Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2016 Dec 5;371(1709):20160207.
doi: 10.1098/rstb.2016.0207.

Mitigating amphibian chytridiomycoses in nature

Trenton W J Garner  1   2 , Benedikt R Schmidt  3   4 , An Martel  5 , Frank Pasmans  5 , Erin Muths  6 , Andrew A Cunningham  7 , Che Weldon  2 , Matthew C Fisher  8 , Jaime Bosch  9
Affiliations
Review

Mitigating amphibian chytridiomycoses in nature

Trenton W J Garner et al. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. .

Abstract

Amphibians across the planet face the threat of population decline and extirpation caused by the disease chytridiomycosis. Despite consensus that the fungal pathogens responsible for the disease are conservation issues, strategies to mitigate their impacts in the natural world are, at best, nascent. Reducing risk associated with the movement of amphibians, non-amphibian vectors and other sources of infection remains the first line of defence and a primary objective when mitigating the threat of disease in wildlife. Amphibian-associated chytridiomycete fungi and chytridiomycosis are already widespread, though, and we therefore focus on discussing options for mitigating the threats once disease emergence has occurred in wild amphibian populations. All strategies have shortcomings that need to be overcome before implementation, including stronger efforts towards understanding and addressing ethical and legal considerations. Even if these issues can be dealt with, all currently available approaches, or those under discussion, are unlikely to yield the desired conservation outcome of disease mitigation. The decision process for establishing mitigation strategies requires integrated thinking that assesses disease mitigation options critically and embeds them within more comprehensive strategies for the conservation of amphibian populations, communities and ecosystems.This article is part of the themed issue 'Tackling emerging fungal threats to animal health, food security and ecosystem resilience'.

Keywords: chytridiomycosis; conservation strategy; mitigation.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Examples of lethal chytridiomycosis from Latin America (a) and Europe (b). (a) A Craugastor underwoodi dead and in situ killed by lethal chytridiomycosis in Monte Verde, Costa Rica. The isolate derived from this animal in 2008 has served as the source of DNA for real-time polymerase chain reaction (qPCR)–positive controls for two of the authors to this day. (b) An Alytes muletensis, again dead and in situ, found on Mallorca, Spain.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
The relative impact of culling and antifungal treatment in a simple, single-species population paramaterised using data on the Mallorcan midwife toad. Mitigation is undertaken at point m. See [23] for explanation of model structure and parameter estimation. (a) Culling of tadpoles, undertaken at point m, results in pathogen elimination. The yellow line is adult population size and the red line is free-swimming zoospore density. (b–c) Comparison between culling and tadpole antifungal treatment and release, assuming maintenance of infection in the adult population and keeping model parameters identical across models. Here, green lines are adult population size and blue lines are free-swimming zoospore density. In (b), mitigation is unsuccessful due to increased host density after treated tadpoles are returned to the pond. In (c), pathogen elimination is attributable to more persistent reduction in host density.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Fisher MC, Henk DA, Briggs CJ, Brownstein JS, Madoff LC, McCraw SL, Gurr SJ. 2012. Emerging fungal threats to animal, plant and ecosystem health. Nature 484, 186–194. (10.1038/nature10947) - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Berger L, et al. 1998. Chytridiomycosis causes amphibian mortality associated with population declines in the rain forests of Australia and Central America. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 95, 9031–9036. (10.1073/pnas.95.15.9031) - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Martel A, et al. 2014. Recent introduction of a chytrid fungus endangers Western Palearctic salamanders. Science 346, 630–631. (10.1126/science.1258268) - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Woodhams DC, et al. 2011. Mitigating amphibian disease: strategies to maintain wild populations and control chytridiomycosis. Front. Zool. 8, 8 (10.1186/1742-9994-8-8) - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Scheele BC, Hunter DA, Skerratt LF, Brannelly LA, Driscoll DA. 2015. Low impact of chytridiomycosis on frog recruitment enables persistence in refuges despite high adult mortality. Biol. Conserv. 182, 36–43. (10.1016/j.biocon.2014.11.032) - DOI

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources