U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Nature
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-06-2019, 02:21 PM
 
Location: on the wind
6,188 posts, read 2,467,481 times
Reputation: 21078

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by guidoLaMoto View Post
Parnassia-- do you still have enough frogs that seem to have better resistance so you can exercise some animal husbandry/ selective breeding to increase that population? I wonder if GMO tech can be applied here?
Sorry I didn't reply sooner...just got home from a nice little road/Alaska Railroad trip to visit friends and catch the aurora before summer hides them!

I donated my frog colony to an aquarium years ago. These frogs have literally never been bred in captivity (I mean F1 captive-produced adults producing viable F2 young). There aren't any F1 frogs to even attempt it. Even successful spawning while in captivity came from imported adults still in "wild" condition, fresh off a plane from Malaysia. At that time there were only 2-3 instances when wildcaught adult frogs that had been kept in captivity longer than one breeding cycle could even be induced to spawn successfully subsequently.

There are fewer sustainable captive breeding populations of amphibians than most people realize with a few exceptions. There are now a few chytrid-related recovery programs, but many of the frogs in those populations were collected before they could have been exposed to chytrid. No way to know whether they would demonstrate any resistance. Most captive populations still depend on some augmentation from wildcaught individuals, even the other more commonly captive bred hobby or commercial species (darts, axolotls, pacmans, meat bullfrogs). Now that chytrid is pandemic, imported adults either get infected during capture and holding, or pick it up from other infected frogs at importer or pet dealer facilities. Those folks are not exactly testing, doing much quarantine, or even attempting to provide uncontaminated water. By the time someone could even get adults they are already compromised. Chytrid decimates tadpoles even more than it does adults and symptoms of infection are almost undetectable until it was too late to intervene. They simply died before they could be treated and no protocols for treating water existed at the time...I don't know if they even exist now.

Last edited by Parnassia; 04-06-2019 at 03:26 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-06-2019, 02:29 PM
 
Location: on the wind
6,188 posts, read 2,467,481 times
Reputation: 21078
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drungus View Post
Honestly, this is nature correcting itself. It always has and it always will.

I have lived in the upper-Midwest my whole life. We go through cycles where the deer population is overwhelming. They're everywhere. Then, inevitably, there will be a disease come through and kill off about 90% of them. But it never kills off all of them. And the ones that survive begin to repopulate.

The same thing is going to be true with the frogs.
The difference here is that the original "infection" was not naturally introduced to the species most decimated by it. Human carelessness and neglect created the multi-continental pandemic. If left to "nature" most of the species now being lost would never have been exposed to chytrid in the first place. Yes, there are signs that some species and some individuals survive infection. The problem is the speed at which resistance needs to happen. Most species simply don't get that time even if they have an inherent ability to adapt. Personally I don't get any warm fuzzy feelings from the knowledge that human irresponsibility doomed millions of beneficial organisms over the brief span of 20 years or so.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-12-2019, 12:24 PM
 
25,434 posts, read 18,560,432 times
Reputation: 13627
here's the paper.

https://science.sciencemag.org/content/363/6434/1459

it looks like north America has gotten off relatively easy comparted to some other places.

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-12-2019, 10:31 PM
 
Location: on the wind
6,188 posts, read 2,467,481 times
Reputation: 21078
Quote:
Originally Posted by uggabugga View Post
here's the paper.

https://science.sciencemag.org/content/363/6434/1459

it looks like north America has gotten off relatively easy comparted to some other places.
I'd have to look at their data and statistical analysis, but part of these results may reflect the number of species native to those regions...N America is relatively sparse in terms of amphibian diversity; fewer species but many generalists that range over large areas. Lots of sub-populations protected because they are isolated by harsher dry habitats without linking water systems...the fungus can't spread as easily. As for Europe, low impacts could be partly due to low diversity too...few remaining unaltered habitats that lost their native species long before chytrid ever arrived. Diversity hotspots (meso and south America, etc) may have lots of species but the population sizes of each may be fairly small...they can be wiped out quicker. There may be a lot less focus on monitoring in Africa for socio-political reasons.

Last edited by Parnassia; 04-12-2019 at 10:47 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 01:10 PM
 
25,434 posts, read 18,560,432 times
Reputation: 13627
Quote:
Originally Posted by Parnassia View Post
I'd have to look at their data and statistical analysis, but part of these results may reflect the number of species native to those regions...N America is relatively sparse in terms of amphibian diversity; fewer species but many generalists that range over large areas. Lots of sub-populations protected because they are isolated by harsher dry habitats without linking water systems...the fungus can't spread as easily. As for Europe, low impacts could be partly due to low diversity too...few remaining unaltered habitats that lost their native species long before chytrid ever arrived. Diversity hotspots (meso and south America, etc) may have lots of species but the population sizes of each may be fairly small...they can be wiped out quicker. There may be a lot less focus on monitoring in Africa for socio-political reasons.
those are good points. north America just doesn't have the diversity or numbers of frogs to be impacted compared to central and south America.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Nature
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. | Please obey Forum Rules | Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top