AMPHIBIAWEB
Bufo bufo
Common Toad
family: Bufonidae

© 2002 John P. Clare (1 of 150)

  hear Fonozoo call

View distribution map using BerkeleyMapper.


Conservation Status (definitions)
IUCN (Red List) Status Least Concern (LC)
See IUCN account.
CITES No CITES Listing
Other International Status Bern Convention (Annex 3); Not Threatened
National Status None
Regional Status Red Data Books of Bashkiria, Tataria, Yamal-Nenets Autonomous County, and Irkutsk Province (all in Russia), included as a Rare species.

   

Can you confirm these amateur observations of Bufo bufo?

Add your own observation of
Bufo bufo »

Description
Parotoids behind the eyes are prominent. Pupil of the eye is horizontal. Tympanic membrane not visible. No male resonator. No tarsal fold. 2nd and 3rd toes with paired subarticular tubercles. Dorsal skin usually with rounded tubercles, sometimes with sharp top. Dorsal surface white-grayish, gray, brown or olive-brown with more or less developed darker spots. These spots are sometimes absent, sometimes fused into irregular longitudinal bands. Background coloration changes during the breeding season, becoming uniform. Belly light-gray or yellowish-gray with dark spots. Male differs from female in having nuptial pads on 1st finger (during the breeding season on 1st, 2nd and/or 3rd fingers), smaller body size and in some body proportions. In the Carpathian Mountains, sexual differences in toad breeding coloration have been described: males have uniform, light-greenish-brownish dorsal coloration, whereas females are more brown with dark-brown spots which sometime fuse into irregular longitudinal bands most distinct on the flanks.

Distribution and Habitat

Country distribution from AmphibiaWeb's database: Albania, Austria, Belarus, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Gibraltar, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Kazakhstan, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Macedonia, the Former Yugoslav Republic of, Moldova, Republic of, Montenegro, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Romania, Russian Federation, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, Ukraine, United Kingdom

View distribution map using BerkeleyMapper.
The species is widespread in Europe. Northern margin of its range extends from Norway and Sweden (ca. 65-67oN) to Northern Finland (Saariselka, Muanio and Kittila at 68oN to Northern Russia: from the northern coast of the White Sea in Murmansk Province (Kandalaksha Nature Reserve: 66o35'N, 33o13'E) and covers the whole of Karelia. Then it runs through Arkhangelsk Province (from the environs of Arkhangelsk City: 64o36'N, 40o32'E to Pinezhskii Nature Reserve), then approximately along the line Komi Republics - through Urals to Tyumen Province (Yamal-Nenets Autonomous County) - Krasnoyarsk Region (middle flow of Enisei River). Then it turns south-south-eastwards to the Chuna River in Krasnoyarsk Region and Irkutsk Province in the East Siberia. The easternmost known locality is Kunerma Settlement in Kazachinsko-Lensk District of Irkutsk Province (56oN, 108o30'E). Thus, the major part of the northern margin of the range of B. bufo in Asia approximately corresponds to the latitude 63-64oN. Further studies of the species' distribution at its northern limit, and especially in its eastern part, are necessary. Southern margin of the range in Europe corresponds approximately to the southern limits of the latter. It is absent, however, from many European islands (Balears, Corsica, Sardinia, Malta, Crete etc.). On the continental part, the southern margin runs by the right bank of Dnieper River in Ukraine approximately along the line Kherson City (48o38'N, 32o37'E) - area of Zaporozhie City - Dnepropetrovsk Province - Donetsk Province - Kharkov Province - Lugansk Province. Then the margin runs in Russia in the southwest of Byelgorod Province - Voronezh Province - Tambov City (52o43'N, 41o26'E) - south-east of Penza Province - Ulyanovsk Province - north of Saratov Province. Then the margin runs to northwestern Kazakhstan: north of Uralsk Province. The toad probably exists on the rivers Uil and Temir southwards to 49oN. Then the margin turns northeastwards in Russia approximately along the line Orenburg Province - Chelyabinsk Province - Kurgan Province - south of Tyumen Province in the West Siberia - east of Omsk Province. Then the margin turns to the south-south-east at a level of about 55oE to the Northeastern Kazakhstan. Then the margin runs to the south-east and south along the valley of the Irtysh River to Semipalatinsk Province and the East Kazakhstan Province and then, probably, to China.

According to allozyme data, Bufo bufo from the Anatolian part of Turkey is closer to B. verrucosisimus, in comparison to B. bufo or B. spinosus (from Tunisia, for example). Therefore, the Anatolian part of Turkey, as well as the Syrian Arab Republic and Lebanon, are considered to be inhabited by B. verrucosissimus and not B. bufo, despite the record provided by Hraoui-Blouqet et al. (2001) for Lebanon (Litvinchuk, pers. comm. 2008).

The Common Toad is associated mainly with the forest zone (in conifer, mixed and deciduous forests), where it prefers conifer forests with marshes. It lives in groves, bushlands, parks and gardens, generally in fairly wet sites with dense vegetation. Large open areas are avoided but in forested landscapes the toad readily inhabits bushlands, meadows, fields, glades, gardens, vineyards etc. In the south of the range, the toad lives in insular forests in the zone of forest steppe and in wet and dense riparian vegetation. Spawning takes place in lakes, ponds, ditches, large puddles and streams with relatively clear water, quite variable in area and depth.

Life History, Abundance, Activity, and Special Behaviors
In most habitats, B. bufo is not very abundant, although sometimes up to 70 specimens are found per 100 m of pond shore or, on land, to 200 individuals per hectare.

As other toads, B. bufo is active mainly in twilight. The activity in light time, common for the toads of the Bufo viridis group, is rare in the Common Toad. The toads hibernate singly or in groups from September - beginning of November to March - June, depending on the altitude and latitude. Hibernation occurs on land and occasionally in streams and springs. Usually, the hibernation is finished in April - May. Reproduction occurs from March - June (usually late April - May). Amplexus is pectoral. A few males often clasp one female, and in many instances several males try to clasp the same female, and large "balls" consisting of numerous toads may be observed. The smallest males are forced out by larger individuals. Therefore, assortative (by body size) mating takes place. Embryonic and larval development takes usually 1.5-2.5 months.

Common Toad forages exclusively on land, mainly on crawling invertebrates. As in other species of toads, consumption of ants is very typical. This results from the sit-and-wait foraging tactics in this species. Numerous predators, parasites and morphological anomalies are known in this toad species. However, their real impact in its population dynamics remains unknown. If faced by a potential predator, the adult toad lifts its body on straight legs and butts its head toward the danger.

Trends and Threats
Destruction of forests and meadows, as well as artificial drying of wetlands compose the most serious threats for populations of B. bufo . These factors are responsible for the extinction of some populations. On a global scale, deforestation of the European south may have resulted in a retreat of the species' range northwards. Pollution of the environment by mineral fertilizers and industrial wastes, recreation, urbanization, mortality on roads, meaningless killing by people etc. result in the gradual decline of populations of B. bufo in settlements and cities. Natural factors may also influence the abundance and distribution of this species. For example, in Moscow Province in 1990s its abundance gradually increases, and the toad appears in places where it was absent in the past.

The UK has designated the species as a Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) priority species in response to declines in some areas of central and lowland england, and on the Channel Island of Jersey (John W. Wilkinson & John Buckley, FrogLog 2012).

Relation to Humans
Main threats related to human activities were indicated above. Although a few populations of the Common Toad are able to survive even in cities, it has moderate possibilities for synanthropization: the toad is practically extinct from many large cities where many other amphibians are in relatively safe condition.

B. bufo have a tendency to breed in the same location they were born, even if other breeding areas are available nearby. This increases their susceptibility to landscape development by humans (John W. Wilkinson & John Buckley, FrogLog 2012).

Possible reasons for amphibian decline

General habitat alteration and loss
Disturbance or death from vehicular traffic
Local pesticides, fertilizers, and pollutants
Long-distance pesticides, toxins, and pollutants
Intentional mortality (over-harvesting, pet trade or collecting)

References
 

Bannikov, A. G., Darevsky, I. S. and Rustamov, A. K. (1971). Zemnovodnye i Presmykayushchienya SSSR [Amphibians and Reptiles of the USSR]. Izdatelistvo Misl, Moscow.  

Bannikov, A. G., Darevsky, I. S., Ishchenko, V. G., Rustamov, A. K., and Szczerbak, N. N. (1977). Opredelitel Zemnovodnykh i Presmykayushchikhsya Fauny SSSR [Guide to Amphibians and Reptiles of the USSR Fauna]. Prosveshchenie, Moscow.  

Basoglu, M. and Ozeti, N. (1973). Turkiye Amphibileri. Ege Univ, Bornova-Izmir.  

Gasc, J. P. , Cabela, A., Crnobrnja-Isailovic, J., Dolmen, D., Grossenbacher,K., Haffner, P., Lescure, J., Martens, H., Martinez Rica, J. P.,Maurin, H., Oliveira, M. E., Sofianidou, T. S., Vaith, M., and Zuiderwijk, A. (1997). Atlas of Amphibians and Reptiles in Europe. Societas Europaea Herpetologica and Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle, Paris.  

Hraoui-Bloquet, S., Sadek, R. and Geze, R. (2001). ''Les Amphibiens du Liban: inventaire, répartition géographique et altitudinale.'' Bulletin de la Société Herpétologique de France, 99, 19-28.  

Kuzmin, S. L. (1995). Die Amphibien Russlands und angrenzender Gebiete. Westarp Wissenschaften, Magdeburg.  

Kuzmin, S. L. (1999). The Amphibians of the Former Soviet Union. Pensoft, Sofia-Moscow.  

Nikolsky, A. M (1936). Fauna of Russia and Adjacent Countries: Amphibians (English translation of Nikolsky, 1918, Faune de la Russie et des Pays limitrophes. Amphibiens. Académie Russe des Sciences, Petrograd, USSR). Israel Program for Scientific Translations, Jerusalem.  

Nikolsky, A. M. (1906). Herpetologia Rossica. Mémoires de l'Académie Impériale des Sciences de St.-Pétersbourg, Série 8, Phys.-Math, Vol. 17, Sofia, Moscow.  

Nöllert, A. and Nöllert, C. (1992). Die Amphibien Europas. Franckh-Kosmos Verlags-GmbH and Company, Stuttgart.  

Ryzhikov, K. M., Sharpilo, V. P. and Shevchenko, N. N. (1980). Gelminty Amfibii Fauny SSSR [Helminths of Amphibians of the USSR Fauna]. Nauka, Moscow.  

Szczerbak, N. N. and Szczerban, M. I. (1980). Zemnovodnye i Presmykayushchiesya Ukrainskikh Karpat [Amphibians and Reptiles of Ukrainian Carpathians]. Naukova Dumka, Kiev.  

Terent'ev, P. V. and Chernov, S. A (1965). Key to Amphibians and Reptiles [of the USSR]. Israel Program for Scientific Translations, Jerusalem.



Written by Sergius L. Kuzmin, John Cavagnaro (ipe51 AT yahoo.com), Institute of Ecology and Evolution, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow
First submitted 1999-09-30
Edited by Vance Vredenburg, Kellie Whittaker (2012-04-03)



Feedback or comments about this page.

 

Citation: AmphibiaWeb: Information on amphibian biology and conservation. [web application]. 2014. Berkeley, California: AmphibiaWeb. Available: http://amphibiaweb.org/. (Accessed: Dec 21, 2014).

AmphibiaWeb's policy on data use.