Sexual dimorphic traits of the head morphology of Chinese edible frog Hoplobatrachus rugulosus in Musuan, Philippines
Article Sidebar
Abstract Views: 441
File Views: 65
Main Article Content
Abstract
Abstract. Rizalda JS, Dapar MLG. 2025. Sexual dimorphic traits of the head morphology of Chinese edible frog Hoplobatrachus rugulosus in Musuan, Philippines. Biodiversitas 26: 4396-4411. Sexual dimorphism in amphibians often reflects ecological pressures, reproductive strategies, and behavioral roles. This study investigated sex-based differences in head, snout, and tympanum shapes in Hoplobatrachus rugulosus using landmark-based geometric morphometric analysis. A total of 60 adult frogs (30 males, 30 females) were photographed, and 33 head, 7 snout, and 8 tympanum landmarks were digitized. Generalized Procrustes Analysis (GPA) and Relative Warp Analysis were used to assess shape variation. Statistical tests included MANOVA, Discriminant Function Analysis (DFA), and Procrustes distance calculations. Significant shape differences were found between sexes for all traits: head (p = 1.03 × 10?¹?, ?² = 0.584; Procrustes d² = 0.07), snout (p = 2.18 × 10??, ?² = 0.381; d² = 0.05), and tympanum (p = 0.0001, ?² = 0.368; d² = 0.04). DFA correctly classified 90% of individuals by head shape and 75% by snout and tympanum. Females exhibited broader, more symmetrical heads and snouts, which may support feeding efficiency and fecundity. Males displayed more irregular and asymmetrical snout and tympanum shapes, likely associated with acoustic signaling and mate competition. Fluctuating asymmetry in tympanum shape across both sexes may reflect developmental stress from environmental factors such as agrochemical use or habitat disturbance. Geometric morphometrics effectively revealed subtle shape variation overlooked by traditional methods. However, the approach requires high-quality images, technical expertise, and may not capture behavioral or physiological traits. Future research should incorporate functional data, including bite force and mating acoustics, to better understand the adaptive significance of cranial dimorphism in this species.
Article Details
Issue
Section
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
References
Bee MA, Swanson EM. 2007. Auditory masking of anuran advertisement calls by road traffic noise. Anim Behav 74 (6): 1765-1776. DOI: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2007.03.019.
Bell RC, Zamudio KR. 2012. Sexual dichromatism in frogs: Natural selection, sexual selection and unexpected diversity. Proc Biol Sci 279 (1748): 4687-4693. DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2012.1609.
Benderlioglu Z. 2010. Fluctuating asymmetry and steroid hormones: A review. Symmetry 2 (2): 541-553. DOI: 10.3390/sym2020541.
Bosch J, Márquez R. 2000. Tympanum fluctuating asymmetry, body size and mate choice in female midwife toads (Alytes obstetricans). Behaviour 137: 1211-1222. DOI: 10.1163/156853900502600.
Cabuga Jr CC, Empeño AMD, Pondang JMD. 2025. Geometric morphometric analysis of body shape variation in Glossogobius giuris from Lake Mainit, Agusan del Norte, Philippines. Res Ecol 7 (2): 144-158. DOI: 10.30564/re.v7i2.9519.
Caldart VM, Loebens L, Brum AJC, Bataioli L, Cechin SZ. 2019. Reproductive cycle, size and age at sexual maturity, and sexual dimorphism in the stream-breeding frog Crossodactylus schmidti (Hylodidae). S Am J Herpetol 14 (1): 1-11. DOI: 10.2994/sajh-d-17-00060.1.
Chen H, Qin H, Zhao Z, Liao J, Wu Y, Liu X, Jiang L, Dayanda B, Chen W. 2023. Body size but not food size determined head sexual dimorphism in Rana kukunoris from the Tibetan Plateau. Asian Herpetol Res 14: 175-181. DOI: 10.3724/ahr.2095-0357.2022.0060.
Crnobrnja-Isailovi? J, ?ur?i? S, Stojadinovi? D, Tomaševi?-Kolarov N, Aleksi? I, Tomanovi? Ž. 2012. Diet composition and food preferences in adult common toads (Bufo bufo) (Amphibia: Anura: Bufonidae). J Herpetol 46 (4): 562-567. DOI: 10.1670/10-264.
Da C Arantes Í, Vasconcellos MM, Boas TCV, Veludo LBA, Colli GR. 2015. Sexual dimorphism, growth, and longevity of two toad species (Anura, Bufonidae) in a Neotropical Savanna. Copeia 103 (2): 329-342. DOI: 10.1643/CH-14-092.
Dapar MLG, Garcia SMG, Achacoso MVD, Debalucos CAP, Moneva CSO, Demayo CG. 2014. Describing populations of Pomacea canaliculata Lamarck from selected areas in Mindanao, Philippines using relative warp analysis of the whorl shell shape. Aust J Basic Appl Sci 8 (5): 355-360.
Dapar MLG, Manting MME, Sasan LG, Arimao RGG, Demayo CG. 2015. Correlation of measured intelligence and facial morphology among the selected students of Mindanao State University-Iligan Institute of Technology, Iligan City, Philippines. Adv Environ Biol 9 (19): 41-49.
de Abreu e Melo-Moreira D, Murta-Fonseca RA, Galdino CAB, Nascimento LB. 2021. Does a male nest builder have the same head shape as his mate? Sexual dimorphism in Leptodactylus fuscus (Anura: Leptodactylidae). Zool Anz 295: 23-33. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcz.2021.09.004.
Delima EMM, Ates FB, Ibañez JC. 2006. Species composition and microhabitats of frogs within Arakan Valley Conservation Area, Cotabato, Mindanao Island, Philippines. Banwa 3: 16-30
Diesmos AC, Diesmos ML, Brown RM 2008. Status and distribution of alien invasive frogs in the Philippines. J Environ Sci Manag 9 (2): 41-53.
Donol CM, Zainudin R, Deka EQ. 2025. Morphological variation of Pelobatrachus nasutus (Schlegel, 1858) (Order: Anura and Family: Dicroglosidae) from different localities in Sarawak. J Sustain Sci Manag 20 (2): 390-406. DOI: 10.46754/jssm.2025.02.013.
Emerson SB. 2000. Vertebrate secondary sexual characteristics—Physiological mechanisms and evolutionary patterns. Am Nat 156 (1): 84-91. DOI: 10.1086/303370.
Flores GMA, Torres AG, Flores ABA, Jakosalem PGC, Guihawan JQ, Roa-Quiaoit HA. 2024. Species composition and conservation of amphibians in Central Panay Mountain Range, Antique, Philippines. Biodiversitas 25 (4): 1797-1808. DOI: 10.13057/biodiv/d250450.
Fondren A. 2023. Variation and sexual dimorphism in color and head morphology in American toads (Anaxyrus americanus). [Thesis]. Saint Cloud State University, USA.
Gallant N, Teather K. 2001. Differences in size, pigmentation, and fluctuating asymmetry in stressed and nonstressed northern leopard frogs (Rana pipiens). Écoscience 8 (4): 430-436. DOI: 10.1080/11956860.2001.11682671.
Gerhardt HC, Bee MA. 2007. Recognition and localization of acoustic signals. In: Narins PM, Feng AS, Fay RR, Popper AN (eds). Hearing and Sound Communication in Amphibians. Springer, New York. DOI: 10.1007/978-0-387-47796-1_5.
Gerhardt HC. 1994. The evolution of vocalization in frogs and toads. Ann Rev Ecol Syst 25: 293-324. DOI: 10.1146/annurev.es.25.110194.001453.
Goldberg J, Naretto S, Carezzano F, Quinzio S. 2024. Sexual size dimorphism in multiple traits: An integrative perspective in several Anuran species. J Herpetol 58 (1): 46-63. DOI: 10.1670/22-079.
Goyes Vallejos J, Gomez J, Hernández-Figueroa AD, Vera R. Green DM. 2021. Fertilization success suggests random pairing in frogs with regard to body size. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 75 (10): 140. DOI: 10.1007/s00265-021-03081-6.
Hammer Ø, Harper DAT, Ryan PD. 2001. PAST: Paleontological Statistics software package for education and data analysis. Palaeontol Electron 4 (1): 1-9.
Haribon Foundation. 2004. Guidelines for Amphibians and Reptiles Survey. Haribon Foundation.
Hetherington TE. 1992. The effects of body size on the functional properties of middle ear systems in anuran amphibians. Brain Behav Evol 39 (3): 133-142. DOI: 10.1159/000114111.
Ili? M, Jojic V, Stamenkovi? G, Markovi? V, Simic VM, Paunovi? M, Crnobrnja-Isailovic J. 2019. Geometric vs. traditional morphometric methods for exploring morphological variation of tadpoles at early developmental stages. Amphibia-Reptilia 40 (4): 1-11. DOI: 10.1163/15685381-00001193.
Indermaur L, Schmidt BR, Tockner K, Schaub M. 2010. Spatial variation in abiotic and biotic factors in a floodplain determine anuran body size and growth rate at metamorphosis. Oecologia 163 (3): 637-649. DOI: 10.1007/s00442-010-1586-4.
James LS, Taylor RC, Hunter KL, Ryan MJ. 2022. Evolutionary and allometric insights into anuran auditory sensitivity and morphology. Brain Behav Evol 97 (3-4): 140-150. DOI: 10.1159/000521309.
Juarez BH, Moen DS, Adams DC. 2023. Ecology, sexual dimorphism, and jumping evolution in anurans. J Evol Biol 36 (5): 829-841. DOI: 10.1111/jeb.14171.
Kaliontzopoulou A. 2011. Geometric morphometrics in herpetology: Modern tools for enhancing the study of morphological variation in amphibians and reptiles. Basic Appl Herpetol 25: 5-32. DOI: 10.11160/bah.11016.
Liao WB, Zeng Y, Yang JD. 2013. Sexual size dimorphism in anurans: Roles of mating system and habitat types. Front Zool 10 (1): 65. DOI: 10.1186/1742-9994-10-65.
Lin Z, Hong Y, Chen S, Zhang Q, Han L, Tu W, Du Y, Gu S, Yuan Z, Hu S, Liu X. 2023. Emerging non-native amphibians require immediate prevention management in a megacity of South China. BioInvasions Rec 12 (3): 731-744.
Lin Z-H, Ji X. 2005. Sexual dimorphism in morphological traits and food habits in tiger frogs, Hoplobatrachus rugulosus, in Lishui, Zhejiang. Zool Res 26 (3): 255-262.
Monnet J-M, Cherry MI. 2002. Sexual size dimorphism in anurans. Proc Biol Sci 269 (1507): 2301-2307. DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2002.2170.
Murta-Fonseca RA, Folly M, Carmo LF, Martins A. 2020. Growing towards disparity: Geometric morphometrics reveals sexual and allometric differences in Aparasphenodon brunoi (Anura: Hylidae: Lophyohylinae) head shape. Cuad Herpetol 34 (1): 1-11. DOI: 10.31017/CdH.2020.(2019-032).
Nali RC, Zamudio KR, Haddad CFB, Prado CPA. 2014. Size-dependent selective mechanisms on males and females and the evolution of sexual size dimorphism in frogs. Am Nat 184 (6): 727-740. DOI: 10.1086/678455.
Nuñeza OM, Non MLP, Oconer EP, Aljibe MC. 2017. Species richness and endemism of anurans in Mt. Matutum protected landscape, South Cotabato, Philippines. J Biodivers Environ Sci 10 (5): 1-13.
Petrovi? TG, Vukov TD, Kolarov NT. 2017. Sexual dimorphism in size and shape of traits related to locomotion in nine anuran species from Serbia and Montenegro. Folia Zool 66 (1): 11-21. DOI: 10.25225/fozo.v66.i1.a4.2017.
Pincheira?Donoso D, Harvey LP, Grattarola F, Jara M, Cotter SC, Tregenza T, Hodgson DJ. 2021. The multiple origins of sexual size dimorphism in global amphibians. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 30 (2): 443-458. DOI: 10.1111/geb.13230.
Portik DM, Bell, RC, Blackburn DC et al. 2019. Sexual dichromatism drives diversification within a major radiation of African amphibians. Syst Biol 68 (6): 859-875. DOI: 10.1093/sysbio/syz023.
Ra?kovi? JK, Kolarov NT, Vukov T. 2019. The ventral cranial size and shape variation between males and females of European brown frogs: Rana dalmatina, R. graeca and R. temporaria (Anura, Amphibia). Nat Sci 9 (2): 6-11. DOI: 10.5937/univtho9-21223.
Rongchapho P, Thongproh P, Chuaynkern C, Intuman C, Chuaynkern Y. 2021. Clutch size of the Rugose Frog, Hoplobatrachus rugulosus (Wiegmann, 1834), from Phu Khiao Wildlife Sanctuary, Northeastern Thailand. Herpetol Notes 14: 1253-1256.
Sapkota S, Bhattarai BP, Mishra MR, Adhikari JN, Khatiwada JR. 2022. Diet composition and overlap of sympatric amphibians in paddy fields of Nepal. Herpetol Conserv Biol 17 (1): 155-164.
Schäuble CS. 2004. Variation in body size and sexual dimorphism across geographical and environmental space in the frogs Limnodynastes tasmaniensis and L. peronii. Biol J Linn Soc 82 (1): 39-56. DOI: 10.1111/j.1095-8312.2004.00315.x.
Shine R. 1979. Sexual selection and sexual dimorphism in the Amphibia. Copeia 1979 (2): 297-306. DOI: 10.2307/1443418.
Silva NR, Berneck BVM, da Silva HR, Haddad CFB, Zamudio KR, Mott T, Nali RC, Prado CPA. 2020. Egg-laying site, fecundity and degree of sexual size dimorphism in frogs. Biol J Linn Soc 131 (3): 600-610. DOI: 10.1093/biolinnean/blaa126.
Solania CL, Fernandez-Gamalinda EV. 2018. Species composition and habitat association of anurans within water systems of Andanan Watershed, Agusan del Sur, Caraga Region, Philippines. Environ Exp Biol 16: 159-168. DOI: 10.22364/eeb.16.15.
Solis MF, Arroyo Jr J, Garcia KA, Zapico F, Requieron E. 2015. Geometric morphometric analysis on sexual dimorphism of guppy Poecilia reticulata in Lake Sebu, South Cotabato, Philippines. Res J Anim Vet Fish Sci 3 (1): 1-9.
Tokita M, Iizuka J, Eto K. 2023. Characterization of the adaptive morphology of the stream brown frog, Rana sakuraii Matsui & Matsui, 1990, using geometric morphometrics. Herpetol Notes 16: 761-771.
Tonini JFR, Provete DB, Maciel NM, Morais AR, Goutte S, Toledo LF, Pyron RA. 2020. Allometric escape from acoustic constraints is rare for frog calls. Ecol Evol 10 (8): 3686-3695. DOI: 10.1002/ece3.6155.
Traijitt T. 2020. Gonadal sex differentiation of rice field frog Hoplobatrachus rugulosus (Wiegmann, 1834). [Dissertation]. Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand. DOI: 10.58837/chula.the.2020.24.
Tsuji H, Matsui M. 2002. Male-male combat and head morphology in a fanged frog (Rana kuhlii) from Taiwan. J Herpetol 36 (3): 520-526. DOI: 10.1670/0022-1511(2002)036[0520:MMCAHM]2.0.CO;2.
Üzüm N, Özdemir N, Dursun C, Kutrup B, Gül S. 2021. Interspecific and intraspecific size and shape variation in skull of two closely related species, Bufo bufo (Linnaeus, 1758) and Bufo verrucosissimus (Pallas, 1814) from Turkey. Turk J Zool 45 (2): 91-101. DOI: 10.3906/zoo-2009-8.
Vági B, Végvári Z, Liker A, Freckleton RP, Székely T. 2020. Climate and mating systems as drivers of global diversity of parental care in frogs. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 29 (8): 1373-1386. DOI: 10.1111/geb.13113.
Wang JC, Wang TL, Fu SH, Brauth SE, Cui JG. 2016. Auditory brainstem responses in the Chinese tiger frog Hoplobatrachus chinensis (Osbeck, 1765) (Anura: Dicroglossidae) reveal sexually dimorphic hearing sensitivity. Ital J Zool 83 (4): 482-489. DOI: 10.1080/11250003.2016.1222638.
Wei L, Shao W, Ding G, Fan X, Lin Z. 2014. Density but not kinship regulates the growth and developmental traits of Chinese tiger frog (Hoplobatrachus chinensis) tadpoles. Asian Herpetol Res 5: 113-118.
Womack MC, Bell RC. 2020. Two?hundred million years of anuran body?size evolution in relation to geography, ecology and life history. J Evol Biol 33 (10): 1417-1432. DOI: 10.1111/jeb.13679.
Yang YJ, Jiang Y, Mi ZP, Liao WB. 2022. Testing the role of environmental harshness and sexual selection in limb muscle mass in anurans. Front Ecol Evol 10: 879885. DOI: 10.3389/fevo.2022.879885.
Zakharov VM, Trofimov IE. 2022. Fluctuating asymmetry as an indicator of stress. Emerg Top Life Sci 6: 295-301. DOI: 10.1042/etls20210274.
Zhelev Z, Mollov I, Tsonev S. 2023. Application of fluctuating asymmetry values in Pelophylax ridibundus (Amphibia: Anura: Ranidae) meristic traits as a method for assessing environmental quality of areas with different degrees of urbanization. Diversity 15 (1): 118. DOI: 10.3390/d15010118.