The Chytrid buzzword

Hi all,

I had originally sat down to reply to the Congressional Hearing Banning Non-Native Species thread but ended up with something else that probably goes in a direction that needs a different thread.

I've been growing ever more bothered by the prevalence of chytrid in the media and consciousness of the herp community. It's presented these days as the main problem amphibians face today, and when talking with non-amphibian people who still love the environment and want to protect frogs it is what they are most familiar with and concerned with. Even looking at the Caudata.org Grant poll....did you see all of those chytrid projects and chytrid surveys? It's great that people want to save amphibians, but to me, the role of chytrid in all of this is a troubling development.

So here it is.

I don't think i'm getting the whole picture, if there's an amphibian epidemic killing everything it touches isn't this a step in the right direction?

Also, there are herp diseases that are ravaging our native animals. Best we can tell, one of the worst is a disease that has been spread throughout the world since the '50s by a species that has been imported into many different areas for medical reasons. The intentions were not just benign, they were good! But it is just now coming to light that these diseases have travelled with these imports, and as a result may cause the most widespread mass extinction since the Cretaceous period.

Click to expand...

Not neccessarily picking on moondog because I hear this stuff all around me all the time, he/she just happened to bring it up at a time when I feel motivated enough on a day off to type out a post:

1) The threats posed by chytridiomycosis globally do not even hold a candle to the threats posed globally by habitat loss/logging/agriculture, pollution, and climate change. It's really not even close. Spending millions or even billions on chytrid research/prevention is misdirection. Passing laws to stop chytrid spread (or even invasive species) while allowing shopping centers to be built, forests logged, rivers dammed, trout stocked, golf courses to be sprayed with atrazine, etc. is simply obscene in my opinion. It's misdirection, folks. Keep your eyes on the prize...the habitat.

2) No one really knows the whole story on how chytrid spreads, especially in the remote parts of the world where people aren't keeping frogs as pets; how it goes over the tops of amphibian-less mountain ranges or across deserts, etc. While an import of chytrid+ bullfrogs imported to Thailand and set loose, for instance, will in fact spread chytrid...does this mean that this is the only way? Is it even the biggest way? What about agriculture? Potted plants? Migratory waterfowl? Weather patterns? No one knows for sure. In the meantime, you'll see news footage of biologists bleaching their boots as if it really means much...what about the ducks that were just at that pond a few hours earlier but have flown 5 minutes away to another pond? Did they bleach?

3) Chytrid is already well established here in the USA (and perhaps it always was here). I believe it's been found in every state now. It's probably in every watershed. If you look for it, chances are, you'll find it. It's already here. It's eventually going to be everywhere else in the world, too. It sucks, but it happened. Legislating and killing the US amphibian trade over it now is useless.

4) There is no smoking gun evidence that Xenopus originally spread chytrid around the world. It's really only a hypothesis that the media, and unfortunately the Animal Planet/Discovery Channel/Natl. Geographic Channel "biologists", have siezed upon and run with as if there are no problems with it. But there's really nothing but circumstantial evidence, educated guesses, and personal conclusions to be made from it. Chytrid kills frogs in Xenopus' home range too. Does anyone know of a single wild Xenopus in California, the presumed cuplrit for chytrid introduction in California, having ever tested positive for chytrid? Do the Xenopus in those highly publicized ponds in Golden Gate Park test positive for chytrid? Bullfrogs fit the bill as a culprit just as nicely. Does anyone recall that the chytrid-resistant bullfrog was introduced to California a full century before? The earliest known detection of chytrid in California was from bullfrogs in 1961.

5) As amphibian enthusiasts, I urge everyone to look over all the threatened and endangered amphibians in your area, wherever that may be, and see where chytrid ranks as a threat to those particular species. Try looking at the threat assessment for a highly publicized chytridiomycosis-ravaged species like Rana muscosa, for instance. You might be surprised.


Now don't get me wrong, chytrid is a terrible thing. But please, more importantly, keep your eyes (and your pocketbook) on the habitat. And for god's sake, give Xenopus a break. It's lunacy to me that we are bombarded with these frogs on TV shows and on the internet in light of the other threats to global amphibians.

Sorry for the rant, but right or wrong, I needed to get that off my chest

Well said. Thank you.

I had to qualm tears in my daughter trying to explain BD, iridovirus, frog mutations, atrazine and a list of other amphibian related fears a while back. Your words clarify a truth often overlooked in our instant information society.

Well said, Nate.