Cookies Policy

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.

I accept this policy

Find out more here

Escape strategy and vocalization during escape by American Bullfrogs (Lithobates catesbeianus)

No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
The full text of this article is not currently available.

Brill’s MyBook program is exclusively available on BrillOnline Books and Journals. Students and scholars affiliated with an institution that has purchased a Brill E-Book on the BrillOnline platform automatically have access to the MyBook option for the title(s) acquired by the Library. Brill MyBook is a print-on-demand paperback copy which is sold at a favorably uniform low price.

Access this article

+ Tax (if applicable)
Add to Favorites
You must be logged in to use this functionality

image of Amphibia-Reptilia

American bullfrogs, Lithobates catesbeianus, escape by jumping into water and submerging, often vocalizing as they flee. I studied effects of several risk factors on escape and refuge use and the association between vocalization by fleeing frogs and escape by other individuals nearby. Frogs on shore permitted equally close approach when approached along the shore or on a path perpendicular to shore. Frogs in water were more likely to flee when closer to shore and when approached more rapidly. Time spent submerged after fleeing was uncorrelated with proximity of the predator upon escape. Frogs spent longer submerged when they swam along shore away from the point of entry than when they surfaced directly offshore. Neither distance offshore nor Euclidean distance from the entry point upon emergence was related to time spent submerged. Bullfrogs may use unpredictability of distance and direction moved underwater and of duration of submergence as a strategy that reduce risk upon surfacing. When a focal frog vocalized as it fled, immediate escape by nearby nonfocal frogs was more frequent than when focal frogs (1) escaped without vocalization and (2) neither escaped nor vocalized. These findings are consistent with either alarm calling or benefit to the fleeing individual due to brief delay of attack by a predator. They are inconsistent with several other possible functions of calling during escape. Experimentation is needed to definitively test the hypothesis that calls during escape are alarm signals.

Affiliations: 1: Department of Biology, Indiana University-Purdue University Fort Wayne, Fort Wayne, IN 46805, USA;, Email:


Full text loading...


Data & Media loading...

Article metrics loading...



Can't access your account?
  • Tools

  • Add to Favorites
  • Printable version
  • Email this page
  • Subscribe to ToC alert
  • Get permissions
  • Recommend to your library

    You must fill out fields marked with: *

    Librarian details
    Your details
    Why are you recommending this title?
    Select reason:
    Amphibia-Reptilia — Recommend this title to your library
  • Export citations
  • Key

  • Full access
  • Open Access
  • Partial/No accessInformation