Salamanders as Bioindicators in the Great Smoky Mountains

National Park

Nika Magradze1
Department of Biology, Principia College. Elsah, Illinois

Keywords: Salamanders; species distribution; bioindicator; high elevation; low elevation;

temperature
Abstract:

Using a variety of measuring techniques, we measured the diversity and abundance of

salamanders at the Cosby Creek site and Indian Gap site of the Great Smoky Mountains National

Park (GSMNP), TN. Other variables were measured such as soil moisture, soil temperature, and

soil pH. The findings were used to make various predictions as to assume salamanders (Family:

Plethodontidae) as a good bioindicator species that could help indicate the status of an

environment. Salamanders are one of many amphibians that may be good bioindicators of

environmental health due characteristics of their physical makeup and their habitat specific

distribution which may be linked

Introduction:

Ecosystems provide habitat for many species of plants and animals. Interactions between

abiotic factors such as temperature, sunlight, pH, water, and nutrient concentrations within a

specific ecosystem can help to determine species distributions and population abundance of that

locality (Brown, 1984). A common trait most animals have is that sometime in their evolutionary

history, they adapted in a way in which they became well-suited for successful survival and

reproduction in their habitats. This suggests that some of these animals evolved to have

characteristics and responses to their environments and changes to those environments may

impact the survival of those animals. This is the definition of a bioindicator. A bioindicator is, a

species or ecological community that is so closely associated with particular environmental

conditions that its presence is indicative of these conditions in a particular environment

(Merriam-Webster, 2015). The necessity of understanding bioindicator species is important in

order to deal with environmental stressors such as physical, chemical, or biological entities that

act adversely (Lowrance & Vellidis, 1995). Disruptions made to organisms or habitats can affect
natural survival rates and reproductive cycles (Welsh and Droege, 2001). One area of the animal

kingdom, class Amphibia, have traits in which their physiological makeup that leads them to be

good bioindicators. Many of them to be ectothermic which means that ambient temperatures of

an environment can affect them. They are able to perform respiration through their skin

(cutaneous respiration) and thus changes in ambient conditions such as moisture or oxygen levels

can impact their ability to breathe. Because they also have highly permeable skin dissolved

solutions of chemicals are absorbed through their skin (Duellman and Trueb, 1986; Wake, 1991;

Peterman and Semlitsch, 2013; Heatwole, 1962; Jorgensen, 1997; Fraser, 1976).

Salamanders are considered bioindicators of habitat type and quality (Welsh and Droege,

2001). Woodland salamanders are an example considering a decline in populations occurred

following a timber harvest in their habitats. This environmental stressor directly affected them

and caused declines (Ash, 1998; Harpole and Hass, 1999). Ford et al. (2002a) found that there

was a correlation between salamander recoveries after a disturbance and factors such as the

extent of high-quality cove hardwood habitats and cove patch size. An analysis like this suggests

that salamanders as a bioindicator species are affected by change that can directly influence them

in a positive or a negative way; hence, environmental stressors causing declines and high-quality

habitat being necessary for recoveries (Ash, 1998; Ford et al. 2002; Harpole and Haas, 1999).

The location in which we conducted our studies was the Great Smoky Mountains

National Park (GSMNP) in Tennessee, USA. It is a national park based in the foothills of the

Appalachian Mountains that span across many states along the eastern side of the United States.

The GSMNP boasts habitats filled with multitudes of wildlife; both animal and plant biodiversity

thrive here. Varying in elevation of high to low, red spruce (Picea rubens), serviceberry

(Amelanchier arborea), yellow birch (Betula alleghaniensis), eastern hemlock (Tsuga

canadensis), tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera), sugar maple (Acer saccharum), buckeye

(Aesculus glabra); and silverbell (Halesia carolina) trees can be found throughout the park.

Constant rain and moisture found here gives opportunities for all kinds of species of plants to

grow. As plants take advantage of the nutritional soils and a water-fed ecosystem, they grow and

provide homes, food, and protective shelter for animals of all kinds as well. From mammals like

elk or black bears to amphibians like frogs and salamanders, the park is diverse in its biological

composition.

One type of animal that truly thrives in the GSMNP are salamanders. The tailed

amphibians are found throughout the park in great numbers. These animals are lungless

amphibians, which means that respiration happens through the process of cutaneous respiration

(Peterman and Semlitsch, 2013). Salamanders need to have a good water balance across their

skin. This is key to their survival (Heatwole, 1962; Jorgensen, 1997). Although a good balance is

necessary, it must endure long enough and be constant enough for a salamander to forage and

meet their energy requirements successfully (Fraser, 1976).

Considering that they need moisture to survive, the rainy, wet conditions of the Smoky

Mountains provides great habitat for many species of salamanders. Since moisture on their

bodies is necessary for respiration, they can mostly be found near or in water-sufficient

environments. They live in streams, rivers, and other habitats with a constant supply of water.

They belong to the order Caudata and are possible examples of animals that can serve as

environmental bioindicators (Duellman and Trueb, 1986). This study looked to find data on the

distribution of salamanders among two study sites supporting the idea that salamanders act as

good bioindicators of the health and status of an environment.

 Such sensitive animals to the environment, like salamanders, suggest that they are

specialized for the habitat environments that sustain them (Ford et al., 2002a; Ford et al., 2002b;

Wilson, 1995; Petranka, 1998; Harper and Guynn, 1999). The GSMNP study sites used for this

study varied in species composition, elevation, and habitat type of each locality. The salamanders

found at each location are assumed to have developed and become specialists of those

environments. This brings to thought that if environmental change were to occur, these

salamanders would be affected by their environment. We predicted that the data in this study

would suggest that salamanders are specialists in their environments, therefore, a good

bioindicator species considering that they would be one of the first to respond to any

environmental stressors.

Materials and Methods:

Study Site

Due to the diversity of biotic and abiotic factors in the GSMNP, distribution of

salamanders varied from location to location, therefore, our methods implemented various data

collection techniques. We conducted our study in two ecologically different habitats. The study

sites which vary in elevation also differ in habitat composition. Our lower elevation site was

located at the Cosby Campground (35.75o W 83o N) at an average elevation of 727 m (Table 1). It

is a second growth forest dominated by tulip poplar. Other species of trees were found there also:

eastern hemlock (Tsuga canadensis), yellow birch (Betula alleghaniensis), tulip poplar

(Liriodendron tulipifera), sugar maple (Acer saccharum), yellow buckeye (Aesculus flava); and

silverbell (Halesia carolina) (Graph 2). The higher elevation Indian Gap (35.6o W, 83.44o N)

study site is found off the road to Clingmans Dome trail head at an average elevation of 1550 m

(Table 1). This is primarily a forest dominated by red spruce. Other tree species found at the
Indian Gap site were: red spruce (Picea rubens), serviceberry (Amelanchier arborea), yellow

birch (Betula alleghaniensis), eastern hemlock (Tsuga canadensis), and an unknown species

(Graph 3).

Composing the forest composition of these two sites included recording tree species that

had a diameter at breast height (DBH) of 10cm or more. No trees were considered if the DBH

was smaller than 10cm. The tree was then identified and the name recorded using Kemp (1993).

The plot used for marking an areas tree composition was a circular ring 5.64m radius from the

center point of the salamander quadrat being observed. At each study site, 10m x 10m quadrats

were set up and each site was marked with flags. Various equipment were used to measure

different aspects of the environment. The center of each quadrat was measured for elevation with

a Garmin Etrex GPS device (Kansas City, MO). Another device, the Kelway soil tester (Teaneck,

NJ), measured soil moisture levels of each quadrat. Other aspects of the soil were calculated as

well. Again with the Kelway soil tester, the pH of the soil was measured. This was followed by

identifying soil temperatures with the Supco EM60 thermocouple reader device (Naperville, IL).

To capture and identify salamander species, animals were collected from within their

habitats over a period of one hour. The location where a salamander was captured was marked

with tape for recognition. Then each capture site was measured for soil moisture, pH of the soil,

and temperature at the marked location. Salamanders were placed in plastic bags with wet leaves.

During this time salamanders and tree species were identified with the use of books by Dodd

(2004), Niemiller and Reynolds (2011), and Tilley and Huheey (2001). In regards to the captured

salamanders, the snout-vent lengths and tail lengths were measured in millimeters (mm) through

the use of Toolshop digital calipers (Eau Claire, WI). Whether a salamander was captured from

underneath a rock, log, leaves or any other object, the capture site was gently returned to the way
it was found to not risk disturbing the home environment of the species. Each salamander plot

location was recorded with the use of the Garmin Etrex GPS device. Locations were measured

with the latitude and longitude of plot points.

Results:

The following calculations were collected at an elevation of 727 m of the Cosby Creek

site and at 1550 m at the Indian Gap site (Table 1). The pH average of the study site was 6.32

(0.39) which was relatively similar to that of the Indian Gap site which was 6.22 (0.47). At the

Cosby Creek site, average soil moisture levels were at 63.22% (12.03%). In comparison, the

moisture levels at the Indian Gap site were much lower, averaging at 44% (15.03%). Finally,

the average soil temperature was 15.2oC (3.54oC) at the Cosby Creek site while at the Indian

Gap site at a higher elevation, the average soil temperature was 7.92oC (1.8oC) (Graph 1).

Although the averages were different for the random points at each location, comparisons

among the averages of soil temperature, soil moisture levels, and soil pH can be made between

the random locations and the locations of the captured salamanders (Graph 4). At the Indian Gap

site, the soil temperatures between the random point averages and the salamander averages were

very adjacent at around 8oC. This was also the case for soil temperatures at the Cosby Creek site

where the average temperatures were around 15oC at both the random points and at captured

salamander points. Soil moisture averages showed greater differences between random points of

the study sites. At Indian Gap, the random points had average soil moisture levels that were

lower than where the salamanders were actually caught. Similarly, the Cosby Creek site showed

parallel findings since the random points had soil moisture levels that were lower than the

salamander capture sites.

 Tree composition was also recorded at both sites. The composition was comprised into

three different measurements: relative density (density of a forest quantified as total basal area);

relative dominance (a measure of the amount of a species in a sample); and the importance value

(the value when both relative density and relative dominance are combined). At the Cosby Creek

site, tulip poplar had the highest relative density (0.42), the highest relative dominance (0.65),

and the highest importance value (0.53). Other trees that followed in ranking at this lower

elevation were yellow buckeye (relative density: 0.25; relative dominance: 0.12; importance

value: 0.19) and eastern hemlock (relative density: 0.08; relative dominance: 0.15; importance

value: 0.12) (Graph 2). At the Indian Gap site, red spruce had the highest relative density (0.46),

the highest relative dominance (0.79), and the highest importance value (0.63). At this higher

elevation, other trees that followed in ranking were serviceberry (relative density: 0.23; relative

dominance: 0.09; importance value: 0.16) and the unknown tree (relative density: 0.15; relative

dominance: 0.05; importance value: 0.1) (Graph 3).

The total number of salamanders caught at both sites was 106 individuals. The species

diversity varied from location to location and from habitat to habitat. At the lower elevation of

the Cosby Creek site, the Shannon index species diversity was 1.74 for a total of 93 captured

individuals. Species that were captured at this location included: 38 Shovelnose salamanders

(Desmognathus marmoratus); 19 spotted dusky salamanders (Desmognathus conanti); 11 seal

salamanders (Desmognathus monticola); 9 blackbelly salamanders (Desmognathus

quadramaculatus); 5 seepage salamanders (Desmognathus aeneus); 4 Blue Ridge two-lined

salamanders (Eurycea wilderae); 2 Southern two-lined salamanders (Eurycea cirrigera);2 Spring

salamanders (Gyrinophilus porphyriticus); 2 four-toed salamanders (Hemidactylium scutatum);

and 1 red-backed salamander (Plethodon cinereus) (Table 2).

 The salamander data collected at the Cosby Creek site differed from the Shannon index

average, species count, and the number of individuals captured at the Indian Gap site. The

average Shannon index species diversity at the Indian Gap site was at 1.07; much lower than that

of Cosby Creeks Shannon index value. This value accounted for a total number of 13 captured

individuals. Species that were captured at this location included: 8 Jordyns red-cheecked

salamanders (Plethodon jordani); 2 Southern gray-cheecked salamanders (Plethodon metcalfi); 2

four-toed salamanders (Hemidactylium scutatum); and 1 imitator salamander (Desmognathus

imitator) (Table 2).

Discussion:

Soil temperatures between the random points and the captured salamander locations was

around 8oC at the Indian Gap site. At the Cosby Creek site, salamanders were found in areas

where soil temperatures were 15oC; this was similar to temperatures at the random points of the

site (Graph 4). This suggests that the salamanders living at both elevations prefer these

temperatures, otherwise, the uncomfortable conditions would probably force them to go

elsewhere.

Our soil moisture level data also had key characteristics that were observed. Moisture for

both random points and salamander capture points at both sites were relatively high. Although

the Indian Gap site was at higher elevations with not many running creeks, rivers, or seeps,

average moisture levels for random points were found to be around 40%. This was still lower by

around 10% than the moisture levels of the points at which salamanders were collected (Graph

4). Similar results at the Cosby site proved that moisture levels at points where salamanders had

been caught were greater than the random locations. In fact, the average moisture levels were

nearly 30% greater at locations where salamanders were caught than at the random points of the
study site (Graph 4). This data suggests that salamanders at the higher elevations, primarily the

Jordyns red cheecked salamanders, prefer climates with lower moisture levels but also colder

temperatures. Considering that they are found primarily at higher elevations in burrows or under

rocks, logs, or other debris, our findings comply with this information (Dodd, 2004; Niemiller

and Reynolds, 2011; Tilley and Huheey, 2001). Another species, the southern gray-cheeked

salamander, which occurred at Indian Gap also occurs at high elevations with similar habitat

preferences as the Jordyns red-cheeked salamander (Dodd, 2004). The presence of both species

at this location at high altitudes with lower temperatures and lower moisture levels indicates that

they have habitat types at which they prosper and are comfortable at. Based on recorded data,

tree composition at either site was not the main factor in species diversity or abundance (Graph

2; Graph 3), however, data suggests that elevation, soil temperatures, and moisture levels are

factors more important to salamander distribution (Graph 4). Species that are habitat specific like

the Jordyns red cheeked salamander or the southern gray-cheecked salamander may provide

valuable indications of the status of an environment or an ecosystem if environmental stressors

were to occur.

According to an analysis of our findings, salamanders at lower elevations like at the

Cosby Creek site seem to prefer higher temperatures with higher moisture levels (Graph 4). The

shovel-nosed salamander, which typically inhabits woodland streams at elevations as low as 300

m, seems to really explain why this species was the most abundant at the Cosby Creek site. It

also means that the fast flowing, well-oxygenated streams with rocky substrates that are found at

Cosby Creek provide sufficient habitat for them (Niemiller and Reynolds, 2011). This

salamander at lower elevations may be one of the better bioindicators of the salamanders because

of its life history. Spending all of its life stages in aquatic environments makes them vulnerable
to poor water quality. They could also suffer from siltation or decreased water flow caused by

terrestrial habitat degradation (Niemiller and Reynolds, 2011; Tilley and Huheey, 2001).

According to Welsh and Droege (2001), a number of characteristics of salamanders make them

good candidates for monitoring forest ecosystems. Similarly, our data suggests that according to

their sensitivity to environmental stressors, salamanders that live in their preferred habitat types

and conditions will express faults or positives of an ecosystem if anything were to abnormally

occur, making them good bioindicators.

Tables:
Cosby Creek Cosby Creek Indian Gap Indian Gap (SD)
(avg) (SD) (AVG)
H' 1.74 1.07
pH 6.58 0.299 6.30 0.656
% soil moisture 0.88 0.242 0.51 0.308
temperature 15.15 2.951 7.86 2.556
Elevation (m) 727.00 1550.00

Table 1: Table lists the findings of the Shannon index (H); pH; soil moisture (%); temperature ( oC); and
elevation (m) of the two study sites, Cosby Creek and Indian Gap. Standard deviations were calculated
for the pH, soil moisture, and the temperatures of the sites.

Table 2: This table lists the capture salamander species types and the frequency (number of individuals) at
which they occurred at both Cosby Creek and Indian Gap sites.
Graphs:

pH
6.34
6.32
6.3
6.28
6.26
6.24
6.22
6.2
6.18
6.16
Indian Gap Cosby

Soil Moisture
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Indian Gap Cosby

Soil Temperature
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Indian Gap Cosby
Graph 1: Averages and their correlative standard deviations were measured for: soil temperature,
soil moisture, and pH of the study site 10 random locations.
 Forest Composition Analysis for Cosby
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4 Relative Density
0.3 Relative Dominance
0.2 Importance Value
Percentage
0.1
0

Graph 2: This graph shows the relative density, relative dominance, and importance values of the trees
found at the Cosby site.

Forest Composition Analysis at Indian Gap

0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5 Relative Density

0.4 Relative Dominance

0.3 Importance Value

Percentage
0.2
0.1
0

Graph 3: This graph shows the relative density, relative dominance, and importance values of the trees
found at the Indian Gap site.
Graph 4: This collection graphs displays the comparison of site averages and salamander capture site
averages of various characteristics of the study site such as: soil temperature, soil moisture, and soil pH.
The comparisons are shown for both the Indian Gap location and the Crosby Creek location.
 Works Cited

Ash, A.N. 1988. Disappearance of Salamander from Clearcut Plots. Journal of the Elisha
Mitchell Scientific Society 104:116-122
Brown, J.H. 1984. On the Relationship between Abundance and Distribution of Species. The
American Naturalist 124:255-279
Dodd, C.K. Jr. 2004. The Amphibians of Great Smoky Mountains National Park. The University
of Tennessee Press.
Duellman, W.E. and L. Trueb. 1986. Biology of Amphibians. The John Hopkins University
Press.
Ford, W.M., M.A. Menzel, and R.H. Odom. 2002a. Elevation, Aspect, and Cove Size Effects on
Southern Appalachian Salamanders. Southeastern Naturalist, 1(4):315-324
Ford, W.M., B.R. Chapman, M.A. Menzel, and R.H. Odom. 2002b. Stand-age and Habitat
Influeces on Salamanders in Appalachian Cove Hard-wood Forests. Forest Ecology and
Management 155:131-141
Fraser, D.F. 1976. Empirical Evaluation of the Hypothesis of Food Competition in Salamanders
of the Genus Plethedon. Ecology 57:459-471
Harper, C.A. and D.C. Guynn. 1999. Factors Affecting Salamander Density And Distribution
Within Four Forest Types In The Southern Appalachian Mountains. Forest Ecology and
Management 114:245-252

Harpole, D.N. and C.A. Haas. 1999. Effects of Seven Silvicultural Treatments on Terrestrial
Salamanders. Forest Ecology and Management 114:349-356
Heatwole, H. 1962. Environmental Factors Influencing Local Distribution and Activity of the
Salamander, Plethodon cinereus. Ecology 43:460-472.
Jorgensen, C.B. 1997. 200 Years of Amphibian Water Economy: from Robert Towson to the
Present. Biological Reviews 72:153-237.
Kemp, S. 1993. Trees & Familiar Shrubs of the Smokies. Great Smoky Mountains Association.
Lowrance, R., and G. Vellidis. 1995. A Conceptual Model for Assessing Ecological Risk to Water
Quality Function of Bottomland Hardwood Forests. Environmental Management 19:239-258
Merriam-Webster [Website]. Merriam-Webster, Incorporation; [updated 2015; cited 2016 April
29]. Available from: www. http://www.merriam-webster.com
Niemiller, M.L. and R.G. Reynolds. 2011. The Amphibians of Tennessee. The University of
Tennessee Press.
Petranka, J.W. 1998. Salamanders of the United States and Canada. Smithsonian Press,
Washington, DC. 587 pp.
Tilley, S.G. and J.E. Huheey. 2004. Reptiles & Amphibians of the Smokies. Great Smoky
Mountains Association.
Wake, D.B. 1991. Declining Amphibian Populations. Science 253(5022):860
Welsh, H.H. Jr. and S. Droege. 2001. A Case for Using Plethodontid Salamanders for Monitoring
Biodiversity and Ecosystem Integrity of north American Forests. Conservation Biology
15(3):558-569
Wilson, L.A. 1995. Land Managers Guide to the amphibians and reptiles of the South. The
Nature Conservancy, Southeast Region, Chapel Hill, NC. 324 pp.