Table 1.
Range and median of alkaloid quantity (estimated by the sum of integrated areas) and alkaloid diversity (number of different compounds) by species from the GCMS assessment. The presumed chemical defense phenotype for poison frogs is given according to Santos and Cannatella [4]. Purple rows highlight defe species.
| Family | Subfamily | Species | Phenotype | Sample Size (frogs) | Log (Total Integrated Area) | Alkaloid Number | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Range | Median | Range | Median | ||||||
| Dendrobatidae | Aromobatinae | Rheobates palmatus | undefended | 4 | 13.07 – 14.24 | 14.00 | 1 – 4 | 1.5 | |
| Dendrobatidae | Aromobatinae | Allobates insperatus | undefended | 8 | 13.47 – 15.44 | 14.99 | 1 – 9 | 5.0 | |
| Dendrobatidae | Aromobatinae | Allobates juanii | undefended | 1 | 14.10 | 14.10 | 1 | 1.0 | |
| Dendrobatidae | Aromobatinae | Allobates kingsburyi | undefended | 1 | 13.63 | 13.63 | 2 | 2.0 | |
| Dendrobatidae | Aromobatinae | Allobates talamancae | undefended | 3 | 14.89 – 16.27 | 15.09 | 2 – 4 | 3.0 | |
| Dendrobatidae | Aromobatinae | Allobates zaparo | undefended | 1 | 16.78 | 16.78 | 8 | 8.0 | |
| Dendrobatidae | Colostethinae | Leucostethus fugax | undefended | 8 | 12.57 – 15.33 | 14.00 | 3 – 8 | 4.5 | |
| Dendrobatidae | Colostethinae | Ameerega bilinguis | defended | 1 | 21.97 | 21.97 | 133 | 133.0 | |
| Dendrobatidae | Colostethinae | Ameerega hahneli | defended | 4 | 20.21 – 22.29 | 21.68 | 85 – 140 | 128.5 | |
| Dendrobatidae | Colostethinae | Silverstoneia flotator * | undefended | 12 | NA | NA | 57 – 68 | 62 | |
| Dendrobatidae | Colostethinae | Silverstoneia aff. gutturalis | undefended | 9 | 11.80 – 17.33 | 15.40 | 1 – 10 | 3.0 | |
| Dendrobatidae | Colostethinae | Silverstoneia erasmios | undefended | 2 | 14.70 – 16.11 | 15.41 | 15 – 15 | 15.0 | |
| Dendrobatidae | Colostethinae | Epipedobates aff. espinosai | defended | 2 | 18.44 – 20.20 | 19.32 | 83 – 131 | 107.0 | |
| Dendrobatidae | Colostethinae | Epipedobates anthonyi | defended | 1 | 20.54 | 20.54 | 127 | 127.0 | |
| Dendrobatidae | Colostethinae | Epipedobates boulengeri | defended | 2 | 18.87 – 19.39 | 19.13 | 77 – 94 | 85.5 | |
| Dendrobatidae | Colostethinae | Epipedobates sp. 1 | defended | 2 | 19.49 – 19.68 | 19.59 | 99 – 105 | 102.5 | |
| Dendrobatidae | Colostethinae | Epipedobates espinosai | defended | 2 | 18.82 – 21.33 | 20.08 | 85 – 146 | 115.5 | |
| Dendrobatidae | Colostethinae | Epipedobates machalilla | defended | 2 | 12.98 – 15.67 | 14.32 | 8 – 38 | 23.0 | |
| Dendrobatidae | Colostethinae | Epipedobates tricolor | defended | 2 | 18.36 – 19.07 | 18.72 | 91 – 114 | 102.5 | |
| Dendrobatidae | Hyloxalinae | Hyloxalus awa | undefended | 7 | 0.00 – 16.05 | 13.58 | 0 – 12 | 3.0 | |
| Dendrobatidae | Hyloxalinae | Hyloxalus shuar | undefended | 1 | 14.92 | 14.92 | 5 | 5.0 | |
| Dendrobatidae | Hyloxalinae | Hyloxalus sp. Agua Azul | undefended | 1 | 14.30 | 14.30 | 8 | 8.0 | |
| Dendrobatidae | Hyloxalinae | Hyloxalus toachi | undefended | 2 | 0.00 – 0.00 | 0.00 | 0 – 0 | 0.0 | |
| Dendrobatidae | Dendrobatinae | Phyllobates aurotaenia | defended | 4 | 17.72 – 21.08 | 18.88 | 48 – 118 | 67.5 | |
| Dendrobatidae | Dendrobatinae | Dendrobates truncatus | defended | 3 | 20.05 – 23.95 | 20.42 | 111 – 172 | 115.0 | |
| Dendrobatidae | Dendrobatinae | Oophaga sylvatica | defended | 5 | 22.86 – 24.85 | 23.76 | 152 – 189 | 175.0 | |
| Dendrobatidae | Dendrobatinae | Andinobates fulguritus | defended | 2 | 20.09 – 20.51 | 20.30 | 80 – 85 | 82.5 | |
| Dendrobatidae | Dendrobatinae | Andinobates minutus | defended | 4 | 16.57 – 18.77 | 18.07 | 34 – 80 | 66.0 | |
| Bufonidae | Amazophrynella siona | NA | 2 | 14.12 – 14.40 | 14.26 | 1 – 1 | 1.0 | ||
| Bufonidae | Atelopus aff. spurrelli | NA | 1 | 11.58 | 11.58 | 4 | 4.0 | ||
| Eleutherodactylidae | Eleutherodactylus cystignathoides * | NA | 3 | NA | NA | 62 – 66 | 63 | ||
| Leptodactylidae | Leptodactylinae | Lithodytes lineatus | NA | 2 | 0.00 – 0.00 | 0.00 | 0 – 0 | 0.0 | |
*
Data are from UHPLC-HESI-MS/MS, which does not provide quantitative data.