Search Field Guide
Advanced Search
MT Gov Logo
Montana Field Guide

Montana Field Guides

Columbia Spotted Frog - Rana luteiventris

Image Copyright and Usage Information
Native Species

Global Rank: G4
State Rank: S4
(see State Rank Reason below)


Agency Status
USFWS:
USFS:
BLM:


 

External Links


Listen to an Audio Sample
Copyright by Canadian Amphibian and Reptile Conservation Network
State Rank Reason (see State Rank above)
Species is apparently secure and not at risk of extirpation or facing significant threats in all or most of its range.
  • Details on Status Ranking and Review
    Columbia Spotted Frog (Rana luteiventris) Conservation Status Review
    Review Date = 05/03/2018
    Range Extent

    ScoreF - 20,000-200,000 km squared (about 8,000-80,000 square miles)

    Comment166,808 square Kilometers from Natural Heritage Program range maps

    Long-term Trend

    ScoreE - Relatively Stable (±25% change)

    CommentSince European arrival, riparian habitat has been altered and lost but it is unlikely that populations have changed significantly (+/- 25%)

    Short-term Trend

    ScoreE - Stable. Population, range, area occupied, and/or number or condition of occurrences unchanged or remaining within ±10% fluctuation

    CommentPopulations appear stable based on surveys conducted by Reichel, Hendricks, Werner, and Maxell between 1994 and 2008.

    Threats

    ScoreG - Slightly threatened. Threats, while recognizable, are of low severity, or affecting only a small portion of the population or area.

    CommentInvasive Bull Frogs are a threat to lower elevation populations in the Bitterroot and Clark Fork Drainages.

    SeverityLow - Low but nontrivial reduction of species population or reversible degradation or reduction of habitat in area affected, with recovery expected in 10-50 years.

    CommentThreat is resulting in loss of population in affected areas which represent a small but non-trivial portion of the statewide population

    ScopeLow - 5-20% of total population or area affected

    CommentLess that 20% of range likely to be affected

    ImmediacyHigh - Threat is operational (happening now) or imminent (within a year).

    CommentOngoing and increasing

    Intrinsic Vulnerability

    ScoreB - Moderately Vulnerable. Species exhibits moderate age of maturity, frequency of reproduction, and/or fecundity such that populations generally tend to recover from decreases in abundance over a period of several years (on the order of 5-20 years or 2-5 generations); or species has moderate dispersal capability such that extirpated populations generally become reestablished through natural recolonization (unaided by humans).

    CommentThis species has high fecundity, a moderate age of maturity, and recruitment can be low.

    Environmental Specificity

    ScoreB - Narrow. Specialist. Specific habitat(s) or other abiotic and/or biotic factors (see above) are used or required by the Element, but these key requirements are common and within the generalized range of the species within the area of interest.

    CommentSpecies generally relies on riparian areas and standing waters with emergent vegetation as well as suitable foraging and dispersal habitat

    Raw Conservation Status Score

    Score 3.5 + 0 (geographic distribution) + 0 (environmental specificity) + 0 (short-term trend) + 0.75 (threats) = 4.25

 
General Description
EGGS:
Eggs are laid in a single grapefruit sized globular mass and are usually laid communally with a few to more than a hundred other egg masses (Bryce Maxell, personal observation). Egg masses contain from 308 to 2,403 eggs per mass (X = 983, SD = 348, N=30 for completely counted egg masses at 8 low elevation sites in northwest Montana) (Bryce Maxell, personal observation). Each ovum is black above and laterally, cream to white at the very bottom, and is surrounded by two jelly layers (Svihla 1935, Bryce Maxell, personal observation). Ovum diameters are 2-3 mm (Svihla 1935, Morris and Tanner 1969; Bryce Maxell, personal observation). Total egg diameters, including the jelly layers, are usually 10-12 mm, but may vary from 8 to 21 mm (Svihla 1935, Turner 1958a, Morris and Tanner 1969, Bryce Maxell, personal observation).

LARVAE:
Body and tail musculature are mottled with light and dark brown spots, black spots, and flecks of metallic gold on a light tan to dark brown background. The ventral body surface is pale yellow and often has a metallic copper sheen toward the edges (Bryce Maxell, personal observation). The tail is about twice the length of the body, and the dorsal and ventral tail fins are clear to yellowish with flecks of black and metallic gold. Eyes are located on the top of the head. Total length of 7-90 mm (Svihla 1935, Wishard 1977, Maxell et al. 2009).

JUVENILES AND ADULTS:
A white to yellowish stripe extends from the tip of the snout laterally underneath the eye to just above the front limb. Dorsal base color varies from light tan to reddish or dark green with small black spots that are irregular in outline and usually have a light spot in their center (Turner 1959b). At higher elevations large adults are often a reddish-brown base color dorsally. Ventral color is white to cream in all individuals, but larger animals are usually salmon in color on their thighs and in some individuals the salmon color extends from the feet to the middle of the belly with patches on the throat as well (Turner 1959b, Bryce Maxell, personal observation). Snout-vent length (SVL) of 17-90 mm (Bryce Maxell, personal observation).

VOICE:
Calls of males are a series of hollow, pulsing clicks (Werner et al. 2004). Typical outer limits for hearing individuals is 20 meters (approximately 65 feet) (Bryce Maxell, personal observation).

Diagnostic Characteristics
The bright pigment on the underside of the legs distinguishes adults of this species from all other amphibians in Montana. Adults of the Northern Leopard Frog (Lithobates pipiens) have large, oval shaped, black spots that are regular in outline and are surrounded with a white halo on their dorsal surface. Adults of the American Bullfrog (Lithobates catesbeianus) lack the white to yellowish stripe on the lateral portion of the snout, have tympanums that are the same size or larger than their eye, and have a fold of skin extending from the back of their eye over their tympanum and down to their front leg (Maxell et al. 2009).

Larvae of the Northern Leopard Frog have tails that are less than twice their body length, do not have large flecks of black on their body or tail, and lack a metallic copper sheen on the lateral edges of their ventral surfaces. Larvae of the American Bullfrog have a bright to creamy yellow ventral surface, have perfectly round black dots on their dorsal surface and tail musculature, and attain much larger sizes (Maxell et al. 2009).

Northern Leopard Frog egg diameters are approximately one-half those of Columbia Spotted Frog because their jelly envelopes are much smaller (see species descriptions), and their egg masses are usually attached underwater (Ross et al. 1994b). American Bullfrog eggs are laid in the middle of the summer and are spread out in a thin layer over the surface or bottom of a pond rather than a globular mass. See sections on distribution to identify possible regions of co-occurrence of Columbia Spotted Frog and Northern Leopard Frog or American Bullfrog.

Species Range
Montana Range Range Descriptions

Native

Western Hemisphere Range

 


Range Comments
Based on allozyme and morphological evidence the Columbia Spotted Frog, Rana luteiventris, is currently recognized as a distinct species with a more or less continuous distribution along the Northern Rocky Mountains from the southwestern Yukon to central Idaho. Isolated populations are also located in the Bighorn Mountains of Wyoming, and at isolated springs and mountain tops in Utah, Nevada, Idaho, and Oregon (Green et al. 1996, Green et al. 1997, Reaser 2000). However, the species’ taxonomy may require future division into three or more subspecies or weakly differentiated full species to adequately represent the genetic differentiation of glacial relict populations that are isolated in several portions of Utah and Nevada, (Green et al. 1997, David Bos, Brigham Young University, personal communication). If future taxonomic subdivisions are made all populations north of south-central Idaho would likely be the same species or subspecies (Green et al. 1997). Across their range the Columbia Spotted Frog are found at elevations up to 3,050 m (10,000 ft) (Stebbins 2003).

Maximum elevation: 2,973 m (9,755 ft) in Park County (Aimee and Grove Wyrick; MTNHP 2022).

Observations in Montana Natural Heritage Program Database
Number of Observations: 7289

(Click on the following maps and charts to see full sized version) Map Help and Descriptions
Relative Density

Recency

 

(Observations spanning multiple months or years are excluded from time charts)



Habitat
The Columbia Spotted Frog are highly aquatic and are regularly found at water's edge in or near forest openings. Wetlands at or near treeline are also used, but populations are uncommon in large, open intermountain valleys. They can be found on grassy/swampy banks of mountain water bodies (Black 1969a, Franz 1971), although they may avoid dense/tall grass (Miller 1978). Adults feed mainly in riparian habitat, occasionally in bordering meadow/woods, while juveniles will forage farther from water (Miller 1978).

Ecological Systems Associated with this Species
  • Details on Creation and Suggested Uses and Limitations
    How Associations Were Made
    We associated the use and habitat quality (common or occasional) of each of the 82 ecological systems mapped in Montana for vertebrate animal species that regularly breed, overwinter, or migrate through the state by:
    1. Using personal observations and reviewing literature that summarize the breeding, overwintering, or migratory habitat requirements of each species (Dobkin 1992, Hart et al. 1998, Hutto and Young 1999, Maxell 2000, Foresman 2012, Adams 2003, and Werner et al. 2004);
    2. Evaluating structural characteristics and distribution of each ecological system relative to the species' range and habitat requirements;
    3. Examining the observation records for each species in the state-wide point observation database associated with each ecological system;
    4. Calculating the percentage of observations associated with each ecological system relative to the percent of Montana covered by each ecological system to get a measure of "observations versus availability of habitat".
    Species that breed in Montana were only evaluated for breeding habitat use, species that only overwinter in Montana were only evaluated for overwintering habitat use, and species that only migrate through Montana were only evaluated for migratory habitat use.  In general, species were listed as associated with an ecological system if structural characteristics of used habitat documented in the literature were present in the ecological system or large numbers of point observations were associated with the ecological system.  However, species were not listed as associated with an ecological system if there was no support in the literature for use of structural characteristics in an ecological system, even if point observations were associated with that system.  Common versus occasional association with an ecological system was assigned based on the degree to which the structural characteristics of an ecological system matched the preferred structural habitat characteristics for each species as represented in scientific literature.  The percentage of observations associated with each ecological system relative to the percent of Montana covered by each ecological system was also used to guide assignment of common versus occasional association.  If you have any questions or comments on species associations with ecological systems, please contact the Montana Natural Heritage Program's Senior Zoologist.

    Suggested Uses and Limitations
    Species associations with ecological systems should be used to generate potential lists of species that may occupy broader landscapes for the purposes of landscape-level planning.  These potential lists of species should not be used in place of documented occurrences of species (this information can be requested at: mtnhp.org/requests) or systematic surveys for species and evaluations of habitat at a local site level by trained biologists.  Users of this information should be aware that the land cover data used to generate species associations is based on imagery from the late 1990s and early 2000s and was only intended to be used at broader landscape scales.  Land cover mapping accuracy is particularly problematic when the systems occur as small patches or where the land cover types have been altered over the past decade.  Thus, particular caution should be used when using the associations in assessments of smaller areas (e.g., evaluations of public land survey sections).  Finally, although a species may be associated with a particular ecological system within its known geographic range, portions of that ecological system may occur outside of the species' known geographic range.

    Literature Cited
    • Adams, R.A.  2003.  Bats of the Rocky Mountain West; natural history, ecology, and conservation.  Boulder, CO: University Press of Colorado.  289 p.
    • Dobkin, D. S.  1992.  Neotropical migrant land birds in the Northern Rockies and Great Plains. USDA Forest Service, Northern Region. Publication No. R1-93-34.  Missoula, MT.
    • Foresman, K.R.  2012.  Mammals of Montana.  Second edition.  Mountain Press Publishing, Missoula, Montana.  429 pp.
    • Hart, M.M., W.A. Williams, P.C. Thornton, K.P. McLaughlin, C.M. Tobalske, B.A. Maxell, D.P. Hendricks, C.R. Peterson, and R.L. Redmond. 1998.  Montana atlas of terrestrial vertebrates.  Montana Cooperative Wildlife Research Unit, University of Montana, Missoula, MT.  1302 p.
    • Hutto, R.L. and J.S. Young.  1999.  Habitat relationships of landbirds in the Northern Region, USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station RMRS-GTR-32.  72 p.
    • Maxell, B.A.  2000.  Management of Montana's amphibians: a review of factors that may present a risk to population viability and accounts on the identification, distribution, taxonomy, habitat use, natural history, and the status and conservation of individual species.  Report to U.S. Forest Service Region 1.  Missoula, MT: Wildlife Biology Program, University of Montana.  161 p.
    • Werner, J.K., B.A. Maxell, P. Hendricks, and D. Flath.  2004.  Amphibians and reptiles of Montana.  Missoula, MT: Mountain Press Publishing Company. 262 p.

Food Habits
Adults feed on a variety of aquatic and terrestrial invertebrates (Moore and Strickland 1955, Turner 1959b, Miller 1978) but may commonly cannibalize smaller individuals as well (Pilliod 1999). In western Montana, adults have been documented mainly foraging on ground insects such as coleoptera (35%), hymenoptera (22%), arachnid (15%); and others less than 10% (Miller 1978). However, prey is based mainly on availability (Whitaker et al. 1983, Turner 1959c, Moore and Strickland 1955). Tadpoles feed on a variety of algae as well as detritus, bacteria, and the remains of other dead tadpoles (Burke 1933, Morris and Tanner 1969). In Yellowstone, larvae have been documented eating vegetation from the families Callitriche and Spirogyra (Turner 1959c).

Ecology
This species is closely restricted to water (Black 1969a, Carpenter 1953b) and usually found within 15 meters of shore (Miller 1978). Young and adult Columbia Spotted Frog commonly bask and forage outside the water several meters from the water’s edge (Bryce Maxell, personal observation). Adults overwinter underwater in larger permanent water bodies or in springs or streams (Turner 1960, Patla 1997a) and may move throughout the winter to areas of higher oxygen concentration (Evelyn Bull, USFS Pacific Northwest Research Station, personal communication). Individuals may aestivate in mud under rocks in extremely dry conditions (Ross et al. 1999). Adults typically do not move more than 50 meters within a season (Hollenbeck 1974, Patla 1997a) but may move up to 1.5 kilometers to a seasonal breeding, foraging, or overwintering site (Engle 2000) and are known to disperse up to 6 or 7 kilometers (Reaser 1996a, Janice Engle, Boise State University, personal communication, Bryce Maxell, personal observation).

Reproductive Characteristics
Reproduction mainly takes place in lakes, ponds (temporary and permanent), springs, and occasionally backwaters or beaver ponds in streams (Turner 1958a). Breeding occurs from mid-March to mid-June depending on snow melt, temperature, and elevation (Turner 1958a, Schaub and Larsen 1978, Bryce Maxell, personal observation). Females deposit egg masses communally in a particular pond, often in the same location. These locations are at the pond margin in shallow waters, usually no more than 10-15 cm deep with emergent vegetation (usually sedges), but egg masses are Eggs are in clusters of 300 to 800 and not usually attached to vegetation (Bryce Maxell, personal observation) and hatch in 5 to 21 days (Turner 1958a, Maxell et al. 2009). Metamorphosis occurs about 8 to 16 weeks during mid-summer to late fall depending on elevation and water and air temperatures (Turner 1958a, Morris and Tanner 1969, Bryce Maxell, personal observation).

Females may breed in alternate years (Turner 1958a). In Yellowstone, this species does not reach reproductive maturity until year 4 (male), year 5-6 (female) (Turner 1960). Males occasionally call, but the call is faint; burst of 4 to 30 short crocks at a rate of 3 to 4 per second, with bursts separate by 3 seconds (Turner 1958a).

Management
The following was taken from the Status and Conservation section for the Columbia Spotted Frog account in Maxell et al. 2009

The Columbia Spotted Frog are the most common frog in the mountains and mountain valleys of western Montana and can be expected to be found in most water bodies that contain emergent vegetation and do not have fish or American Bullfrogs. However, their presence and/or status in the Big Snowy, Highwood, and Bighorn Mountains is uncertain. Risk factors relevant to the viability of populations of this species in Montana are likely to include grazing, fire and fire management activities, nonindigenous species and their management, development of water impoundments, and habitat fragmentation, all as described above. Individual studies that specifically identify risk factors or other issues relevant to the conservation of Columbia Spotted Frogs include the following. (1) In 1993, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service found that isolated “distinct population segments” of Columbia Spotted Frogs (at the time they were still known as Spotted Frog Rana pretiosa) throughout Utah, Nevada and southern Idaho were warranted for listing as a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act, but their listing was precluded by other species with higher listing priorities (USFWS 1993). Several mechanisms of decline have been proposed for the isolated populations of Columbia Spotted Frogs in Utah, Nevada, and southern Idaho (Koch et al. 1996). Turner (1962a) reported on the decline of Columbia Spotted Frogs in Nevada in the early and mid-1900s because of intensive water utilization for irrigation, and the introduction of bass and American Bullfrogs. Thirty-five years later Reaser (1996b, 1997, 2000) reported on further population declines in Nevada and attributed declines to alteration of natural hydrologic regimes for irrigation and livestock watering, livestock grazing, loss of beaver, and introduction of exotic American Bullfrogs and warm- and cold-water fishes. Hovingh (1993) noted that the following as factors that have contributed to the decline of Columbia Spotted Frog populations in the Wasatch Mountains and Bonneville basin in Utah: (a) habitat loss and fragmentation by highways, dams, reservoirs, urbanization, and the loss of natural flood disturbances because of water diversions and the channeling of rivers; (b) livestock grazing in riparian and wetland habitats; and (c) introduction of Raccoons (Procyon lotor), American Bullfrogs, crayfish, bass, and trout. For a population inhabiting an isolated set of springs in Utah, Cuellar (1994) reported that all ponds used by cattle had dark reddish water as a result of dung eutrophication, and lacked any aquatic vegetation, invertebrates, or frogs. Ross et al. (1999) found crushed individuals at the bottom of the hoof prints of cattle and reported that a decline in habitat appeared to be at least in part due to cattle grazing in the riparian areas. The construction of a dam on the Provo River in north central Utah extirpated many populations because of flooding of habitats (Wilkinson 1996). Populations in southwest Idaho are threatened by habitat loss as a result of livestock grazing impacts on riparian areas (Munger in Koch et al. 1996). It is likely that many of the known and postulated mechanisms of decline for the isolated southern populations pose threats to the viability of populations of Columbia Spotted Frogs in Montana. (2) Exotic warm- and cold-water fish have been implicated in the declines and losses of local Columbia Spotted Frog populations in Montana, Oregon, and Idaho. In Glacier National Park, Marnell (1997) reported that fish were found within the same general wetland complexes in only 16 of 68 (23%) of the sites where frogs were found. Furthermore, at sites where Columbia Spotted Frogs were found with fish, they were almost always found in satellite pools isolated from the fish or in densely vegetated sloughs. With a few exceptions this same general pattern of cooccurrence only where isolated pools, dense vegetation, or some other physical barrier from the fish exists has been observed in the Bitterroot and Cabinet Mountains in Montana (Bryce Maxell, personal observation). On the Palouse Prairie in northern Idaho, Monello and Wright (1999) found Columbia Spotted Frogs to be excluded from all water bodies containing fish, including those containing goldfish. Similarly, although Columbia Spotted Frogs cooccurred with fish at 69% of 55 lakes surveyed in the Big Horn Crags in central Idaho, frogs only successfully reproduced at 1 (2%) of these lakes (Pilliod et al. in Koch et al. 1996). Thus, stocked lakes in this region appeared to be population “sinks” and persistence in a basin may be dependent on the number and location of stocked sites (Pilliod et al. in Koch et al. 1996). In northeast Oregon, Bull and Hayes (2000) found the numbers of metamorphosed frogs at a site was inversely correlated with the presence of Longnose Dace (Rhinichthys cataractae) and rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss). (3) American Bullfrogs, which were introduced into Montana sometime prior to 1968, have apparently extirpated Columbia Spotted Frogs from a number of sites along the Bitterroot, lower Flathead, and lower Clark Fork Rivers (Black 1969a, 1969b, Giermakowski 1998, Werner et al. 1998a, Bryce Maxell, personal observation). However, sizable Columbia Spotted Frog populations have been found in close proximity with American Bullfrogs on the floodplain of the Bitterroot River near spring brooks. Spring brooks provide summer habitat and overwintering sites for Columbia Spotted Frogs which are apparently too cold for American Bullfrogs (Cavallo 1997, Bryce Maxell, personal observation); therefore, provide important refuges for Columbia Spotted Frogs around the flood plains of the mountain valleys. (4) Manipulation of water levels in water impoundments can result in direct and indirect mortality of amphibian larvae and eggs. For example, during the summer of 1998, fluctuating water levels in Cabinet Gorge Reservoir in northwest Montana led to the desiccation of Columbia Spotted Frog eggs and larvae when water levels dropped for power generation (Bryce Maxell, personal observation). (5) Kirk (1988) found a large number of dead adults in Oregon as the result of spraying with DDT (0.65-0.72 kg DDT/ha) to control Douglas fir tussock moth. Subsequent examination of the tissues of the dead frogs showed them to be heavily contaminated with DDT and its analogs relative to live individuals collected at the same site. (6) In northeast Oregon, Bull and Hayes (2000) found that the numbers of egg masses, metamorphosed frogs, and adult frogs found at grazed and ungrazed ponds did not differ. (7) Patla (1997b, 1998a) and Patla and Peterson (1999) reported declines in a population in Yellowstone National Park as the result of highway construction and construction of an underground water pumping system which changed migratory habitat and the local hydrological regime, respectively. (8) Lefcort et al. (1998) reported reduced survival of Columbia Spotted Frog larvae when exposed to experimental chambers with heavy metal contaminated soils from an EPA Superfund site in northern Idaho. Larval survival was 0.875 in controls, 0.20 in heavily contaminated soil and 0.175 in less contaminated soil. Thus, average survival in the superfund soils represented an almost 80 percent reduction in larval survival. Furthermore, they found that exposure to most heavy metal contaminants had sublethal effects in that they greatly reduced the ability of tadpoles to respond to chemical cues from a fish predator. (9) Blaustein et al. (1999) found that Columbia Spotted Frogs had relatively high levels of photolyase, an enzyme that is known to repair UV-B damage to DNA, as compared with other amphibian species. Furthermore, at several field sites, hatching success was unaffected by exposure to ambient levels of UV-B. Davis et al. (2000) found that embryo survival was above 80% for those exposed to ambient or no UV-B radiation, but dropped to 56% in those exposed to UV-B radiation enhanced to 15-30% above ambient levels at mid-day. Furthermore, few of the larvae survived when exposed to the enhanced UV-B radiation. (10) Reinking et al. (1980) found that aldosterone levels in blood plasma were over three times higher in animals held in captivity for three weeks than animals in the wild, indicating that animals face high levels of stress when held in captivity and possibly when being handled in the wild. (11) Historic loss of beaver may be causing gradual habitat loss in some mountain ranges in Montana as sites fill in with sediments and are no longer being replaced (Grant Hokit, Carroll College, personal communication, Bryce Maxell, personal observation).

References
  • Literature Cited AboveLegend:   View Online Publication
    • [USFWS] US Fish and Wildlife Service. 1993. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants; finding on petition to list the spotted frog. Federal Register 58(87): 27260-27263.
    • Black, J.H. 1969a. The frog genus Rana in Montana. Northwest Science 43(4): 191-195.
    • Black, J.H. 1969b. Yes--there are bullfrogs in Montana. Montana Outdoors 1969: 4.
    • Blaustein, A.R., J.B. Hays, P.D. Hoffman, D.P. Chivers, J.M. Kiesecker, W.P. Leonard, A. Marco, D.H. Olson, J.K. Reaser, and R.G. Anthony. 1999. DNA repair and resistance to UV-B radiation in western spotted frogs. Ecological-Applications 9(3): 1100-1105.
    • Bull, E.L. and M.P. Hayes. 2000. Livestock effects on reproduction of the Columbia spotted frog. Journal of Range Management 53: 293-296.
    • Burke, V. 1933. Bacteria as food for vertebrates. Science 78(2018): 194-195.
    • Carpenter, C.C. 1953b. Aggregation behavior of tadpoles of Rana pretiosa pretiosa Herpetelogica 9: 77-78.
    • Cavallo, B.J. 1997. Floodplain habitat heterogeneity and the distribution, abundance, and behavior of fishes and amphibians in the Middle Fork Flathead River Basin, Montana. M.S. Thesis. University of Montana, Missoula, MT. 133 p.
    • Cuellar, O. 1994. Ecological observations on Rana pretiosa in western Utah. Alytes 12(3): 109-121.
    • Davis, T.M., I.N. Flamarique, and K. Ovaska. 2000. Effects of UV-B on amphibian development: embryonic and larval survival of Hyla regilla and Rana pretiosa. Froglog 16: 3.
    • Engle, J. 2000. Columbia spotted frog Great Basin population (Owyhee Mountains subpopulation) long-term monitoring plan.
    • Franz, R. 1971. Notes on the distribution and ecology of the herpetofauna of northwestern Montana. Bulletin of the Maryland Herpetological Society 7: 1-10.
    • Giermakowski, J.T. 1998. Microhabitat separation between the bullfrog (Rana catesbeiana) and the Columbia spotted frog (Rana luteiventris) in Western Montana. Undergraduate Thesis, Wildlife Biology Program, University of Montana. Missoula, Montana. 2
    • Green, D.M., H. Kaiser, T.F. Sharbel, J. Kearsley, and K.R. McAllister. 1997. Cryptic species of spotted frogs, Rana pretiosa complex, in western North America. Copeia 1997(1): 1-8.
    • Green, D.M., T.F. Sharbel, J. Kearsley, and H. Kaiser. 1996. Postglacial range fluctuation, genetic subdivision and speciation in the western North American spotted frog complex, Rana pretiosa. Evolution 50: 374-390.
    • Hollenbeck, R.R. 1974. Growth rates and movements within a population of Rana pretiosa pretiosa Baird and Girard in south central Montana. Ph.D. Dissertation. Bozeman, Montana: Montana State University. 66 p.
    • Hovingh, P. 1993. Aquatic habitats, life history observations, and zoogeographic considerations of the spotted frog (Rana pretiosa) in Tule Valley, Utah. Great Basin Naturalist 53(2): 168-179.
    • Kirk, J.J. 1988. Western spotted frog (Rana pretiosa) mortality following forest spraying of DDT. Herpetological Review 19(3): 51-53.
    • Koch, E.D., G. Williams, C.R. Peterson and P.S. Corn. 1996. Conference on declining and sensitive amphibians in the Northern Rockies and the Pacific Northwest: a summary paper. Idaho Herpetological Society Technical Bulletin and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report, Boise, Idaho.
    • Lefcort, H., R.A. Meguire, L.H. Wilson, and W.F. Ettinger. 1998. Heavy metals alter the survival, growth, metamorphosis, and antipredatory behavior of Columbia spotted frog (Rana luteiventris) tadpoles. Archives of Environmental Contaminants and Toxico
    • Marnell, L. E. 1997. Herpetofauna of Glacier National Park. Northwestern Naturalist 78:17-33.
    • Maxell, B.A., P. Hendricks, M.T. Gates, and S. Lenard. 2009. Montana amphibian and reptile status assessment, literature review, and conservation plan, June 2009. Montana Natural Heritage Program. Helena, MT. 643 p.
    • Miller, J.D. 1978. Observations on the diets of Rana pretiosa, Rana pipiens, and Bufo boreas from western Montana. Northwest Science 52(3): 243-249.
    • Monello, R.J. and R.G. Wright. 1999. Amphibian habitat preferences among artificial ponds in the Palouse Region of Northern Idaho. Journal of Herpetology 33(2): 298-303.
    • Moore, J.E. and E.H. Strickland. 1955. Further notes on the food of Alberta amphibians. American Midland Naturalist 52: 221-224.
    • Morris, R.L. and W.W. Tanner. 1969. The ecology of the western spotted frog, Rana pretiosa pretiosa Baird & Girard: a life history study. Great Basin Naturalist 29(2): 45-81.
    • Patla, D.A. 1997a. Changes in a population of spotted frogs in Yellowstone National Park between 1953 and 1995: the effects of habitat modification. Ph.D. dissertation, Idaho State University, Pocatello.
    • Patla, D.A. 1997b. Potential impacts to amphibians and reptiles from the proposed Canyon contractor camp. 10 May 1997 (Supplement, 12 January 1998). Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem Amphibian Survey and Monitoring Program, Herpetology Laboratory, Department of Biological Sciences, Idaho State University, Pocatello, ID. 16 p.
    • Patla, D.A. 1998a. Amphibians and reptiles in the Old Faithful sewage treatment area. Report to Yellowstone Center for Resources, Yellowstone National Park. 10 September, 1998. Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem Amphibian Survey and Monitoring Program, Herpetology Laboratory, Department of Biological Sciences, Idaho State University, Pocatello, ID. 7 p.
    • Patla, D.A. and C.R. Peterson. 1999. Are amphibians declining in Yellowstone National Park? Yellowstone Science 1999 (Winter):2-11.
    • Pilliod, D.S. 1999. Rana luteiventris (Columbia spotted frog) cannibalism. Herpetological Review 30(2): 93.
    • Reaser, J. K. 1996a. Rana pretiosa (Spotted Frog) vagility. Herpetological Review 27: 196-197.
    • Reaser, J.K. 1996b. Spotted frog: catalyst for sharing common ground in the riparian ecosystems of Nevada's range landscape. U.S. Forest Service General Technical Report INT 343: 32-39.
    • Reaser, J.K. 1997. Amphibian declines: conservation science and adaptive management. Ph.D. Dissertation, Stanford University, Palo Alto, California. 148 pp.
    • Reaser, J.K. 2000. Demographic analysis of the Columbia spotted frog (Rana luteiventris): case study in spatiotemporal variation. Canadian Journal of Zoology 78(7): 1158-1167.
    • Reinking, L.N., C.H. Daugherty and L.B. Daugherty. 1980. Plasma aldosterone concentrations in wild and captive western spotted frogs (Rana pretiosa). Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology 65A(4): 517-518.
    • Ross, D., J.K. Reaser, P. Kleeman, and D.L. Drake. 1999. Rana luteiventris. (Columbia spotted frog) mortality and site fidelity. Herpetological Review 30(3): 163.
    • Ross, D.A., D.W. Kuehn and M.C. Stanger. 1994b. Rana pretiosa (spotted frog) reproduction. Herpetological Review 25(3): 118.
    • Schaub, D. L. and J. H. Larson, Jr. 1978. The reproductive ecology of the Pacific treefrog Hyla regilla. Herpetologica 34(4): 409-416.
    • Stebbins, R. C. 2003. A field guide to western reptiles and amphibians. 3rd Edition. Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston and New York. 533 p.
    • Svihla, A. 1935. Notes on the western spotted frog, Rana p. pretiosa. Copeia 1935: 119-122.
    • Turner, F.B. 1958a. Life history of the western spotted frog in Yellowstone National Park. Herpetologica 14: 96-100.
    • Turner, F.B. 1958b. Some parasites of the western spotted frog, Rana pretiosa pretiosa, in Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming. Journal of Parasitology 44(2): 182.
    • Turner, F.B. 1959a. Variation in skeletal proportions of Rana pretiosa pretiosa in Yellowstone Park, Wyoming. Copeia 1959: 63-68.
    • Turner, F.B. 1959b. Pigmentation in the spotted frog, Rana pretiosa pretiosa, in Yellowstone Park, Wyoming. American Midland Naturalist 61(1): 162-176.
    • Turner, F.B. 1959c. An analysis of the feeding habits of Rana pretiosa pretiosa in Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming. American Midland Naturalist 61(2): 403-413.
    • Turner, F.B. 1960. Population structure and dynamics of the western spotted frog, Rana pretiosa pretiosa Baird & Girard, in Yellowstone Park, Wyoming. Ecol. Monogr. 30(3): 251-278.
    • Turner, F.B. 1962a. An analysis of geographic variation and distribution of Rana pretiosa. American Philosophical Society Yearbook 1962: 325-328.
    • Werner, J.K., T. Plummer, and J. Weaslehead. 1998a. Amphibians and reptiles of the Flathead Indian Reservation. Intermountain Journal of Sciences 4(1-2): 33-49.
    • Whitaker, J.A., Jr.; S.P. Cross, J.M. Skovlin and C. Maser 1983. Food habits of the spotted frog Rana pretiosa from managed sites in Grant County, Oregon. Northwest Science 57(2):147-154.
    • Wilkinson, T. 1996a. Utah ushers its frogs toward oblivion. High Country News, No. 19: 1, 10-13. May 27, 1996.
    • Wishard, L.N. 1977. Larval growth in Rana pretiosa: ecological and genetic factors. M.S. Thesis. University of Montana, Missoula, MT. 80 p.
  • Additional ReferencesLegend:   View Online Publication
    Do you know of a citation we're missing?
    • [USFWS] US Fish and Wildlife Service. 1994. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants; animal candidate review for listing as endangered or threatened species. Federal Register 59(219): 58982-59028.
    • [WWPC] Washington Water Power Company. 1995. 1994 wildlife report Noxon Rapids and Cabinet Gorge Reservoirs. Washington Water Power Company. Spokane, WA.
    • Adams, M.J., B.R. Hossack, and R.A. Knapp. 2005. Distribution patterns of lentic-breeding amphibians in relation to ultraviolet radiation in western North America. Ecosystems 8(5):488-500.
    • Adams, M.J., C.A. Pearl, B. McCreary, S.K. Galvan, S.J. Wessell, W.H. Wente, C.W. Anderson, and A.B. Kuehl. 2009. Short-term effect of cattle exclosures on Columbia spotted frog (Rana luteiventris) populations and habitat in northeastern Oregon. Journal of Herpetology 43(1): 132-138.
    • American Gem Corporations. 1996. Application for an Operating Permit and Proposed Plan of Operations: Gem Mountain Sapphire Mine, Granite County, Montana. August 1996
    • Ammon, E.M., C.R. Gorley, K.W. Wilson, D.A. Ross, and C.R. Peterson. 2003. Advances in habitat restoration for the Columbia spotted frog (Rana luteiventris): a case study from the Provo River population. In: Proceedings: California riparian systems: pr
    • Anderson, M.E. 1977. Aspects of the ecology of two sympatric species of Thamnophis and heavy metal accumulation with the species. M.S. thesis, University of Montana, Missoula. 147 pp.
    • Baird, S.F. and C.F. Girard. 1853. Proceedings of the Academy of National Sciences, Philadelphia, Volume 6, p. 378.
    • Bartelt, P.E. and C.R. Peterson. 1994. Riparian habitat utilization by western toads (Bufo boreas) and spotted frogs (Rana pretiosa) on the Targee National Forest. USDA Forest Service Contract # INT-93780-CCSA Final Report. 30 pp.
    • Bartoletti, F.J. 2000. Impact of stream corridors on breeding populations of Rana luteiventris. Undergraduate Honors Thesis. Carroll College, Helena, MT. 15 p.
    • Beal, M.D. 1951. The occurrence and seasonal activity of vertebrates in the Norris and Gibbon Geyser Basins of Yellowstone National Park. M.S. Thesis. Utah State Agricultural College. Logan, Utah. 61 pp.
    • Billman, H.G., C.G. Kruse, S. St-Hilaire, T.M. Koel, J.L. Arnold, and C.R. Peterson. 2012. Effects of rotenone on Columbia spotted frogs Rana luteiventris during field applications in lentic habitats of southwestern Montana. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 32(4):781-789.
    • Billman, H.G., S. St-Hilaire, C.G. Kruse, T.S. Peterson, and C.R. Peterson. 2011. Toxicity of the piscicide rotenone to Columbia spotted frog and boreal toad tadpoles. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 140:919-927.
    • Bissonette, J.A. and B.C. Larson. 1991. Annotated bibliography for the spotted frog (Rana pretiosa). Utah State Cooperative Wildlife Research Unit Miscellaneous Report 91(2): 1-20.
    • Black, J.H. and R. Timken. 1976. Endangered and threatened amphibians and reptiles in Montana. p 36–37. In R.E. Ashton, Jr. (chair). Endangered and threatened amphibians and reptiles in the United States. Society for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles Herpetological Circular 5: 1-65.
    • Blaustein, A.R., J.J. Beatty, H. Deanna, and R.M. Storm. 1995. The biology of amphibians and reptiles in old-growth forests in the Pacific Northwest. General Technical Report PNW-GTR-337. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 98 p.
    • Blouin, M. 2001. Microsatellite DNA testing of Columbia spotted frog toe samples. Unpublished report. On file with: USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, 1401 Gekeler Lane, La Grande, OR 97850.
    • Bodley, K.T. 2003. The effects of the presence of dragonfly predators on the morphology of the Columbia spotted frog (Rana luteiventris). Undergraduate Honors Thesis. Carroll College, Helena, MT. 13 p.
    • Bos, D.H. 2000. Conservation genetics and phylogeography of the Columbia spotted frog (Rana luteiventris). M.S. Thesis. Department of Zoology, Brigham Young University. Provo, Utah. 42 p.
    • Bos, D.H. and J.W. Sites, Jr. 2001. Phylogeography and conservation genetics of the Columbia spotted frog (Rana luteiventris; Amphibia, Ranidae). Molecular Ecology 10:1499-1513.
    • Boulenger, G.A. 1920. A monograph of the American frogs of the genus Rana. Proceedings of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences 55: 411-480.
    • Boundy, J. 2001. Herpetofaunal surveys in the Clark Fork Valley region, Montana. Herpetological Natural History 8: 15-26.
    • Briggs, J.L., Sr. 1987. Breeding biology of the Cascade frog, Rana cascadae, with comparisons to Rana aurora and Rana pretiosa. Copeia 1987: 241-245.
    • Brues, C.T. 1924. Observations on animal life in the thermal waters of Yellowstone Park, with a consideration of the thermal environment. Proceedings of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences 59(15): 371-437.
    • Brues, C.T. 1932. Further studies on the fauna of North American Hot Springs. Proceedings of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences 67(7): 184-303.
    • Brunson, R.B. 1955. Check list of the amphibians and reptiles of Montana. Proceedings of the Montana Academy of Sciences 15: 27-29.
    • Brunson, R.B. and H.A. Demaree, Jr. 1951. The herpetology of the Mission Mountains, Montana. Copeia (4):306-308.
    • Bull, E.L. 2000. Comparisons of two radio transmitter attachments on Columbia spotted frogs (Rana luteiventris). Herpetological Review 31(1): 26-28.
    • Bull, E.L. 2003. Diet and prey availability of Columbia spotted frogs in northeastern Oregon. Northwest Science 77:349-356.
    • Bull, E.L. 2005. Ecology of the Columbia spotted frog in northeastern Oregon. General Technical Report PNW-GTR-640. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. Portland, OR. 46 p.
    • Bull, E.L. and B.C. Wales. 2001. Effects of disturbance on amphibians of conservation concern in eastern Oregon and Washington. Northwest Science 75: 174-179.
    • Bull, E.L. and D.B. Marx. 2002. Influence of fish and habitat on amphibian communities in high elevation lakes in northeastern Oregon. Northwest Science 76(3): 241-249.
    • Bull, E.L. and J.F. Shepherd. 2003. Water temperature at oviposition sites of Rana luteiventris in northeastern oregon. Western North American Naturalist 63(1): 108-113.
    • Bull, E.L. and M.P. Hayes. 2001. Post-breeding season movements of Columbia spotted frogs (Rana luteiventris) in northeastern Oregon. Western North American Naturalist 61:119-123.
    • Bull, E.L. and M.P. Hayes. 2002. Overwintering of Columbia spotted frogs in northeastern Oregon. Northwest Science 76:141-147.
    • Bull, Evelyn. 2005. Ecology of the Columbia Spotted Frog in Northeastern Oregon. USDA Forest Service - General Technical Report PNW. PNW-GTR-640
    • Burton, S.R., D.A. Patla, and C.R. Peterson. 2002. Amphibians of Red Rock Lakes National Wildlife Refuge: occurrence, distribution, relative abundance, and habitat associations. Herpetology Laboratory, Department of Biological Sciences, Idaho State University, Pocatello, ID. 66 p.
    • Bury, R.B. and J.A. Whelan. 1985. Ecology and management of the bullfrog. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service/Resource Publication 155: 23pp.
    • Call, D.R., and J.G. Hallett. 1998. PCR primers for microsatellite loci in the anurans Rana luteiventris and Hyla regilla. Molecular Ecology 7: 1083-1090.
    • Case, S.M. 1976. Evolutionary studies in selected North American frogs of the genus Rana (Amphibia, Anura). Ph.D. Dissertation. University of California, Berkeley, CA. 157 p.
    • Case, S.M. 1978. Biochemical systematics of members of the genus Rana native to western North America. Systematic Zoology 27: 299-311.
    • Confluence Consulting Inc. 2010. Montana Department of Transportation Wetland Mitigation Monitoring Reports (various sites). MDT Helena, MT.
    • Confluence Consulting Inc. 2011. Montana Department of Transportation Wetland Mitigation Monitoring Reports (various sites). MDT Helena, MT.
    • Cooper, J. G. 1869. The fauna of Montana Territory (concluded) III. Reptiles, IV Fish. American Naturalist 3(3):124-127
    • Cope, E. D. 1879. A contribution to the zoology of Montana. American Naturalist 13(7): 432-441.
    • Cope, E.D. 1872. Report on the recent reptiles and fishes of the survey, collected by Campbell Carrington and C.M. Dawes. pp. 467-469 In: F.V. Hayden, Preliminary report of the United States geological survey of Montana and portions of adjacent territories; being a fifth annual report of progress. 538 pp. 42nd Congress, 2nd Session, House Executive Document Number 326. Serial 1520.
    • Cope, E.D. 1875. Check-list of North American Batrachia and Reptilia; with a systematic list of the higher groups, and an essay on geographical distribution. Based on the specimens contained in the U.S. National Museum. U.S. Natioanl Museum Bulletin 1: 1-104.
    • Cope, E.D. 1883. Notes on the geographical distribution of Batrachia and Reptilia in western North America. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Science in Philadelphia 35: 10-35.
    • Cope, E.D. 1889. The Batrachia of North America. Bulletin of the U.S. National Museum 34: 1-525, figs. 1-119, pls. 1-86.
    • Corn, J. and P. Hendricks. 1998. Lee Metcalf National Wildlife Refuge bullfrog and painted turtle investigations: 1997. Montana Natural Heritage Program. Helena, MT. 20 pp.
    • Corn, P.S., B.R. Hossack, E. Muths, D.A. Palta, C.R. Peterson, and A.L. Gallant. 2005. Status of amphibians on the Continental Divide: aurveys on a transect from Montana to Colorado, USA. Alytes 22(3-4):85-94.
    • Crother, B.I. (ed.) 2008. Scientific and standard English names of amphibians and reptiles of North America north of Mexico. SSAR Herpetological Circular No. 37:1-84.
    • Cuellar, O. 1996. Taxonomic status of the western spotted frog. Biogeographica (Paris) 72(4): 145-150.
    • Daugherty, C.H., L.B. Daugherty, F.W. Allendorf, L.N. Wishard, and N.J. Mitchell. 1976. Adaptive heat retention in giant egg masses of Rana pretiosa. University of Montana, Department of Zoology. Missoula, Montana. 9 p.
    • Daugherty, C.H., L.N. Wishard, and L.B. Daugherty. 1978. Sexual dimorphism in an anuran response to severe thermal stress. Journal of Herpetology 12(3): 431-432.
    • Davis, A.B. and P.A. Verrell. 2005. Demography and reproductive ecology of the Columbia spotted frog (Rana luteiventris) across the Palouse. Canadian Journal of Zoology 83(5):702-711.
    • Douglass, Richard J., DMI Ecological Research, Butte, MT., 1995, Small animals potentially living in the proposed Cottonwood Mining Area. August 1995. In Gem River Corporation Application for Operating Permit and Plan of Operations. Marc I Mine, Dry Cottonwood Creek, Deer Lodge County, Montana. Vol. 2, Apps. App. L. No date.
    • Dumas, P.C. 1964. Species-pair allopatry in the genera Rana and Phrynosoma. Ecology 45(1): 178-181.
    • Dumas, P.C. 1966. Studies of the Rana species complex in the Pacific Northwest. Copeia 1966(1): 60-74.
    • Dunlap, D.G. 1955. Inter- and intraspecific variation in Oregon frogs of the genus Rana. American Midland Naturalist 54: 314-331.
    • Dunlap, D.G. 1977. Wood and western spotted frogs (Amphibia, Anura, Ranidae) in the Big Horn Mountains of Wyoming. Journal of Herpetology 11: 85-87.
    • Engle, J. 2001a. Columbia spotted frog project: the translocation of 2 male Columbia spotted frogs between sites within an element of occurrence in the Owyhee subpopulation of the Great Basin population. Section 6, Endangerd Species Act Threatened and
    • Engle, J. 2001b. Population biology and natural history of Columbia spotted frogs (Rana luteiventris) in the Owyhee uplands of southwestern Idaho: implications for monitoring and management. Masters Thesis-Boise State University.
    • Engle, J.C. and J.C. Munger. 1998. Population structure of spotted frogs in the Owyhee Mountains. Techinical Bulletin 98-20. Boise, ID: Idaho Bureau of Land Management. 10p.
    • Enk, M. 1999. Preliminary results of amphibian monitoring on the Lewis & Clark National Forest. Intermountain Journal of Sciences 5(1-4): 48.
    • Farmer, P. and K. Burgess. 1983. Jardine area baseline terrestrial wildlife study May 15, 1981 - May 15, 1982. Western Technology and Engineering Inc. Helena, MT.
    • Farmer, P. J. and K. Burgess. 1984. Jardine area baseline terrestrial wildlife study. West. Tech. & Eng., Helena.
    • Farmer, Patrick J., and Thomas W. Butts, Western Technology & Eng., Inc., Helena, MT., 1994, McDonald Project Terrestrial Wildlife Study, November 1989 - November 1993. April 1994. In McDonald Gold Project: Wildlife & Fisheries. [#18]. Seven-up Pete Joint Venture, Lincoln, MT. Unpub. No date.
    • Ferguson, D.E. 1954. An annotated list of the amphibians and reptiles of Union County, Oregon. Herpetologica 10:149-152.
    • Flath, D.L. 2002. Reptile and amphibian surveys in the Madison-Missouri River Corridor, Montana. Annual Progress Report. 14pp.
    • Funk, C.W., A.E. Greene, P.S. Corn, and F.W. Allendorf. 2005. High dispersal in a frog species suggests that it is vulnerable to habitat fragmentation. Biology Letters 1:13-16.
    • Funk, W.C. 2004. Patterns and consequences of dispersal in Columbia Spotted Frogs (Rana luteiventris). PhD Dissertation. University of Montana. 139pp.
    • Funk, W.C., C.A. Pearl, H.M. Draheim, M.J. Adams, T.D. Mullins, and S.M. Haig. 2008. Range-wide phylogeographic analysis of the spotted frog complex (Rana luteiventris and Rana pretiosa) in northwestern North America. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 49:198-210.
    • Funk, W.C., M.S. Blouin, P.S. Corn, B.A. Maxell, D.S. Pilloid, S. Amish, and F.W. Allendorf. 2005. Population structure of Columbia spotted frogs (Rana luteiventris) is strongly affected by the landscape. Molecular Ecology 14:483-496.
    • Garber, C. S. 1992. A survey for spotted frogs (Rana pretiosa), wood frogs (Rana sylvatica), and boreal toads (Bufo boreas) in Wyoming. Wyoming Natural Diversity Database, Laramie. 15 pp. + appendix.
    • Garber, C.S. 1994. A status survey for spotted frogs (Rana pretiosa) wood frogs (Rana sylvatica) and boreal toads (Bufo boreas) in the mountains of southern and eastern Wyoming. U.S.F.W.S. Cooperative Agreement No. 14-48-0006-92-919.
    • Garber, C.S. 1995a. A survey for U.S. Forest Service listed "Sensitive" amphibians including the spotted frog (Rana pretiosa), leopard frog (Rana pipiens), tiger salamander (Ambystoma tigrinum) and the boreal toad (Bufo boreas) on the north half of the
    • Garber, C.S. 1995b. Addendum Number 1 to "A status survey for spotted frogs (Rana pretiosa) wood frogs (Rana sylvatica) and boreal toads (Bufo boreas) in the mountains of southern and eastern Wyoming. Unpublished report prepared by the Wyoming Natural
    • Goraya, J., Y. Wang and J.M. Conlon. 2000. Peptides with antimicrobial activity from four different familes isolated from the skins of the North American frogs Rana luteiventris, Rana berlandie and Rana pipiens. European Journal of Biochemistry 267(3)
    • Green, D.M. 1978. Northern leopard frogs and bullfrogs on Vancouver Island. Canadian Field Naturalist 92: 78-79.
    • Green, D.M. 1985. Natural hybrids between the frogs, Rana cascadae and Rana pretiosa (Anura: Ranidae). Herpetologica 41(3): 262-267.
    • Green, D.M. 1986a. Systematics and evolution of Western North American frogs allied to Rana aurora and Rana boylii: karyological evidence. Systematic Zoology 35(3): 273-282.
    • Greer, K.R. 1955. Yearly food habits of the River Otter in the Thompson Lakes region, northwestern Montana, as indicated by scat analysis. Am. Midl. Nat. 54(2):299-313.
    • Greer, K.R. 1955a. The otter's diet - good or bad? Montana Wildlife 5(3): 14-17. Montana Fish and Game Department, Helena, MT.
    • Griffin, J.S. 2002. Spotted frog (Rana luteiventris) dispersal in the Lower Lump Drainage. Undergraduate Honors Thesis. Carroll College, Helena, Montana. 18 p.
    • Guarino, F.M., F. Angelini, and M. Cammarota. 1995. A skeletochronological analysis of three syntopic amphibian species from southern Italy. Amphibia-Reptilia 16:297-302.
    • Haertel, J.D. and R.M. Storm. 1970. Experimental hybridization between Rana pretiosa and Rana cascadae. Herpetologica 26: 436-446.
    • Hall, J.C. 1994. Central processing of communication sounds in the anuran auditory system. American Zoologist 34(6): 670-684.
    • Hanauska-Brown, L., B.A. Maxell, A. Petersen, and S. Story. 2014. Diversity Monitoring in Montana 2008-2010 Final Report. Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks. Helena, MT. 78 pp.
    • Hatch, K. (Coordinator). 2000. Conference on biology and conservation of the spotted frog (Rana luteiventris). March 9, 2000. Reno, Nevada.
    • Hayes, M.P. and D.M. Krempels. 1986. Vocal sac variation among frogs of the genus Rana from Western North America. Copeia 1986: 927-936.
    • Hayes, M.P. and M.R. Jennings. 1986. Decline of ranid frog species in western North America: are bullforgs (Rana catesbeiana) responsible? Journal of Herpetology 20: 490-509.
    • Hendricks, P. 1996. Geographical distribution. Thamnophis elegans vagrans. Herpetological Review 27(2):89.
    • Hendricks, P. 1997. Lee Metcalf National Wildlife Refuge preliminary amphibian and reptile investigations: 1996. Montana Natural Heritage Program, Helena, MT. 21 p.
    • Hendricks, P. 2000. Amphibian and reptile survey of the Thompson Chain of Lakes. A report to the Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife, and Parks. Montana Natural Heritage Program, Helena, MT. 15 p.
    • Hendricks, P. and J.D. Reichel. 1996a. Amphibian and reptile survey of the Bitterroot National Forest: 1995. Montana Natural Heritage Program. Helena, MT. 95 p.
    • Hill, S.R. 1995. Migratory chronology of adult tiger salamanders (Ambystoma tigrinum) and survey of larvae of the tiger salamander in the northern range of Yellowstone National Park. Masters thesis, Montana State University. Bozeman, MT. 72 pp.
    • Hill, S.R. and R.E. Moore. 1994. Herpetological survey in the northern range of Yellowstone National Park. Annual Report, Yellowstone National Park. February 1, 1994. 21 pp.
    • Hill, S.R., Jr. and R.E. Moore. 1994a. Herpetological survey in the northern range of Yellowstone National Park. Investigator's Annual Reports Yellowstone National Park 1993. Yellowstone Center for Resources. pp. 96-97.
    • Hilliard, J., H. Minkus, and M. Weber. 1997. Amphibian survey of the Birch Creek drainage, Beaverhead County. Wildland Studies Project, San Francisco State University, San Francisco, CA. 12 p.
    • Hillis, D.M. and S. Davis. 1986. Evolution of ribosomal DNA: Fifty million years of recorded history in the frog genus Rana. Evolution 40: 1275-1288.
    • Hollenbeck, R.R. 1975. Growth rates, breeding ages, and sex ratios within a population of Rana p. pretiosa Baird and Girard in south central Montana. Abstract. Journal of the Colorado-Wyoming Academy of Science 7(6): 44-45.
    • Hollenbeck, R.R. 1976. Movements within a population of Rana pretiosa pretiosa Baird and Girard in south central Montana. Wyoming Academy of Sciences Journal 8(1): 72-73.
    • Hollenbeck, R.R. 1978. Growth rates and mortality patterns in anurans. Abstract. Journal of the Colorado-Wyoming Academy of Science 10(1): 49-50.
    • Hossack, B., D. Pilliod, and P.S. Corn. 2001a. Reptile and amphibian inventory at Grant-Kohrs Ranch National Historic Site and Little Bighorn Battlefield National Monument. USGS Northern Rocky Mountain Science Center, Aldo Leopold Wilderness Research Institute, Missoula, MT. 6 p.
    • Hossack, B., D. Pilliod, and P.S. Corn. 2001b. Preliminary amphibian surveys of the National Bison Range, Lost Trail National Wildife Refuge, and Swan River National Wildlife Refuge: 2001. USGS Northern Rocky Mountain Science Center, Aldo Leopold Wilderness Research Institute, Missoula, MT. 15 p.
    • Hossack, B.R. 2006. Amphibians and wildfire in the U.S. Northwest. International Journal of Wilderness 12(1):26.
    • Hossack, B.R. and P.S. Corn. 2004. Responses of pond-breeding amphibians to wildfire in Glacier National Park. Abstract. Northwestern Naturalist 85:78.
    • Hossack,B.R., W.R. Gould, D.A. Patla, E. Muths, R. Daley, K. Legg, and P.S. Corn. 2015. Trends in Rocky Mountain amphibians and the role of beaver as a keystone species. Biological Conservation 187:260-269.
    • Hovingh, P. 1986. Biogeographic aspects of leeches, mollusks, and amphibians in the intermountain region. Great Basin Naturalist 46: 736-744.
    • Hovingh, P. 1997. Amphibians in the eastern Great Basin (Nevada and Utah USA): a geographical study with paleozoological models and conservation implications. Herpetological Natural History 5: 97-134.
    • James, J.D. 1998. Status of the Columbia Spotted Frog (Rana luteiventris) in Alberta. Alberta Wildlife Status Report 17: 1-22.
    • Jean, C., P. Hendricks, M. Jones, S. Cooper, and J. Carlson. 2002. Ecological communities on the Red Rock Lakes National Wildlife Refuge: inventory and review of aspen and wetland systems. Report to Red Rock Lakes National Wildlife Refuge.
    • Jennrich, R.I. and F.B. Turner. 1969. Measurement of non-circular home range. Journal of Theoretical Biology 1969(22): 227-237.
    • Johnson, O.W. 1965. Early development, embryonic temperature tolerance and rate of development in Rana pretiosa luteiventris Thompson. Ph.D. Dissertation, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon.
    • Johnson, P.T.J., K.B. Lunde, E.M. Thurman, E.G. Ritchie, S.N. Wray, D.R. Sutherland, J.M. Kapfer, T.J. Frest, J. Bowerman, and A.R. Blaustein. 2002. Parasite (Ribeiroia ondatrae) infection linked to amphibian malformations in the western United States. Ecological Monographs 72(2):151-168.
    • Jones, Lawrence L. C., W. P. Leonard and D. H. Olson, eds. 2005. Amphibians of the Pacific Northwest. Seattle Audubon Society: Seattle, WA, 227 pp.
    • Joslin, Gayle, and Heidi B. Youmans. 1999. Effects of recreation on Rocky Mountain wildlife: a review for Montana. [Montana]: Montana Chapter of the Wildlife Society.
    • Knight, J. 1999. Geographic variation in morphology between two groups of Rana luteiventris in western Montana. Undergraduate Honors Thesis. Carroll College, Helena, MT. 24 p.
    • Koch, E.D. and C.R. Peterson. 1989. A preliminary survey of the distribution of amphibians and reptiles in Yellowstone National Park. pp. 47-49. In: Rare, sensitive and threatened species of the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem, T.W. Clark, A.H. Harvey, R.D. Dorn, D.C. Genter, and C. Groves (eds.), Northern Rockies Conservation Cooperative , Montana Natural Heritage Program, The Nature Conservancy, and Mountain West Environmental Services. 153 p.
    • Land & Water Consulting, Inc., Missoula, MT., 2002, Montana Dept. of Transportation Wetland Mitigation Monitoring Report, Year 2002: South Fork Smith River, Ringling, Montana. Proj. No. 130091.016. February 2003. In 2002 Wetland Mitigation Monitoring Reports, Vol. II.
    • Laselle, B.T. 2000. Association of wetland area with breeding activity for multiple amphibian species. Undergraduate Honors Thesis. Carroll College, Helena, MT. 18 p.
    • Lefcort, H., S.M. Thomson, E.E. Cowles, H.L. Harowicz, B.M. Livaudais, W.E. Roberts, and W.F. Ettinger. 1999. Ramifications of predator avoidance: predator and heavy-metal-mediated competition between tadpoles and snails. Ecological Applications 9(4): 1477-1489.
    • Legler, J.M. and L.J. Sullivan. 1979. The application of stomach flushing to lizards and anurans. Herpetologica 35:107-110.
    • Leonard, W.P. and E.L. Bull. 2005. Columbia spotted frogs, Rana luteiventris. In: Jones, L.L.C., W.P. Leonard, and D.H. Olson (eds). Amphibians of the Pacific Northwest. Seattle, WA: Seattle Audubon Society: 212-215.
    • Leonard, W.P., N.P. Leonard, R.M. Storm, and P.E. Petzel. 1996. Rana pretiosa (spotted frog). Behavior and reproduction. Herpetological Review 27(4): 195.
    • Licht, L.E. 1969a. Comparative breeding behavior of the red-legged frog (Rana aurora aurora) and the western spotted frog (Rana pretiosa pretiosa) in southwestern British Columbia. Canadian Journal of Zoology 47: 1287-1299.
    • Licht, L.E. 1974. Survival of embryos, tadpoles, and adults of the frogs Rana aurora and Rana pretiosa sympatric in southwestern British Columbia. Canadian Journal of Zoology 52: 613-627.
    • Licht, L.E. 1975. Comparative life history features of the western spotted frog, Rana pretiosa, from low- and high-elevation populations. Canadian Journal of Zoology 53:1254-1257.
    • Licht, L.E. 1986a. Comparative escape behavior of sympatric Rana aurora and Rana pretiosa. American Midland Naturalist 115: 239-247.
    • Licht, L.E. 1986b. Food and feeding behavior of sympatric red-legged frogs, Rana aurora, and spotted frogs, Rana pretiosa, in southwestern British Columbia. Canadian Field Naturalist 100(1): 22-31.
    • Lindeman, P.V. 1990. Rana pretiosa (spotted frog). Herpetological Review 21(2): 38.
    • Logier, E.B.S. 1932. Some account of the amphibians and reptiles of British Columbia. Transactions of the Royal Canadian Institute 18: 311-336.
    • Loudon, A.H., A. Durtz, E. Esposito, T.P. Umile, K.P.C. Minbiole, L. W. Parfrey, and B.A. Sheafor. 2020. Columbia spotted frogs (Rana luteiventris) have characteristic skin microbiota that may be shaped by cutaneous skin peptides and the environment. FEMS Microbiology Ecology 96(10):1-10.
    • Manville, R.H. 1957. Amphibians and reptiles of Glacier National Park, Montana. Copeia 1957: 308-309.
    • Marnell, L.F. 1996. Amphibian survey of Glacier National Park, Montana. Abstract. Intermountain Journal of Sciences 2(2): 52.
    • Maxell, B. A. 2000. Management of Montana's amphibians: a review of factors that may present a risk to population viability and accounts on the identification, distribution, taxonomy, habitat use, natural history, and the status and conservation of individual species. Report to USFS Region 1, Order Number 43-0343-0-0224. University of Montana, Wildlife Biology Program. Missoula, MT. 161 p.
    • Maxell, B.A. 2002a. Amphibian and aquatic reptile inventories in watersheds in the South and Middle Forks of the Flathead River drainage that contain lakes being considered for application of piscicides and subsequent stocking of west slope cutthroat trout. Report to the Region 1 Office of the U.S. Forest Service and the Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife, and Parks. Montana Cooperative Wildlife Research Unit and Wildlife Biology Program, University of Montana, Missoula, MT. 62 pp.
    • Maxell, B.A. 2016. Northern Goshawk surveys on the Beartooth, Ashland, and Sioux Districts of the Custer-Gallatin National Forest: 2012-2014. Montana Natural Heritage Program. Helena, MT. 114pp.
    • Maxell, B.A., J.K. Werner, P. Hendricks, and D.L. Flath. 2003. Herpetology in Montana: a history, status summary, checklists, dichotomous keys, accounts for native, potentially native, and exotic species, and indexed bibliography. Society for Northwestern Vertebrate Biology, Northwest Fauna Number 5. Olympia, WA. 135 p.
    • McAvoy, S.A. 2003. Wetland characteristics associated with amphibian presence in the Rocky Mountain Region. Undergraduate Honors Thesis. Carroll College, Helena, MT. 23 p.
    • McCaffery, R., R.E. Russell, B.R. Hossack. 2021. Enigmatic near-extirpation in a boreal toad metapopulation in northwestern Montana. The Journal of Wildlife Management 85(5):953-963.
    • Middendorf, L.J. 1957. Observations on the early spring activities of the western spotted frog (Rana pretiosa) in Gallatin County, Montana. Proceedings of the Montana Academy of Sciences 17: 55-56.
    • Miller, J. D. 1975. Interspecific food relationships of anurans in northwestern Montana and fluoride accumulation in amphibians and reptiles in northwestern Montana. M.S. thesis. University of Montana, Missoula, MT. 105 p.
    • Miller, M. 1995. Amphibian survey Birch Creek July 1995. Wildland Studies Project, San Francisco State University, San Francisco, CA. 9 p.
    • Miller, M. 1995. Amphibians survey, Birch Creek, July 1995. Unpublished report. University of California, Berkley. 3 pp.
    • Mitchell, T. 2005. A geometric morphometric analysis of tail morphology in the Columbia Spotted frog, Rana lutieventris. Undergraduate Thesis. Carroll College, Helena, Montana. 17 pp.
    • Munger, J.C., B.R. Barnett, and A. Ames. 1997. 1996 Sawtooth Wilderness amphibian survey. A challenge cost share agreement between the Sawtooth National Forest, USDA, Forest Service, and Boise State University. Boise, ID: Boise State University. 10pp.
    • Munger, J.C., C.R. Peterson, M. McDonald, T. Carrigan. 1997. Conservation strategy for the Columbia Spotted Frog (Rana luteiventris) in Idaho. Submitted to Idaho State Conservation Effort, February 28, 1997. 12 pp.
    • Munger, J.C., M. Gerber, K. Madrid, M.A. Carroll, W. Petersen and L. Heberger. 1998. US National Wetland inventory classifications as predictors of the occurrence of Columbia spotted frogs (Rana luteiventris) and Pacific treefrogs (Hyla regilla). Conser
    • Murphy, P.D. 2002. The effects of different species of introduced salmonids on amphibians in headwater lakes of north-central Idaho. Pocatello, ID: Idaho State University. M.S. Thesis.
    • Northrop, Devine & Tarbell, Inc. 1994. Cabinet Gorge and Noxon Rapids hydroelectric developments: 1993 wildlife study. Unpublished report to the Washington Water Power Company, Spokane. Vancouver, Washington and Portland, Maine. 144 pp. plus appendices.
    • Northrop, Devine and Tarbell, Inc. 1995. Cabinet Gorge and Noxon Rapids Hydroelectric Developments, 1994 Wetland Mapping and Assessment Study, Volume I of II. 27 pp. plus appendices.
    • O’Hara, R.K. and A.R. Blaustein. 1988. Hyla regilla and Rana pretiosa tadpoles fail to display kin recognition behaviour. Animal Behaviour 36(3): 946-948.
    • Oechsli, L.M. 2000. Ex-urban development in the Rocky Mountain West: consequences for native vegetation, wildlife diversity, and land-use planning in Big Sky, Montana. M.Sc. Thesis. Montana State University, Bozeman. 73 p.
    • Patla, D.A. 1998b. Potential effects of native fish restoration projects on amphibians in Yellowstone National Park Part I. Report to National Park Service, Yellowstone National Park. 20 November 1998. 26 pp.
    • Patla, D.A. 1998c. The effects of habitat modification on spotted frogs in Yellowstone National Park. Froglog 28(August 1998): 1-2.
    • Patla, D.A. 1999a. Amphibians and reptiles along the grand loop road in Yellowstone National Park: Canyon Junction to Fishing Bridge Junction. December 11, 1999. Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem Amphibian Survey and Monitoring Program, Herpetology Laboratory, Department of Biological Sciences, Idaho State University, Pocatello, ID. 24 p.
    • Patla, D.A. 1999b. Amphibians and reptiles of the Madison to Norris road improvement project area, Yellowstone National Park. 11 November, 1999. Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem Amphibian Survey and Monitoring Program, Herpetology Laboratory, Department of Biological Sciences, Idaho State University, Pocatello, ID. 17 p.
    • Patla, D.A. 1999c. Amphibians and reptiles, Tower Junction to Canyon Village, Yellowstone National Park; addendum to previous report. 24 November, 1999. Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem Amphibian Survey and Monitoring Program, Herpetology Laboratory, Department of Biological Sciences, Idaho State University, Pocatello, ID. 10 p.
    • Patla, D.A. 2000. Amphibians in potential native fish restoration areas, Yellowstone National Park Part II. 7 March, 2000. Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem Amphibian Survey and Monitoring Program, Herpetology Laboratory, Department of Biological Sciences, Idaho State University, Pocatello, ID. 22 p.
    • Patla, D.A. and C.R. Peterson. 1994. The effects of habitat modification on a spotted frog population in Yellowstone National Park. pp 135-144. In: Harlow, H.J. and M. Harlow (eds.) University of Wyoming, National Park Service Research Center, 18th annual report. University of Wyoming, Laramie, WY.
    • Patla, D.A. and C.R. Peterson. 1996a. Amphibians and reptiles along the Grand Loop Highway in Yellowstone National Park: Tower Junction to Canyon Village. 24 February, 1996. Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem Amphibian Survey and Monitoring Program, Herpetology Laboratory, Department of Biological Sciences, Idaho State University, Pocatello, ID. 49 p.
    • Patla, D.A. and C.R. Peterson. 1996b. Amphibians and reptiles along the Grand Loop Highway in Yellowstone National Park: Arnica Creek to Little Thumb Creek. 1 August, 1996. Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem Amphibian Survey and Monitoring Program, Herpetology Laboratory, Department of Biological Sciences, Idaho State University, Pocatello, ID. 35 p.
    • Patla, D.A. and C.R. Peterson. 1997. Amphibians and reptiles along the Grand Loop Highway in Yellowstone National Park: Mammoth Hot Springs to Norris Junction. 1 February, 1997. Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem Amphibian Survey and Monitoring Program, Herpetology Laboratory, Department of Biological Sciences, Idaho State University, Pocatello, ID. 60 p.
    • Patla, D.A. and C.R. Peterson. 1998. Amphibians of the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem. Natural Resource Conservation Cooperative News 11(Autumn 1998): 10-11.
    • Patla, D.A. and C.R. Peterson. 2001. Status and trends of amphibian populations in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem, progress report, February 2001. Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem Amphibian Survey and Monitoring Program, Herpetology Laboratory, Department of Biological Sciences, Idaho State University, Pocatello, ID. 8 p.
    • Patla, D.A. and C.R. Peterson. 2022. The slow decline of a Columbia spotted frog population in Yellowstone National Park: a cautionary tale from a developed zone within a large protected area. Ecological Indicators 136(108606):1-11.
    • Peterson, C.R. and J.P. Shive. 2002. Herpetological survey of southcentral Idaho. Idaho Bureau of Land Management Technical Bulletin 02-3:1-97.
    • Peterson, C.R., C.J. Askey, and D.A. Patla. 1993. Amphibians and reptiles along the Grand Loop and Fountain Freight Roads between Madison Junction and Biscuit Basin in Yellowstone National Park. 26 July, 1993. Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem Amphibian Survey and Monitoring Program, Herpetology Laboratory, Department of Biological Sciences, Idaho State University, Pocatello, ID. 45 p.
    • Peterson, C.R., D.A. Patla, and S.R. Sullivan. 1995. Amphibians and reptiles along the Grand Loop Highway in Yellowstone National Park: Madison Junction to Norris Campground. 7 July, 1995. Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem Amphibian Survey and Monitoring Program, Herpetology Laboratory, Department of Biological Sciences, Idaho State University, Pocatello, ID. 64 p.
    • Peterson, C.R., E.D. Koch and P.S. Corn. 1992. Monitoring amphibian populations in Yellowstone and Grand Teton National Parks final report to University of Wyoming. National Park Service Research Center, Laramie, WY. 37 p.
    • Pilliod, D.S. 2001. Ecology and conservation of high-elevation amphibian populations in historically fishless watersheds with introduced trout. Ph.D. Dissertation. Idaho State University, Pocatello, Idaho. 125 p.
    • Pilliod, D.S. 2002. Clark's Nutcracker (Nucifraga columbiana) predation on tadpoles of the Columbia Spotted frog (Rana luteiventris). Northwestern Naturalist 83(2):59-61.
    • Pilliod, D.S. 2005. Conserving amphibian habitats in montane environments: A case study of Columbia spotted frogs (Rana luteiventris). Abstract. Northwestern Naturalist 86:112.
    • Pilliod, D.S., C.R. Peterson, P.I. Ritson. 2002. Seasonal migration of Columbia spotted frogs (Rana luteiventris) among complimentary resources in a high mountain basin. Canadian Journal of Zoology 80: 1849-1862.
    • Pilliod, D.S., R.B. Bury, E.J. Hyde, C.A. Pearl, and P.S. Corn. 2003. Fire and amphibians in North America. Forest Ecology and Management 178:163-181.
    • Rauscher, R.L. 2000. Tiger salamander axolotls in southwest Montana, final report. Bozeman, MT: Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks. 28p.
    • Reaser, J.K. and D.S. Pilliod. 2005. Columbia spotted frog (Rana luteiventris). In: Lannoo, M.J. ed. Status and conservation of United States amphibians. Berkley, CA: University of California Press:559-563.
    • Reaser, J.K. and R.E. Dexter. 1996a. Rana pretiosa (spotted frog) predation. Herpetological Review 27(2): 75.
    • Reaser, J.K. and R.E. Dexter. 1996b. Rana pretiosa (spotted frog): toe clipping effects. Herpetological Review 27(4): 195-196.
    • Reichel, J. and D. Flath. 1995. Identification of Montana's amphibians and reptiles. Montana Outdoors 26(3):15-34.
    • Reichel, J. D. In prep. Amphibian and reptile survey in southwest Montana: 1996. Unpublished report.
    • Reichel, J.D. 1995a. Preliminary amphibian and reptile survey of the Lewis & Clark National Forest: 1994. Montana Natural Heritage Program. Helena, MT. 92 p.
    • Reichel, J.D. 1996. Preliminary amphibian and reptile survey of the Helena National Forest: 1995. Montana Natural Heritage Program. Helena, MT. 87 pp.
    • Reichel, J.D. 1997a. Amphibian, reptile and northern bog lemming survey on the Rocky Mountain Front: 1996. Montana Natural Heritage Program, Helena, MT. 81 p.
    • Reichel, J.D. and S.G. Beckstrom. 1993. Northern bog lemming survey: 1992. Unpublished report. Montana Natural Heritage Program, Helena, MT. 64 p.
    • Relyea, R.A. 2005. The impact of insecticides and herbicides on the biodiversity and productivity of aquatic communities, Ecological Applications 15(2):618-627.
    • Roberts, W.E. 1997. Rana pretiosa. Predation. Herpetological Review 28(2): 86.
    • Rodgers, T. L. and W. L. Jellison. 1942. A collection of amphibians and reptiles from western Montana. Copeia (1):10-13.
    • Roedel, M.D. and P. Hendricks. 1998a. Amphibian and reptile survey on the Bureau of Land Management Lewistown District: 1995-1998. Montana Natural Heritage Program, Helena, MT. 53 p.
    • Roedel, M.D. and P. Hendricks. 1998b. Amphibian and reptile inventory on the Headwaters and Dillon Resource Areas in conjunction with Red Rocks Lakes National Wildlife Refuge: 1996-1998. Montana Natural Heritage Program, Helena, MT. 46 p.
    • Ross, D.A. and B.J. Richardson. 1995. Rana pretiosa (spotted frog) basking behavior. Herpetological Review 26(4): 203.
    • Russell, K.R. and R.L. Wallace. 1992. Occurrence of Halipegus occidualis (Digenea: Derogenidae) and other trematodes in Rana pretiosa (Anura: Ranidae) from Idaho, USA. Transactions of the American Microscopical Society 111(2): 122-127.
    • Ryan, S.A. 1980. Frog study of the Kicking Horse Reservoir on the Flathead Indian Reservation. Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribal Wildlife Division, Pablo, MT. 3 p.
    • Sestrich, C. 2004. Hebgen Reservoir amphibian survey. USDA Forest Service Annual Progress Report to PPL Montana. 22pp.
    • Sestrich, Clint. 2006. 2006 Hebgen Reservoir Amphibian Survey, USDA Forest Service Annual Progress Report to PPL Montana. Hebgen Lake Ranger District. Gallatin National Forest. West Yellowstone Montana.
    • Simons, R.W. 2002. The effect of predation on tadpole morphology of the spotted frog (Rana luteiventris). Undergraduate Honors Thesis. Carroll College, Helena, MT. 10 p.
    • Skinner, M.P. 1924. The Yellowstone Nature Book. A.C. McClurg Company, Chicago, IL. 221 p.
    • Smith, M.M. and C.S. Goldberg. 2022. Facilitative interaction promotes occupancy of a desert amphibian across a climate gradient. Conservation Ecology original research. Oecologia. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-022-05127-6. 10 p.
    • Stearns-Roger Inc., 1975, Environmental baseline information of the Mount Vernon Region, Montana. January 31, 1975.
    • Stebbins, R.C. and N.W. Cohen. 1995. A natural history of amphibians. Princeton University Press. Princeton, NJ. 316 pp.
    • Sullivan, S.R. and C.R. Peterson. 1996. Amphibians and reptiles along the highway in Yellowstone National Park: Tower Junction to the Northeast Entrance. 25 February, 1996. Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem Amphibian Survey and Monitoring Program, Herpetology Laboratory, Department of Biological Sciences, Idaho State University, Pocatello, ID. 60 p.
    • Syslo, J. and L. Eby. 2005. Possible effects of Highway 93 expansion on a population of Western toads (Bufo boreas) in the Bitterroot Valley. Wildlife Biology Program University of Montana. pp. 11 plus figures.
    • Test, F. C. 1891. Fish-cultural investigations in Montana and Wyoming. Annotated list of Reptiles and Batrachians collected. Bull. U.S. Fish Comm. for 1891; pp. 57-59.
    • Test, F.C. 1893. Annotated list of reptiles and batrachians collected. In B.W. Evermann. A reconnaisance of the streams and lakes of western Montana and northwestern Wyoming. Bulletin of United States Fish Commission 11(1891): 57-59.
    • Thompson, H.B. 1913. Description of a new subspecies of Rana pretiosa from Nevada. Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington 26: 53-56.
    • Thompson, M.D. and A.P. Russell. 2000. Phylogeography of Ambystoma macrodactylum: post glacial range expansion and resultant genetic diversity. Field Summary Report No. 1. University of Calgary. Calgary, Canada. 39 p.
    • Thompson, M.D. and A.P. Russell. 2001. Phylogeography of Ambystoma macrodactylum: post glacial range expansion and resultant genetic diversity. Field Summary Report No. 2. University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada. 65 p.
    • Thompson, P.D., C.L. Lundskog, and D.E. Dittmer. 2022. A successful Reintroduction of Columbia spotted frog (Rana luteiventris) through repatriation of recently hatched larvae. Icthyology & Herpetology 110(1):1-7.
    • Timken, R. No Date. Amphibians and reptiles of the Beaverhead National Forest. Western Montana College, Dillon, MT. 16 p.
    • Toline, C.A., A.M. Seitz. 1999. Mitochondrial and nuclear DNA variation within and among populations of Columbia spotted frog (Rana luteiventris) in Utah. M.S. Thesis, Utah State University, Logan.
    • Turner, F.B. 1951. A checklist of the reptiles and amphibians of Yellowstone National Park with incidental notes. Yellowstone Nature Notes 25(3): 25-29.
    • Turner, F.B. 1952a. Peculiar aggregations of toadlets on Alum Creek. Yellowstone Nature Notes 26(5): 57-58.
    • Turner, F.B. 1955. Reptiles and amphibians of Yellowstone National Park. Yellowstone Interpretive Series No. 5. Yellowstone Library and Museum Association. Yellowstone National Park, WY. 40 p.
    • Turner, F.B. 1957. The ecology and morphology of Rana pretiosa pretiosa in Yellowstone Park, Wyoming. Ph.D. dissertation, University of California. Berkeley, CA. 252 pp.
    • Turner, F.B. 1960. Postmetamorphic growth in anurans. American Midland Naturalist 64(2): 327-338.
    • Turner, F.B. 1962b. The demography of frogs and toads. Quarterly Review of Biology 37(4): 303-314.
    • Turner, F.B., and P.C. Dumas. 1972. Rana pretiosa. Catalogue of American Amphibians and Reptiles 119.1-119.4.
    • Turner, F.B., and P.C. Dumas. 1972. Rana pretiosa. Catalogue of American Amphibians and Reptiles 119.1-119.4.
    • Utah Division of Wildlife Resources. 1993. Distribution of the spotted frog along the Wasatch Front in Utah 1991-1992. April 13, 1993, Salt Lake City, pp. 1-25.
    • Utah Division of Wildlife Resources. 1994a. Distribution, habitat use, and relative abundance indices of spotted frogs in the West Desert, Utah, 1993. January 24, 1994, Salt Lake City, pp. 1-49.
    • Utah Division of Wildlife Resources. 1998. Conservation agreement for spotted frog. January 22, 1998, Salt Lake City, pp. 1-18.
    • Van Denburgh, J. 1895. Annotated list of reptiles and batrachians. In C.H. Gilbert and B.W. Evermann. A report upon investigations in the Columbia River Basin, with descriptions of four new species of fishes. Bulletin of United States Fish Commission 14(1894): 206-207.
    • Van Kirk, R., L. Benjamin, and D. Patla. 2000. Riparian area assessment and amphibian status in the watersheds of the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem. Greater Yellowstone Coalition, Bozeman, MT. 102 p.
    • Vitt, L.J., J.P. Caldwell, and D.B. Shepard. 2005. Inventory of amphibians and reptiles in the Billings Field Office Region, Montana. Sam Noble Oklahoma Museum of Natural History and Department of Zoology, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK. 33 pp.
    • Waitz, J.A. 1959. Parasites infesting R. luteiventris and R. pipiens. M.S. Thesis. Moscow, ID: University of Idaho.
    • Waitz, J.A. 1959. Unpublished Master's Thesis on parasites infesting R. luteiventris and R. pipiens. University of Idaho at Moscow.
    • Weisel, G.F. 1952. Animal names, anatomical terms, and some ethnozoology of the Flathead Indians. Journal of the Washington Academy of Sciences 42(11): 345-355.
    • Wente, W., M.J. Adams, and C.A. Pearl. [In press]. Evidence of decline for Bufo boreas and Rana luteiventris in and around the norther Great Basin, western USA. Alytes 22.
    • Werner, J.K. and J.D. Reichel. 1994. Amphibian and reptile survey of the Kootenai National Forest: 1994. Montana Natural Heritage Program. Helena, MT. 104 p.
    • Werner, J.K. and J.D. Reichel. 1996. Amphibian and reptile monitoring/survey of the Kootenai National Forest: 1995. Montana Natural Heritage Program. Helena, MT. 115 pp.
    • Werner, J.K. and T. Plummer. 1995a. Amphibian and reptile survey of the Flathead Indian Reservation 1993-1994. Salish Kootenai College, Pablo, MT. 55 pp.
    • Werner, J.K. and T. Plummer. 1995b. Amphibian monitoring program on the Flathead Indian Reservation 1995. Salish Kootenai College, Pablo, MT. 46 p.
    • Werner, J.K., B.A. Maxell, P. Hendricks and D.L. Flath. 2004. Amphibians and Reptiles of Montana. Mountain Press Publishing Company: Missoula, MT. 262 pp.
    • Werner, J.K., J. Weaselhead, and T. Plummer. 1999. The accuracy of estimating eggs in anuran egg masses using weight or volume measurements. Herpetological Review 30(1): 30-31.
    • Werner, J.K., T. Plummer, and J. Weaselhead. 1998b. The status of amphibians on the Flathead Reservation, Montana. Intermountain Journal of Sciences 4(3-4): 88.
    • Wicher, C.G. 2000. The effects of mining effluent on amphibian survivorship. Undergraduate Honors Thesis. Carroll College, Helena, MT. 18 p.
    • Wirsing, A.J., J.D. Roth, and D.L. Murray. 2005. Can prey use dietary cues to distinguish predators? A test involving three terrestrial amphibians. Herpetologica 61(2):104-110.
    • Wyrick, A.C. 2004. Demography of the Columbia spotted frog (Rana luteiventris) in the presence or absence of fish in the Absaroka-Beartooth Wilderness, Montana. Missoula, MT: University of Montana. 118 pp. PhD Dissertation.
    • Yeager, D.C. 1926. Miscellaneous notes. Yellowstone Nature Notes 3(4): 7.
    • Zisook, R., K. Almond, and B. Sharpe. 1996. Amphibian survey of the Birch Creek drainage, Beaverhead County. Wildland Studies Project. San Francisco State University, San Francisco, CA. 9 p.
  • Web Search Engines for Articles on "Columbia Spotted Frog"
  • Additional Sources of Information Related to "Amphibians"
Login Logout

Take us with you! PDF icon

Look for this PDF icon as you search and browse.  Click it to build a custom PDF with species shown on that page or for all the species within that taxonomic level.  To create your own list of species, use the PDF Creator tool at the bottom of the Advanced Search page.

Here's some links if you want to download a whole group.

Mammals
Birds
Reptiles
Amphibians
Fish
Invertebrates
Butterflies / Moths
Dragonflies / Damselflies
Ferns and allies
Conifers
Flowering Plants (Dicots)
Flowering Plants (Monocots)
Bryophytes
Lichens
Ecological Systems
Noxious Weeds
Citation for data on this website:
Columbia Spotted Frog — Rana luteiventris.  Montana Field Guide.  .  Retrieved on , from