikely that peronii would be found in suburban areas, where as fallax and gracilenta appear to be far more tolerant of urbanisation (I have been researching wildlife of urban parks for 4 years now)


----------



## richoman_3 (Mar 22, 2012)

as said already you cant really tell the tadpoles or bubs apart, all the following litoria mentioned look exactly the same, only reason id kick fallax out is because they look too big for fallax bubs


----------



## Raymonde (Mar 22, 2012)

richoman_3 said:


> as said already you cant really tell the tadpoles or bubs apart, all the following litoria mentioned look exactly the same, only reason id kick fallax out is because they look too big for fallax bubs



really have to disagree with you, it is possible to ID tadpole, maybe not by the average joe, but with a magnifying glass it is most definitively possible, and tadpole researches don't even need that.... 

If it isn't possible then why are there books on it....


----------



## richoman_3 (Mar 22, 2012)

i said it was hard to tell apart not you couldnt do it lol?


----------



## Raymonde (Mar 22, 2012)

richoman_3 said:


> i said it was hard to tell apart not you couldnt do it lol?



sorry, feeling agro today and i interpreted your post the wrong way


----------



## jedi_339 (Mar 22, 2012)

I would have said Litoria pearsoniana but they seem slightly larger then a recently metamorphosed froglet.

I don't think gracilenta as I've never seen a young one with facial stripes, are you sure they're not just very young Litoria caerulea?


----------



## GeckPhotographer (Mar 23, 2012)

I'm sorry if you thought I was implying you couldn't tell tadpoles apart, I was simply referring to that without a scope and the tadpole in hand it's extremely difficult and I would trust only a very few to do it from photos to any level at all. Therefore I wouldn't hazard any guess of the tadpoles in these pictures. 

I won't rule out gracilenta, but to me it looks both too big and has colouration especially in the facial region at odds with metamorph gracilenta I have seen. It doesn't look anything like L.cearulea to me, it certainly isn't fallax. And it fits well with the numerous metamorphs I have seen of both L.peronii and L.tylerii. 
In terms of commonality of the species I haven't been to Brisbane but the two frogs are very common in urban environments as long as some trees/medium heighted foliages are present down here in the south and I assumed that that shouldn't change in Brisbane. 

Honestly I'm not happy with my ID either as it seems to not quite fit. But it is the best ID I can propose.


----------



## teapotzombie (Mar 23, 2012)

Thanks for you responses guys! Another morphed last night and is exactly the same as the other froglet! 
I'm pretty sure they are some sort of tree frog.. they have lil pads on their toes, so super tiny! 
I got some super little crickets today and tried my oldest one with a cricket in a separate container but he doesn't seem interested yet, 
(its tail has fully gone now) When is a good time to start on pin head crickets?
If i can get the jumpy little bugger to stay on my hand long enough to get a better picture i will post it up!


----------



## jordo (Mar 23, 2012)

As everyone has said it can be difficult to tell. I'd be guessing at L. revelata or dentata. They don't look the right shape for tylerii/peronii to me but that might just be because they're metamorphs, I can't make out a cross in the eye either (better photos?).


----------



## GeckPhotographer (Mar 23, 2012)

> As everyone has said it can be difficult to tell. I'd be guessing at L. revelata or dentata. They don't look the right shape for tylerii/peronii to me but that might just be because they're metamorphs, I can't make out a cross in the eye either (better photos?).



I'd probably go L.dentata over L.revelata but good possibilities, they look a bit big for those species mets to me though. I'm interested in finding out what they actually are.


----------



## jordo (Mar 23, 2012)

Not sure what you guys are using for size comparison?? lol They look pretty small to me!


----------



## Raymonde (Mar 23, 2012)

well it seems the only thing that can be agreed on is that they are Litoria (tree frogs)..... without detailed good photos with no discolouration or older frog specimens there is really no way we can positively ID them from these photos.....

Teapotzombie: Do you ever hear frog calls where you collected the tadpoles from? is there any chance of making a recording? with all the rain we've been having they should be fairly active/vocal

i've only ever found pearsoniana and revelata in more rainforested mountainous areas outside of brisbane..... i doubt they would be in any sort of urban setting but i could be wrong. 
unless your living next to a big piece of bushland with a pond/creek, or on Mt glorious or Mt nebo, i doubt you'd find many species of litoria that are more sensitive..... in my field studies i have only ever found fallax, caerulea, gracilenta, peronii, latopalmata and nasuta in urban parks of brisbane. i am sure there are others that i didn't find during my study but these are the more common urban Litoria species, and even some of them were only found in areas where there was stretches of bushland...


----------



## GeckPhotographer (Mar 23, 2012)

> well it seems the only thing that can be agreed on is that they are Litoria (tree frogs)


I think we've also agreed that these pictures obviously aren't the best for ID.  

To the OP I think wait a week or two and photograph the metamorph again once it's taken on a bit of form. It's just hard to ID them at this stage as I'm sure you've noticed.


----------



## teapotzombie (Mar 23, 2012)

Eeepp Guys, I'm getting confused, using all the technical terms, I need common names ha ha ha

They are from a really bushy area of dayboro, there is a garden pond with hundreds of tadpoles/.....

And a huge creek running through the property


----------



## GeckPhotographer (Apr 2, 2012)

Any update pics?


----------



## Snake-Supplies (Apr 2, 2012)

Cute froggies!!

To everyone else...

How come when people suspect people have got wild caught snakes on here they go ape S H * T 
but when if comes to frogs...


----------



## GeckPhotographer (Apr 2, 2012)

Becuase in Qld you can legally catch frogs.


----------



## Snake-Supplies (Apr 2, 2012)

GeckPhotographer said:


> Becuase in Qld you can legally catch frogs.



That's cool as jelly beans!!


----------



## Shotta (Apr 2, 2012)

lol ill have a guees
eastern sedge frog or something litoria somethin or other lol sorry couldnt be much helpl


----------



## froggyboy86 (May 5, 2012)

I don't think they are Litoria peroni/tyleri tadpoles based on the nares. They are most similar to Graceful Tree Frogs (Litoria gracilenta) tadpoles and the metamorphs look similar to metamorphs of this species as well. For tadpole ID it is best to photograph the tadpoles from directly above (and a lateral shot if possible always helps). 

Aaron


----------

