E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Dante Fenolio
A captive bred Darwin's frog is held by a researcher shortly after it was coughed up from its dad's vocal sac. Ten baby frogs were coughed up at a breeding facility in Chile on Thursday.
A captive male Darwin's frog coughed up ten babies Thursday at a zoo in Santiago, Chile, a milestone in a project to save the amphibians from extinction.
The vulnerable species is one of two members of the only genus on Earth that rears its young inside of its vocal sac, a job taken on by the males.
"They have a small opening below their tongue. … After [the eggs] hatch, he takes the tadpoles into his mouth and manipulates them through that opening and into his vocal sac," Danté Fenolio, a conservation scientist with the Atlanta Botanical Garden, explained to me today.
"For about 60 days, they go all the way through to development inside his vocal sac. At that point when they are ready, fully developed, he coughs up fully formed miniatures of the adult."
Fenolio is working on a captive breeding project with the National Zoo and Universidad Catolica in Santiago to build a so-called assurance population of the frogs that can be released into the wild once, or if, environmental threats to their natural habitat are thwarted.
The babies coughed up Thursday are the second batch produced by the frogs, a sign that the project is meeting success.
Froggy threats
The frogs are native to the southern temperate forests of Chile and Argentina, which have been isolated from the rest of the world since the dinosaur age due to a surrounding geography of mountains, desert and ocean.
This region receives enough rainfall to classify as a rainforest, which makes it ideal for amphibians. But it's also ideal for vineyards and plantations of radiata pine, a fast-growing tree highly valued for the country's lumber and pulp and paper industries.
"Those two things have driven a lot of these southern Chilean amphibians close to extinction," Fenolio said.
In addition, the chyrtrid fungus, which has devastated amphibian populations around the world, recently arrived to southern Chile and could easily wipe out populations there as it has elsewhere.
Yet another threat to some species of frogs in the region are invasive trout introduced to rivers and streams to support Chile's rising status as a world-class fly fishing destination. The trout eat tadpoles, though not those of the Darwin's frogs since they are safely inside dad's vocal sac.
Dante Fenolio
A captive breeding facility to raise assurance colonies of frogs at a lab in Santiago, Chile. Researchers are currently raising Darwin's frogs. They hope to secure funding to raise more of the country's endangered amphibian species.
Assurance colonies
"It is a very complicated conservation landscape," said Fenolio, who hopes to secure funding to establish captive breeding populations for Chile's other endangered amphibians and build up assurance colonies.
"An assurance colony doesn't fix the problem in the wild. What you are trying to do is buy yourself some time," he explained.
While addressing some of the threats could be a decades-long process with tough battles against well-established industries, others are relatively simple and straightforward, albeit costly.
For example, populations of some amphibians such as the false mountain toad could be protected by eliminating invasive trout from a stream and putting in fish exclusion devices downstream from them.
"That's been done in before in various areas around the world and it would be a relatively simple effort," Fenolio said.
One more threat, though, looms on the horizon. The Chilean government recently approved the construction of a series of hydroelectric dams in the amphibian zone. The dams will bring inexpensive electricity, but they come at a cost.
"Whenever you put a dam in, the habitat behind it is flooded and destroyed," Fenolio noted. "These construction projects will impact the amphibian populations of southern Chile negatively, there's no question."
More stories about frogs:
- Fungus hitting frogs hard
- Scant froggy finds spark worries
- Froggy finds raise hope for Haiti
- Social networking to save frogs
John Roach is a contributing writer for msnbc.com. Connect with the Cosmic Log community by hitting the "like" button on the Cosmic Log Facebook page or following msnbc.com's science editor, Alan Boyle, on Twitter (@b0yle).
Leave a Comment:
Our own worst enemy.
I would WAY rather have my 2 kids live in a world where they know such a creature exists (even if they never get to actually see it) than ever meet anyone's 3rd, 4th, or 5th kid.
I really hope we get our population in check for the sake of every other struggling Earthling.
What do my seven children have to do with this? Go ahead and believe the propaganda about over popluation if you want. Go ahead and limit the number of children you have, that just makes it easier for me and my children to be the future majority.
And for the record, I love animals and I am constantly in awe of how wonderfully God CREATED them all. I respect them and will do what I can to help them when I can, but I worship the CREATOR not the creation.
Also for the record. I think there are ignorant people out there willing to do anyting to make money, such as the fools that introduced the trout to boost the fly fishing industry. But this has to do with money and popluarity, not popluation.
Overpopulation propaganda? The one thing this earth needs is less people. Seven kids in this day and age is a slap in the face to the rest of the world. I certainly hope your paying for them...and not the rest of us.
Bummer, she's clearly building an army... a "future majority".
It's terrifying that the ones who would best benefit this planet by reproducing (the ones who value true knowledge and think for themselves) are the ones that know the importance of limiting how many more people they create.
I'd be speechless, or would make onle tiny peeps, needeep, needeep.
??????!!?!
Thousands of species die off every day -- it happens. Remember the infamous Snail Darter fiasco of the mid- and - late '70s? Turned out the Little Tenessee River wasn't the sole habitat of that creature, but that didn't matter -- the Tellico Dam was dismantled anyway, for what? Please -- we can't save them all, regardless of what the libs and the environmental whackos believe. That frog probably would make good fishing bait.
The lack of respect for GODs creatures is amazing, and the childish comments like the one above, are the reason for so many of the problems today. Its amazing, to see all the different creations GOD has made... its too bad we are so quick to destroy so many. Im a realist, and am aware that some things may have to be destroyed for the support of human life, but there are also far more that could be spared while still giving mankind what they need. Its called conservation, creative thinking, and co-existing. Being lazy and cheap, these 2 things are major reasons for so many destructive actions... that and the short sightedness of not looking down the road, of just instant gratification... TODAYS "FISHING BAIT" MAY BE TOMORROWS CURE FOR CANCER, OR AIDS.... shouldnt we want to keep those options open....to maybe save milloins of lives.... maybe even yours 24PAWS.... maybe even yours!
my wife would have prefered it that way instead of the c- section!
my wife would have liked that cmon chris cough harder!
So that's where the phrase "frog in your throat" came from.
A common and important question regarding amphibian declines has been posited here, “Why care about amphibian declines?” I could fill pages with valid reasons but let me provide one of pragmatism. What have HIV, cancer, neurological diseases, psychoses, epileptic seizures, chronic pain, and antibiotic resistant bacteria in common? Amphibian skin secretions. Hospitals and convalescent facilities are plagued with these bacterial strains and humanity is down to a single antibiotic that is mostly effective against antibiotic resistant strains of Staphylococcus, “staph infection.” Amphibian skin secretions may soon come into play to provide new and novel killers of these deadly bacteria. Likewise, cancers, HIV, chronic pain, etc. may be treated/prevented with chemicals discovered in amphibian skin secretions. Contemporary medical biochemists and research scientists are just beginning to crack open the store house of biochemically active compounds in amphibian skin secretions. Many hold the promise of treating human diseases; some chemicals are in the testing/trial phase. We don’t know anything of the skin secretions in the vast majority of the world’s 6000+ amphibian species. No doubt that with so many species, there are thousands of unique compounds awaiting discovery. Are you willing to bet that any one particular species “not worth saving” isn’t the one with a skin secretion that could ultimately cure a human disease, treat a family member, or save your life?
But don’t take my word for it:
Mangoni, M.L., G. Maisetta, M.D. Luca, L.M.H. Gaddi, S. Esin, W. Florio, F.L. Brancatisano, D. Barra, M. Campa, G. Batoni. 2008. Comparative analysis of the bactericidal activities of amphibian peptide analogues against multi-drug-resistant nosocomial bacterial strains. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy 52(1): 85–91.
Papo N. & Y. Shai. 2005. Host defense peptides as new weapons in cancer treatment. Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences 62(7–8): 784–790.
Lu, Y., Li, J.,Yu, H., Xu, X., Liang, J., Tian, Y., Ma, D., Lin, G., Huang G., and Lai, R. 2006. Two families of antimicrobial peptides with multiple functions from skin of rufous-spotted torrent frog, Amolops loloensis. Peptides 27(12): 3085-3091.
Szabo J, E. Belicza, I. Redal, F. Rozgonyi. 1991. Distribution and antibiotic resistance of aerobic bacteria isolated from infected wounds caused by burns. Orvosi hetilap 132(13):687–690.
Wong H, J.H. Bowie, & J.A. Carver. 1997. The solution structure and activity of caerin 1.1, an antimicrobial peptide from the Australian green tree frog, Litoria splendida. European Journal of Biochemistry 247(2): 545–557.
Doyle, J., C.S. Brinkworth, K.L. Wegener, J.A. Carver, L.E. Llewellyn, I.N. Olver, J.H. Bowie, P.A. Wabnitz, & M.J. Tyler. 2003. nNOS inhibition, antimicrobial and anticancer activity of the amphibian skin peptide, citropin 1.1 and synthetic modifications. Euopean. Journal of Biochemistry 270, 1141–1153.
Prates, M.V., M.L. Sforça, W.C.B. Regis, J.R.S.A. Leite, L.P. Silva, T.A. Pertinhez, A.L.T. Araújo, R.B. Azevedo, A. Spisni, & C. Bloch Jr. 2003. The NMR-derived solution structure of a new cationic antimicrobial peptide from the skin secretion of the anuran Hyla punctata*. The Journal of Biological Chemistry 279(13): 13018–13026.
VanCompernolle, S.E., R.J. Taylor, K. Oswald-Richter, J. Jiang, B.E. Youree, J.H. Bowie, M.J. Tyler, J.M. Conlon, D. Wade, C. Aiken, T.S. Dermody, V.N. KewalRamani, L.A. Rollins-Smith, and D. Unutmaz. 2005. Antimicrobial Peptides from Amphibian Skin Potently Inhibit Human Immunodeficiency Virus Infection and Transfer of Virus from Dendritic Cells to T Cells. Journal of Virology 79(18): 11598–11606.
Bannon, A.W., M.W. Decker, M.W. Holladay, P. Curzon, D. Donnelly-Roberts, R.D. Porsolt, M. Williams, and S.P. Arneric. 1998. Broad-Spectrum, Non-Opioid Analgesic Activity by Selective Modulation of Neuronal Nicotinic Acetylcholine Receptors. Science 279(5347): 77–80.
Bepler, G., D.N. Carney, A.F. Gazdar, & J.D. Minna. 1987. In vitro growth inhibition of human small cell lung cancer by physalaemin. Cancer Research 47(9): 2371–2375.
Daly, J.W., J. Caceres, R.W. Moni, F. Gusovsky, M. Moos Jr., K.B. Seamon, K. Milton and C.W. Myers. 1992. Frog Secretions and Hunting Magic in the Upper Amazon: Identification of a Peptide that Interacts with an Adenosine Receptor. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 89: 10960–10963.
Lazarus, L.H., S.D. Bryant, A. Martti, and S. Severo. 1994. Frog Skin Opioid Peptides: A Case for Environmental Mimicry. Environmental Health Perspectives 102(8): 648–654.
Erspamer V, P. Melchiorri, E.G. Falconieri, P.C. Montecucchi, and R. de Castiglione. 1985. Phyllomedusa skin: a huge factory and store-house of a variety of active peptides. Peptides (sup. #3): 7–14.
Jason D., C.S. Brinkworth, K.L. Wegener, J.A. Carver, L.E. Llewellyn, I.N. Olver, J.H. Bowie, P.A. Wabnitz, and M.J. Tyler. nNOS inhibition, antimicrobial and anticancer activity of the amphibian skin peptide, citropin 1.1 and synthetic modifications. European Journal of Biochemistry 270: 1141–1153.
Conlon JM, Sonnevend A, Patel M, Vijayasarathy C, Nowotny N, Zilahi E, et al. 2003. A melittin-related peptide from the skin of the Japanese frog, Rana tagoi, with antimicrobial and cytolytic properties. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 306:496–500.
Conlon JM. The therapeutic potential of antimicrobial peptides from frog skin. 2004. Rev. Med. Micro. 15:17–25.
Conlon JM, Kolodziejek J, Nowotny N. 2004. Antimicrobial peptides from ranid frogs: taxonomic and phylogenetic markers and a potential source of new therapeutic agents.Biochim. Biophys. Acta. 1696:1–14.
Conlon JM, Sonnevend A, Davidson A, Demandt A, Jouenne 2005. T. Host-defense peptides isolated from the skin secretions of the Northern red-legged frog Rana aurora aurora. Dev. Comp. Immunol. 29:83–90.
Zhou J., McClean S., Thompson A., Zhang Y., Shaw C., Rao P., Bjourson A.J. 2006.
Purification and characterization of novel antimicrobial peptides from the skin secretion of Hylarana guentheri. Peptides 27(12): 3077-3084.
@ Dante Fenolio post #10 -- Thank you so much for that truly insightful post. I had read somewhere that alligators are immune to HIV and I didn't know if it was true or not. This is all super interesting. Thanks again
Thank you for going into more detail about what I was saying earlier... People dont realize how useful EVERY CREATURE is, and all the secrets they have the answers to... and when they are gone...they are gone. EXCELLENT POST... THANK YOU!!!
Aaack....Aaack....Aaack, whew I feel better
Humans are the worst thing that ever happened to the planet. Why can't we co-exist with other species?
why does everything need to be useful to us?
what, just because WE can't use the frog, it suddenly doesn't deserve to live, but if we can breed it for our medicine, our homes or our food, then suddenly its important?
we need to stop being selfish and learn to coexist with animals. yes, extinction is a natural process, sometimes species just die out, its survival of the fittest and actually creates stronger animals which is better in the long run. but what we're doing is sick and wrong, we are taking creatures and harnessing them for our own selfish needs. when this was done to people thousands of years ago, IT WAS CALLED SLAVERY.
You are correct, but the fact that some species can provide us with something useful to our own survival is a reason for those who don't otherwise care to be invested in their survival. You won't get very far with a lot of people based solely on the animal rights argument.
I am a conservationist by my definition, but still pose the question "frogs or us"? I choose us.
You do realize that question doesn't exist, right? We'll survive whether or not we act to preserve the frog's species. What is it that specifically makes you a conservationist "by definition"?