Table 1 Study site details.

From: Infection dynamics, dispersal, and adaptation: understanding the lack of recovery in a remnant frog population following a disease outbreak

Park

Site

Latitude

Longitude

Elevation mean (m)

Elevation range (m)

Transect length (m)

Girramay–Kirrama

G1

−18.17451

145.82828

303

283–327

610

Girramay–Kirrama

G2

−18.18250

145.80926

303

287–336

560

Girramay–Kirrama

G3

−18.16582

145.82360

222

214–225

310

Girramay–Kirrama

G4

−18.15697

145.82381

191

159–213

1540

Tully

T1

−17.77420

145.59390

378

359–423a

350a

Tully

T2

−17.76977

145.58993

275

258–286

220

Tully

T3

−17.76487

145.59011

198

195–207

330

Tully

T4

−17.77607

145.66484

95

91–100

150

Wooroonooran

W1

−17.38523

145.86868

319

295–356b

560b

Wooroonooran

W2

−17.38814

145.87605

237

224–247

250

Wooroonooran

W3

−17.39380

145.88595

134

126–143

200

Wooroonooran

W4

−17.39803

145.89468

57

47–64

450

  1. The coordinates represent the approximate midpoints of each transect. Litoria dayi was not abundant at Girramay–Kirrama, resulting in long transect distances, particularly at the lowest elevation, where it was clustered around small creeks that fed into the main channel. G1 and G2 correspond roughly to DCl and MRl (respectively) in McKnight et al. (2019).
  2. aOnly one frog was found above 398 m (210-m transect length excluding that frog).
  3. bOnly one frog was found above 334 m (363-m transect length excluding that frog).