Skip to main content

Table 2 Summary of tadpole collections and ecological parameters in natural ponds

From: Widespread disruptive selection in the wild is associated with intense resource competition

Pond

Map ID

Year

N

Tadpole density

Fairy shrimp density

Cover (%)

AZ0602

1

2006

93

2

3

.8

AZ0603

2

2006

124

1

2

.75

AZ0604

3

2006

50

2

3

.5

AZ0605

4

2006

176

3

2

.6

AZ0606

5

2006

94

2

1

.9

AZ0607

6

2006

102

2

1

.4

NM0608

7

2006

165

3

2

1

AZ0710

8

2007

78

3

1

.9

AZ0711

9

2007

99

2

3

1

AZ0706

10

2007

125

1

2

.7

AZ0801

11

2008

99

1

2

1

AZ0810

12

2008

213

3

2

.8

AZ0811

13

2008

181

3

3

.5

AZ0816

14

2008

297

3

2

1

AZ0809

15

2008

59

3

3

1

AZ0802

16

2008

150

2

2

.7

AZ0812

17

2008

188

2

2

.6

AZ0813

18

2008

135

2

2

1

NM0810

19

2008

169

2

2

.8

AZ0903

20

2009

78

3

1

.75

AZ0902

21

2009

211

3

3

1

AZ0904

22

2009

192

1

1

1

  1. For each population the pond name, map ID corresponding to Figure 1, sampling year, tadpole sample size (N), tadpole density, fairy shrimp density, and percentage of vegetative cover (Cover) are shown. We assigned numerical values to our estimates of tadpole and shrimp abundance such that “high” = 3, “medium” = 2 and “low” = 1.