↓ Skip to main content

Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis and the Decline and Survival of the Relict Leopard Frog

Overview of attention for article published in EcoHealth, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
39 Mendeley
Title
Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis and the Decline and Survival of the Relict Leopard Frog
Published in
EcoHealth, April 2017
DOI 10.1007/s10393-017-1240-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jef R. Jaeger, Anthony W. Waddle, Rebeca Rivera, D. Tyler Harrison, Silas Ellison, Matthew J. Forrest, Vance T. Vredenburg, Frank van Breukelen

Abstract

Epizootic disease caused by the fungal pathogen Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis (Bd) is a major driver of amphibian declines, yet many amphibians declined before the pathogen was described. The Relict Leopard Frog, Rana onca (=Lithobates onca), was nearly extinct, with the exception of populations within a few geothermal springs. Growth of Bd, however, is limited by high water temperature, and geothermal springs may have provided refuge during outbreaks of chytridiomycosis. We conducted field surveys and laboratory experiments to assess the susceptibility of R. onca to Bd. In the field, we found Bd at one of the two areas where remnant populations of R. onca still occur, but not in the other. In the laboratory, we infected juvenile frogs from these two areas with two hypervirulent Bd isolates associated with declines in other ranid species. In our experiments, these Bd isolates did not affect survivorship of R. onca and most infections (64%) were cleared by the end of the experiments. We propose that R. onca either has inherent resistance to Bd or has recently evolved such resistance. These results may be important for conservation efforts aimed at establishing new populations of R. onca across a landscape where Bd exists. Resistance, however, varies among life stages, and we also did not assess Bd from the local environment. We caution that the resistance we observed for young frogs under laboratory conditions may not translate to the situation for R. onca in the wild.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 39 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 28%
Student > Bachelor 6 15%
Researcher 6 15%
Other 4 10%
Student > Master 3 8%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 6 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 18 46%
Environmental Science 6 15%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 3 8%
Social Sciences 2 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 5%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 7 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 June 2017.
All research outputs
#17,337,983
of 25,443,857 outputs
Outputs from EcoHealth
#600
of 754 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#205,789
of 323,566 outputs
Outputs of similar age from EcoHealth
#7
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,443,857 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 754 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.5. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 323,566 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.