Dryophytes andersonii 

Scope: Global
Language: English

Translate page into:

Taxonomy [top]

Kingdom Phylum Class Order Family
Animalia Chordata Amphibia Anura Hylidae

Scientific Name: Dryophytes andersonii (Baird, 1854)
Common Name(s):
English Pine Barrens Treefrog, Anderson's Tree Frog
Hyla andersonii Baird, 1854
Taxonomic Source(s): Duellman, W.E, Marion, A.B. and Hedges, S.B. 2016. Phylogenetics, classification, and biogeography of the treefrogs (Amphibia: Anura: Arboranae). Zootaxa 4104: 1-109.
Taxonomic Notes: The genus Dryophytes was resurrected from synonymy under Hyla by Duellman et al. (2016) and this species was transferred from Hyla to Dryophytes.

Assessment Information [top]

Red List Category & Criteria: Near Threatened ver 3.1
Year Published: 2017
Date Assessed: 2004-04-30
Needs updating
Assessor(s): Hammerson, G.A.
Reviewer(s): Stuart, S.N., Chanson, J.S., Cox, N.A. & Young, B.E.
Listed as Near Threatened because its extent of occurrence is not much greater than 20,000 km2, and the extent and quality of its habitat are probably declining, thus making the species close to qualifying for Vulnerable.
Previously published Red List assessments:

Geographic Range [top]

Range Description:This species is found in eastern USA including the Pine Barrens of New Jersey; the upper Coastal Plain and parts of lower Coastal Plain of North and South Carolina; and western Florida panhandle and adjacent Alabama, some 750km south-west of the nearest South Carolina population. It is also known in Georgia from an old record of a single specimen (Means and Mohler 1979; Gosner and Black 1967; Conant and Collins 1991). There are numerous occurrences throughout its range. The largest populations occur in New Jersey (Freda and Morin 1984). Discovery of this species in Florida was fairly recent (Christman 1970). Palmer (1977) suggested that the current distribution reflects relicts from a considerably more widespread distribution in the past.
Countries occurrence:
United States
Additional data:
Range Map:Click here to open the map viewer and explore range.

Population [top]

Population:Its total adult population size is unknown but it is relatively common where it occurs. Its population is relatively stable overall, but it is probably experiencing local declines due to habitat loss.
Current Population Trend:Decreasing
Additional data:
Population severely fragmented:No

Habitat and Ecology [top]

Habitat and Ecology:The non-breeding habitat is generally pine-oak areas adjacent to breeding habitat. Activity is terrestrial and arboreal. Important egg-laying and larval habitats include open cedar swamps and sphagnaceous, shrubby, acidic, seepage bogs on hillsides below pine-oak ridges. It is intolerant of closed-canopy conditions.
Systems:Terrestrial; Freshwater

Threats [top]

Major Threat(s): It is apparently secure in most of the range, although relative scarcity and specialized habitat requirements justify continued monitoring and protection. The primary threat in the New Jersey Pine Barrens is habitat destruction or alteration from residential, agricultural, and industrial development (Palmer 1977; Freda and Morin 1984). Development pressures within the Pine Barrens place isolated populations outside protected areas at increased risk of elimination. The early successional shrub bogs, seeps, and sphagnum ponds selected as breeding sites are very acidic and nutrient-poor ecosystems and any changes in the chemistry of the waters in these habitats (as, for example, from storm water runoff) would likely cause the disappearance of the characteristic flora and fauna (Ehrenfeld 1983; Morgan et al. 1983; Freda and Morin 1984). The sandy soils of the Pine Barrens are very porous and allow pollutants to quickly enter the ground water, which is the major water source for the wetlands upon which the tree frog depends. Development can also lower the water table, which would have dramatic effects on the hydrology of bog wetlands. Garton and Sill (1979) reported that the specific habitat requirements of the species made it susceptible to local extirpation. Unlike other sympatric tree frog species, it generally does not breed in temporary waterbodies such as natural rain pools or in human-made areas such as roadside ditches and borrow pits. However, Bullard (1965) reported chorusing males along a roadside ditch in North Carolina. As is true for other Sandhills species, plant succession due to fire suppression appears to be a significant threat in South Carolina (Cely and Sorrow 1986).

Conservation Actions [top]

Conservation Actions: Many populations on public lands provide good opportunities for conservation management of this species. For example, it occurs in 16 sites within the Carolina Sandhills National Wildlife Refuge in Chesterfield County, South Carolina (Garton and Sill 1979; Brown 1980). In New Jersey, the greatest density of tree frogs, and the largest numbers of colonies, are found in protected areas within Lebanon and Wharton State Forests and Greenwood and Pasadena wildlife management areas (Freda and Morin 1984). Most occurrences in the Florida and Alabama populations are on protected lands, specifically Eglin Air Force Base and Blackwater River State Forest in Florida, and Conecuh National Forest in Alabama (Jackson pers. comm.).

Amended [top]

Amended reason: This amended assessment has been created because the species was transferred from the genus Hyla to Dryophytes.

Classifications [top]

1. Forest -> 1.4. Forest - Temperate
5. Wetlands (inland) -> 5.4. Wetlands (inland) - Bogs, Marshes, Swamps, Fens, Peatlands
1. Land/water protection -> 1.1. Site/area protection
2. Land/water management -> 2.1. Site/area management

In-Place Research, Monitoring and Planning
In-Place Land/Water Protection and Management
  Conservation sites identified:Yes, over part of range
  Occur in at least one PA:Yes
In-Place Species Management
In-Place Education
1. Residential & commercial development -> 1.1. Housing & urban areas
♦ timing:Past, Likely to Return    
→ Stresses
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.1. Ecosystem conversion
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation

1. Residential & commercial development -> 1.2. Commercial & industrial areas
♦ timing:Ongoing    
→ Stresses
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.1. Ecosystem conversion
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation

2. Agriculture & aquaculture -> 2.1. Annual & perennial non-timber crops -> 2.1.4. Scale Unknown/Unrecorded
♦ timing:Ongoing    
→ Stresses
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.1. Ecosystem conversion
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation

4. Transportation & service corridors -> 4.1. Roads & railroads
♦ timing:Ongoing    
→ Stresses
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation

7. Natural system modifications -> 7.2. Dams & water management/use -> 7.2.8. Abstraction of ground water (unknown use)
♦ timing:Ongoing    
→ Stresses
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation

9. Pollution -> 9.1. Domestic & urban waste water -> 9.1.2. Run-off
♦ timing:Ongoing    
→ Stresses
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation

1. Research -> 1.2. Population size, distribution & trends
1. Research -> 1.3. Life history & ecology
1. Research -> 1.5. Threats
1. Research -> 1.6. Actions
3. Monitoring -> 3.1. Population trends

Bibliography [top]

Baird, S.F. 1854. Description of new genera and species of North American frogs. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia: 59-62.

Blackburn, L., Nanjappa, P. and Lannoo, M.J. 2001. An Atlas of the Distribution of U.S. Amphibians. Ball State University, Muncie, IN, USA.

Brown, E.E. 1980. Some historical data bearing on the pine barrens treefrog, Hyla andersonii, in South Carolina. Brimleyana: 113-117.

Bullard, A.J. 1965. Additional records of the treefrog Hyla andersonii from the Coastal Plain of North Carolina. Herpetologica: 154-155.

Cely, J.E. and Sorrow, J.A. Jr. 1983. Distribution, status and habitat of the pine barrens treefrog in South Carolina. Final report, South Carolina Wildlife and Marine Resources Department, Columbia, South Carolina, pp. 55 pp.

Cely, J.E. and Sorrow, J.A. Jr. 1986. Distribution and habitat of Hyla andersonii in South Carolina. Journal of Herpetology: 102-104.

Christman, S.P. 1970. Hyla andersoni in Florida. Quarterly Journal of the Florida Academy of Science.: 80.

Conant R. 1975. A Field Guide to Reptiles and Amphibians of Eastern and Central North America. Second Edition. Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, MA, USA.

Duellman, W.E, Marion, A.B. and Hedges, S.B. 2016. Phylogenetics, classification, and biogeography of the treefrogs (Amphibia: Anura: Arboranae). Zootaxa 4104: 1-109.

Ehrenfeld, J.G. 1983. The effects of changes in land-use on swamps of the New Jersey Pine Barrens. Biological Conservation: 353-375.

Freda, J. and Gonzalez, R.J. 1986. Daily movements of the treefrog, Hyla andersonii. Journal of Herpetology: 469-471.

Freda, J. and Morin, P.J. 1984. Adult home range of the pine barrens treefrog (Hyla andersonii) and the physical, chemical, and ecological characteristics of its preferred breeding ponds. Final Report to New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Fish, Game, and Wildlife, Endangered Nongame Species Program, pp. 33 pp. Trenton, NJ.

Frost, D.R. 1985. Amphibian Species of the World: A Taxonomic and Geographic Reference. Allen Press and the Association of Systematic Collections, Lawrence, Kansas.

Garton, J.S. and Sill, B.L. 1979. The status of the pine barrens treefrog, Hyla andersonii Baird, in South Carolina. In: Forsythe, D.M. and Ezell Jr, W.B. (eds), Proceedings of the First South Carolina Endangered Species Symposium, pp. 131-132. South Carolina Wildlife and Marine Res. Department, Columbia, SC.

Gerhardt, H.C. 1974. Behavioral isolation of the treefrogs Hyla cinerea and Hyla andersonii. American Midland Naturalist: 424-433.

Godwin, J.C. 1995. Extrinsic factors influencing the breeding of the pine barrens treefrog, Hyla andersonii. M.S. Thesis., Auburn University, Alabama.

Gosner, K.L. 1960. A simplified table for staging anuran embryos and larvae with notes on identification. Herpetologica 16: 183-190.

Gosner, K.L. and Black, I.H. 1956. Notes on amphibians from the upper coastal plain of North Carolina. Journal of the Elisha Mitchell Scientific Society: 40-47.

Gosner, K.L. and Black, I.H. 1957. Larval development in New Jersey Hylidae. Copeia: 31-316.

Gosner, K.L. and Black, I.H. 1967. Hyla andersonii. Catalogue of American Amphibians and Reptiles: 1-2.

Hulmes, D., Hulmes, P. and Zappalorti, R. 1981. Notes on the ecology and distribution of the pine barrens treefrog, Hyla andersonii, in New Jersey. Bulletin of the New York Herpetological Society: 2-19.

IUCN. 2004. 2004 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Available at: (Accessed: 23 November 2004).

IUCN. 2017. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2017-1. Available at: (Accessed: 27 April 2017).

Jensen, J.B. 1991. The distribution of the pine barrens treefrog, Hyla andersonii, in Conecuh National Forest, Alabama. Unpublished report.

Martof, B.S., Palmer, W.M., Bailey, J.R. and Harrison III, J.R. 1980. Amphibians and Reptiles of the Carolinas and Virginia. University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.

Means, D.B. 1983. The enigmatic pine barrens treefrog. Florida Wildlife: 16-19.

Means, D.B. and Longden, C.J. 1976. Aspects of the biology and zoogeography of the pine barrens treefrog (Hyla andersonii) in northern Florida. Herpetologica: 117-30.

Means, D.B. and Moler, P.E. 1979. The pine barrens treefrog: fire, seepage bogs, and management implications. In: Odum, R.R. and Landers, L. (eds), Proceedings. Georgia Game & Fish Div. Tech. Bull. WL4, Atlanta, pp. 77-83.

Moler, P.E. 1981. Notes on Hyla andersonii in Florida and Alabama. Journal of Herpetology: 441-444.

Morgan, M.D., Hastings, R.W., Wolfe, C.W. and Philipp, K.R. 1983. A comparison of aquatic species composition and diversity in disturbed and undisturbed pinelands waters. Center for Coastal and Environmental Studies, Rutgers - The State Univesity of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ.

Morin, P.J., Lawler, S.P. and Johnson, E.A. 1990. Ecology and breeding phenology of larval Hyla andersonii: the disadvantages of breeding late. Ecology: 1590-1598.

Mount, R.H. 1980. Distribution and status of the pine barrens treefrog, Hyla andersonii, in Alabama. Report to U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Auburn University, Alabama.

Noble, G.K. and Noble, R.C. 1923. The Anderson treefrog (Hyla andersonii Baird): observations on its habits and life history. Zoologica: 416-55.

Palmer, W.M. 1977. Hyla andersonii Baird. In: Cooper, J.E., Robinson, S.S. and Funderburg, J.B. (eds), Endangered and threatened plants and animals of North Carolina, pp. 313-314. North Carolina State Museum of Natural History., Raleigh, NC.

Tardell, J.H., Yates, R.C. and Schiller, D.H. 1981. New records and habitat observations of Hyla andersonii Baird (Anura: Hylidae) in Chesterfield and Marlboro Counties, South Carolina. Brimleyana: 153-158.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1980. Selected vertebrate endangered species of the seacoast of the United States - the pine barrens treefrog. FWS/OBS-80/01.6.

Wright, A.H. and Wright, A.A. 1949. Handbook of frogs and toads of the United States and Canada. Comstock Publishing Company, Inc, Ithaca, New York, USA.

Citation: Hammerson, G.A. 2017. Dryophytes andersonii (amended version of 2004 assessment). The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2017: e.T10350A112711185. . Downloaded on 20 April 2018.
Disclaimer: To make use of this information, please check the <Terms of Use>.
Feedback: If you see any errors or have any questions or suggestions on what is shown on this page, please provide us with feedback so that we can correct or extend the information provided