摘要
共域物種如何利用有限資源，降低彼此的競爭以達到共存，一直是生態學家感興趣的課題。台灣擁有高度生物多樣性和多樣化的棲地類型，特別適合探討物種資源利用相關研究。本研究自2004年4月至2005年8月，在台北縣石碇鄉的烏塗庫溪對河道中共域蛙種進行資源分配的研究調查，利用生態棲位寬度與生態棲位重疊度指數估算出物種在時間、空間及食性等資源利用上的差異，探討共域蛙種間資源分配利用的策略。此外亦探討人為干擾所造成的棲地變化，對溪流蛙類優勢種的褐樹蛙，在時間、空間及食性資源利用上的影響。
研究期間，共記錄到3科7種蛙類：盤古蟾蜍（Bufo bankorensis）、腹斑蛙（Rana adenopleura）、古氏赤蛙（Rana kuhlii）、拉都希氏赤蛙（Rana latouchi）、斯文豪氏赤蛙（Rana swinhoana）、面天樹蛙（Chirixalus idiootocus）及褐樹蛙（Buergeria robustus）。由於腹斑蛙、古氏赤蛙與面天樹蛙等三個物種樣本數不足，本研究將不列入分析。利用IRI相對重要指數分析各物種最重要的食物類型發現，在褐樹蛙和拉都希氏赤蛙為鱗翅目幼蟲、在盤古蟾蜍為倍足綱的馬陸，而斯文豪氏赤蛙則為蜚蠊目的昆蟲。在生態棲位寬度方面，拉都希氏赤蛙在時間資源（BA = 0.502）、棲地資源（BA = 0.403）與食性資源（BA = 0.418）方面具有最大的寬度；在生態棲位重疊度方面，盤古蟾蜍與拉都希氏赤蛙之間具有最大的時間棲位重疊度（O = 0.778），褐樹蛙與斯文豪氏赤蛙之間具有最大的棲地棲位重疊度（O = 0.854），褐樹蛙與拉都希氏赤蛙間在食性資源利用上較為相近（O = 0.779）。共域物種間在一項資源利用的重疊度高時，則其餘資源的重疊度會有降低的現象，顯示物種間會以不同資源項目減少競爭。
人為干擾造成的棲地差異中，環境中底石組成與隱蔽場所的多寡發生變化，會影響褐樹蛙出現的數量；在食性資源利用上，環境中植被多寡會影響攝食比例，並改變褐樹蛙的食性組成。結果顯示，蛙種間主要以食性資源利用上的差異達到共存。有限度的環境干擾，對溪流蛙類而言並非只有負面的影響。

Abstract
Ecologists are interesting to know how sympatric species can coexist to decrease interspecific competition. Because of having high specie and habitat diversity in Taiwan, it is appropriate to investigate about resource partitioning among species in a community. This study was conducted from April 2004 to August 2005, in Wu-too-ku stream of Taipei County .The main purpose of this research was to investigate the resource partitioning among sympatric frogs in a stream by using the index of niche breadth and niche overlap. Meanwhile we also explored the effects of human disturbance in resources utilization of Buergeria robustus in Wu-too-ku stream.
A total of 7 species were recorded from study site, Rana adenopleura, Rana kuhlii and Chirixalus idiootocus, were present only in small numbers. Their data were not analyzed. The major food items of Buergeria robustus and Rana latouchi were Lepidoptera larvae, Chilognatha for Bufo bankorensis, Blattodea for Rana swinhoana, calculated by the IRI index. Indexes of niche breadth indicated that the temporal (0.502), habitat (0.403), and diet (0.418) breadth of Rana latouchi were the widest among 4 species. Indexes of niche overlap indicated that the highest niche overlap was seen between Bufo bankorensis and Rana latouchi in temporal aspect (0.778), Buergeria robustus and Rana swinhoana with the greatest niche overlap in habitat aspect (0.854), and Buergeria robustus and Rana Rana latouchi with the greatest niche overlap in diet aspect (0.779).Results from our study suggests that sympatric species reduce interspecific competition by shifting in niche overlap in various aspects.
The component of rocks and difference in vegetation along riparian zones were considered the main reasons which decrease on amphibian abundance in human disturbance area. The density of vegetation affected the components of diet on Buergeria robustus. These findings suggest that difference in feeding habitats is the main mechanism to decrease the interspecific competition among sympatric frog species in a stream. It seems that human disturbance may provide some benefits for certain species of frogs.

參考文獻
朱哲民，1996。台灣北部溪流蛙類群聚之研究。國立台灣師範大學生物研究所碩士論文。
吳世揚，1999。蝎虎(Hemidactylus frenatus)族群內食物資源分配之研究。國立師範大學生物學系碩士論文。
呂光洋、汪靜明，1987。武陵農場河域之原產種魚類生態之初步研究。行政院農業委員會。76年生態研究第010號。
呂光洋、杜銘章、向高世，1999。台灣兩棲爬行動物圖鑑。中華民國自然生態保育協會、大自然雜誌社。台北。
李宜娟，2001。關渡草澤地共域小獸類的棲地利用。國立台灣大學動物學研究所碩士論文。
林中一，2001。台北縣雙溪河流域褐樹蛙（Buergeria robusta）之生殖生態與族群分布。國立台灣大學動物學研究所碩士論文。
林曜松、楊懿如、李承恩，2003。人工構造物對溪流蛙類的影響。生態工法與生物多樣性研討會論文集。中華民國溪流環境協會。台北。
候平君，2000。台灣南部低地雨林四種兩棲類食性之季節變化。台北市立動物園國際兩棲爬行動物保育研討論文集。台北。
高保齡，1994。台灣北部靜止水域共棲蛙種間資源分配利用之研究。國立台灣師範大學生物研究所碩士論文。
陳得康，1994。溪頭地區鳥類種間資源利用區隔之研究。國立台灣師範大學生物研究所碩士論文。
張大勇等，2000。理論生態學研究。高等教育出版社、施普林格出版社。北京。
張謙方，1996。福山植物園水生植物池共棲蛙種間資源分配之研究。國立師範大學生物研究所碩士論文。
溫國彰，2002。台灣南北部潮池魚類聚攝食同功群與食性成長變化之研究。國立海洋大學海洋生物研究所碩士論文。
Alanara A., Burns M.D. and Metcalfe N.B. 2001. Intraspecific resource partitioning in brown trout: the temporal distribution of foraging is determined by social rank. J. Anim. Ecol. 70:980-86.
Amezaga I. and Rodriguez M.A. 1998. Resource partitioning of four sympatric bark beetles depending on swarming dates and tree species. Forest Ecology and Management 109: 127-135.
Begon M., Harper J.L. and Townsend C.R. 1990. Ecology - individual, population, communities 2nd Edition. Blackwell Scientific publication 945 pp
Bertoluci J. and Rodrigues M.Y. 2002. Seasonal patterns of breeding activity of Atlantic Rainforest anurans at Boraceia, Southeastern Brazil. Amphibia-Reptila 23: 161-167.
Bjorndal K.A., Bolten A.B., Lagueux C.J. and Jackson D.R. 1997. Dietary overlap in three sympatric congeneric freshwater turtles (Pseudemys) in Florida. Chelon. Conserv. Biol. 2: 430-433.
Bowers C.F., Hanlin H.G., Guynn D.C., McLendon J.P. and Davis J.R. 2000. Herpetfaunal and vegetational characterization of a thermally-impacted stream at the beginning of restoration. Ecological Engineering 15 S101-S114.
Cardona L. 2001. Non-competitive coexistence between Mediterranean grey mullet: evidence from seasonal changes in food availability, niche breadth and trophic overlap. Journal of Fish Biology 59:729-744.
Denol M. and Joly P. 2001. Adaptive significance of facultative paedomorphosis in Triturus alpestris (Amphibia, Caudata): resource partitioning in an alpine lake. Freshwater Biology 46: 1387-1396.
Dupuis L. and Steventon D. 19993 Raparian management and the tailed frog in northern coastal forests. Forest Ecology and Management 124(1): 35-43.
Ebensperger L. and Mahan C.B. 2001. Use of habitat, size of prey, and food-niche relationships of two sympatric otters in southernmost Chile. Journal of Mammalogy 78:12-22.
Ficetola G.F. and Bernardi F.D. 2004. Amphibians in a human-dominated landscape: the community structure is related to habitat features and isolation. Biological conservation 119:219-230.
Greenberg C.H. and Tanner G.W. 2004. Breeding pond selection and movement patterns by eastern spadefoot toads (Scaphiopus holbrookii) in relation to weather and edaphic conditions. Journal of Herpetology 38(4):569-577.
Hazell D., Hero J.M., Lindenmayer D. and Cunningham R. 2004. Comparison of a on strcted and natural habitat fir frog conservation in an Australian agricultural landscape. Biological conservation 119:61-71.
Hirai T. and Matsui M. 2001a. Diet Composition of the Indian Rice Frog, Rana limnocharis, in Rice Fields of Central Japan. Current Herpetol. 20(2): 97-103.
Hirai T. and Matsui M. 2001b. Food partitioning between two syntopic ranid frogs, Rana nigromaculata and R. rugosa. Herpetol. J. 11(3): 109-115.
Hofer U., Bersier L.F. and Borcard D. 2004. Relating niche and spatial overlap at the community level. Oikos 106:366-376.
Krebs C.J. 1998. Ecological methodology, 2nd. Benjamin/Cummings, Menlo Park.
Khonsue W., Matsui M. and Misawa Y. 2002. Age determination of Daruma pond frog, Rana porosa brevipoda from Japan towards its conservation (Amphibia: Anura). Amphibia-Reptila 23: 259-268.
Kronfeld-Schor N. and Dayan T. Partitioning of time as an ecological resource. Au. Rev. Evol. Syst. 34:153-81.
Lecomte F. and Dodson J.J. 2005. Distinguishing trophic and habitat partitioning among sympatric populations of the estuarine fish Osmerus mordax Mitchill. Journal of Fish Biology 66: 1601-1623.
Lemckert F. and Brassil T. 2000. Movements and habitat use of the endangered giant barred river frog (Mixophyes iteratus) and the implications for its conservation in timber production forests. Biological Conservation 96: 177-184.
Lemckert F. and Brassil T. 2002. Movements and habitat use by the giant burrowing frog, Heleioporus australiacus. Amphibia-Reptila 24: 207-211.
Lin Y.F., Lin C.Y., Chou W.C., Lin W.T., Tsai J.S. and Wu C.F. 2004. Modeling of riparian vegetated buffer strip width and placement: a case study in Shei Pa National Park, Taiwan. Ecological Engineering 23: 327-339.
Lin J.Y., Tsao E.H., Lee T.C. and Yu S.L. 2004. Stream physical parameters and habitat requirement: the case of the Formosan salmon. Ecological Engineering 22: 305-309.
Loman J. 1999. Early metamorphosis in common frog Rana temporaria tadpole at risk of drying: an experimental demonstration. Amphibia-Reptila 20: 421-430.
Lddecke H. 2003. Space use, cave choice, and spatial learning in the dendrobatid frog Colostethus palmatus. Amphibia-Reptila 24: 37-46.
Maerz J.C., Blossey B. and Nuzzo V. 2005. Green frogs show reduced foraging success in habitats invaded by Japanese knotweed. Biodiversity and Conservation 14: 2901-2911.
Miaud C., Sanuy D. and Avrillier J.N. 2000. Terrestrial movements of the natterjack toad Bufo calamita(Amphibia, Anura) in a semi-arid, agricultural landscape. Amphibia-Reptilia 21: 357-369.
Neale J.C.C. and Sacks B.N. 2001. Resource utilization and interspecific relations of sympatric bobcats and coyotes. Oikos 94: 236-249.
Neckel-Oliveira S. 2004. Effects of landscape change on clutches of Phyllomedusa tarsius, a neotropical treefrog. Biological conservation 118: 109-116.
Parris K.M. and McCarthy M.A. 1999. What influences the structure of frog assemblages at forest streams? Australian Journal of Ecology 24: 495-502.
Penna M. and Solis R. 1996. Influence of burrow acoustics on sound reception by frogs Eupsophus (Leptodactylidae). Anim. Behav. 51: 255-263.
Pellet J., Guisan A. and Perrin N. 2004. A concentric analysis of the impact of urbanization on the threatened European tree frog in an agricultural landscape. Conservation Biology 18(6): 1599-1606.
Pineda E. and Halffter G.. 2004. Species diversity and habitat fragmentation: frogs in a tropical mountain landscape in Mexico. Biological conservation 117: 499-508.
Ricklefs R.E., Cochran D. and Pianka E.R. 1981. A morphological analysis of the structure of communities of lizards in desert habitats. Ecology 62(6): 1474-1483.
Salewski V., Bairlein F. and Leiser B. 2003. Niche partitioning of two Palearctic passerine migrants with Afritropical residents in their West African winter quarters. Behavioral Ecology 14(4): 493-502.
Sall J., Lehman A. and Creighton L. 2001.JMP Start Statistics. Pacific Grove, CA: Duxbury Press.
Samejima H., Marzuki M., Nagamitsu T. and Nakasizuka T. 2004. The effects of human disturbance on a stingless bee community in a tropical rainforest. Biological conservation 120: 577-587.
Schoener T.W. 1968. The anolis lizard of Bimini: resource partitioning in a complex fauna. Ecology 49:704-726.
Schoener T.W., Huey R.B. and Pianka E.R. 1979. A biogeographic extension of the compression hypothesis: competitors in narrow sympatry. Am. Nat.113: 295-317.
Spieler M. and Linsenmair K.E. 1998. Migration and diurnal shelter in a ranid frog
from a West African savannah: a telemetric study. Amphibia-Reptilia 69: 43-64.
Stoddard M.A. and Hayend J.P. 2005. The influence of forest management on headwater stream amphibians at multiple spatial scales. Ecological Applications 15(3): 811-823.
Swart C.C. and Adams D.C. 2004. The role of muscle mass and tooth number in ecological character displacement between Plethodon cinereus and P. hoffmani (Caudata:plethodontidae). Herpetologica 60(4): 408-413.
Thurnheer S. and Reyer H.U. 2000. Spatial distribution and survival rate of waterfrog tadpoles in relation to biotic and abiotic factors: a field experiment. Amphibia-Reptilia 22: 21-32.
Toft C.A. 1980. Feeding ecology of thirteen syntopic species of anurans in a seasonal tropical environment. Oecologia 45:131-141.
Trenham P.C. and Shaffer H.B. 2005. Amphibian upland habitat use and its consequences for population viability. Ecological Applications 15(4): 1158-1168.
Van-Sluys M., Rocha F.D., Vrcibradic D. and Aleksander C. 2004. Diet, activity, and microhabitat use of two syntopic Tropidurus species (Lacertilia: tropiduriade ) in Minas gerais, Brazil. Journal of Herpetology 38(4): 606-611.
Vos C.C. and Chardon J.P. 1998. Effects of habitat fragmentation and road density on the distribution pattern of moor frog Rana avails. Journal of Applied Ecology 38: 44-56.
Woodford J.E. and Meyer M.W. 2002. Impact of lakeshore development on green frog abundance. Biological Conservation 110: 277-284.
Woodward G. and Hildrew A.G. 2002. Body-size determinants of niche overlap and intraguild predation within a complex food web. Journal of Animal Ecology 71: 1063-1074.