Treefrog Problems
For the past three days, it rained nearly nonstop. I took this opportunity to catch and observe all the amphibians that would crawl out of the logs and debris in my property. I've heard the distinct croaking of chorus frogs for several weeks and I was desperate to get photos.
During my several day searches, I found and caught five different treefrogs to photograph. And I reported all of these treefrogs to the species I've learned to be the frogs I've seen the last four years, the (Northern) Pacific Tree Frog (Pseudacris regilla). However, iNaturalist @boattailedgrackle brought it up to my attention that my frogs may not be what they seem.
Boattailedgrackle suggested that my frogs were Sierran Tree Frog (Pseudacris sierra) and not the normal Pacific I thought I've been seeing. So immediately I was starting getting skeptical, especially since the only two species of frogs in Union County, Oregon was the Pacific Tree and the American Bullfrog. However, something kept bugging me and I decided to look over the species again in the "National Audubon Society Field Guide to North American Reptiles and Amphibians". What caught my eye was the fact the Pacific Tree Frog's range was much larger than what I saw on iNat. Second, I couldn't find the Sierran Tree Frog in the guide.
My next resource was the internet and I learned that in 2006, a herpetologist named Recuero split the Pacific Tree Frog into three different taxa; Northern Pacific (P. regilla) in Washington, W Oregon and Idaho, Sierrra (P. sierra) of California and southeastern Oregon and third in southern California and Baja. However, the taxonomic change is controversial as the research paper was based primarily on mitochondrial DNA and nothing else. Range maps and discussions on the differences between the species were never mentioned. However Amphibian Species of the World accepted this change.
What makes this situation worse for me is, I don't know what species I have. I went on looking for other resources on range of the species. iNat vague range maps say I'm well in range of Northern Pacific but just outside of Sierra but mere few miles. The United States Geological Survey (USGS) suggested the Northern Pacific's range ends on the Blue Mountain ridgeline and vice versa for the Sierra. That means my frogs are Sierra but the frogs literally on the other side of the mountain are Northern Pacific. Last but not least, California Herps says that the Northern Pacific is Washington coastline restricted, meaning I'm well in range of Sierra.
Those are just the three main sources I saw but the point still stands, who's right and what species do I have? And to top it off, if iNat and USGS are correct(ish), do I also need to deal with hybrids, making the id process even more challenging? The answer is simple, I can't. But that doesn't mean I can't give my own two cents worth on this issue.
Though I have no science backing me up, I fully agree that this taxon change was very narrow-minded and bias. To me, there is not enough information to back up Recuero's research. This isn't the first time this has happened either. Always remember, ornithologists split the Western Flycatcher (now Pacific-slope along the coast, Cordilleran in the Rocky Mountains) specifically because of mtDNA. Now look at the effects that change made on the birders. It's a headache identifying them because you can't because there's no plumage differences.
But this also leaves room for study. I think this incident is going to encourage me to continue what I'm doing though. I'm just going to continue catching tree frogs and photographing every single one I get my hands on. The only thing I don't have is a lab for DNA testing but if I can find visible differences between the frogs in different areas, maybe I can support the taxon change. I guess that means I'm going searching!