Published in

PeerJ, PeerJ, (6), p. e4587, 2018

DOI: 10.7717/peerj.4587

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Modelling the growth of the brown frog (Rana dybowskii)

Journal article published in 2018 by Qing Tong ORCID, Xiao-Peng Du, Zong-Fu Hu, Li-Yong Cui, Hong-Bin Wang
This paper is made freely available by the publisher.
This paper is made freely available by the publisher.

Full text: Download

Red circle
Preprint: archiving forbidden
Red circle
Postprint: archiving forbidden
Green circle
Published version: archiving allowed
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

Well-controlled development leads to uniform body size and a better growth rate; therefore, the ability to determine the growth rate of frogs and their period of sexual maturity is essential for producing healthy, high-quality descendant frogs. To establish a working model that can best predict the growth performance of frogs, the present study examined the growth of one-year-old and two-year-old brown frogs (Rana dybowskii) from metamorphosis to hibernation (18 weeks) and out-hibernation to hibernation (20 weeks) under the same environmental conditions. Brown frog growth was studied and mathematically modelled using various nonlinear, linear, and polynomial functions. The model input values were statistically evaluated using parameters such as the Akaike’s information criterion. The body weight/size ratio (Kwl) and Fulton’s condition factor (K) were used to compare the weight and size of groups of frogs during the growth period. The results showed that the third- and fourth-order polynomial models provided the most consistent predictions of body weight for age 1 and age 2 brown frogs, respectively. Both the Gompertz and third-order polynomial models yielded similarly adequate results for the body size of age 1 brown frogs, while the Janoschek model produced a similarly adequate result for the body size of age 2 brown frogs. The Brody and Janoschek models yielded the highest and lowest estimates of asymptotic weight, respectively, for the body weights of all frogs. TheKwlvalue of all frogs increased from 0.40 to 3.18. TheKvalue of age 1 frogs decreased from 23.81 to 9.45 in the first four weeks. TheKvalue of age 2 frogs remained close to 10. Graphically, a sigmoidal trend was observed for body weight and body size with increasing age. The results of this study will be useful not only for amphibian research but also for frog farming management strategies and decisions.