Katheryn M. Junglas, MSU Department of Biology Minot ND, 58707 Rana pipiens Malformation Assessment.

Katheryn M. Junglas, MSU Department of Biology

Minot ND, 58707

Rana pipiens Malformation Assessment

Range

Range in North Dakota

Taken from Hoberg and Gause,

Deformed Frog sites

North Dakota Malformations

USGS- NWHC Information Report2001

Tadpoles development

Normal Bone Structure

Other Deformities

X-Ray of Bone Structure

Extra Limbs

Deformed leg structures

False elbow and Double bones

No Regression of tail

Missing the Right eye

Salamander from our lab

Possible causes for deformities

• UV-B Radiation

• Chemical Agents

• Parasites

-Ribeiroia

-Alaria

• Interactions

Sexing frogs (female)

Sexing frogs (male)

Hayes (2002)

Hermaphroditic frog

Atrazine effects-normal histology- female

Atrazine-normal male

Atrazine-ovateste

Habitat

Habitat

Habitat

Finding Tadpoles

Tadpole

Normal Bone Structure

Measuring

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Location

SUL (mm)

0

10

20

30

40

50

sexSnout Uro-style Length (mm)

Statistics

• No significant difference in male and females

• No Significant difference in lengths between sites

• Healthy Ratio of Males to females 13:20

Sexing animals (males)

Assessment

• No deformities were found

• Mean of Female juvenile length- 42.2 mm

• Mean of Male juvenile length- 41.4 mm

• Mass of Gonads- in progress

• Skeletal development- so far good development of skeleton and cartilage

Why We Should Continue to Observe

•Small sample size

•Teratogens and carcinogens in other organisms

•Since no malformations yet, we can analyze what is or isn’t here, and the sooner we notice something, the easier to find out what that is.

•Frogs are Cool!

Acknowledgements

• Dr. Christopher Beachy at Minot State

• Dr. Cory Rubin, Project Manager Assistant

• Regional Director Richard A. Coleman

• All the staff at Upper Souris Wildlife Refuge

• Fish-Wildlife Service Cost Share Agreement, grant #62680-4-J001

• Minot State University, Division of Biology