Lessons from extinctions

Frog extinctions from the chytrid fungus are particularly troublesome because there is literally nothing that be done to stop them. Helplessness is a bad feeling, particularly for a scientist. Generally, a scientist thinks that we can control much of our world through knowledge. Species out of the wild can be propagated. If there is no way for them to survive in the wild, then they are doomed to be caged creatures. Somehow, animals in zoos do not seem the same to me.

I have mixed feelings about captive animals. A recent visit I made to an aquarium with extensive coral reef fish exhibits illustrates the paradox. I was thinking how much more I enjoyed seeing fish in the wild by scuba diving or snorkeling. Then it occurred to me that the resources used for me to travel to a coral reef were tremendous, and that the environmental damage would be immense if each of the visitors to the aquarium traveled to see all these fishes in their native habitat. The educational value of having these fish available for public viewing is high. Still, an animal or plant that only exists in zoos or botanical gardens seems more like a collector’s item than anything relevant to the natural world. For many of the frog species that are threatened by the chytrid disease, life in captivity is the only way the species will avoid complete extinction.

The El Valle Amphibian Rescue Center is attempting to save 1000 animals from 40 species. They are concentrating on 15 priority species now, and building capacity to save more. The center started in the same hotel (Campsetre) where we stayed. Heidi and Edguardo felt they had to do something, and rented rooms to set up aquaria in them. They collected frogs from areas where the disease had not invaded. They experimented with ways to kept the caged frogs from getting the disease, including washing with Clorox solutions, and heavy use of disinfectants of any materials that entered the area from outsize.

Since then, the El Nispero Zoo at El Valle de Antón and a number of US zoos (notably the Houston zoo and the Atlanta zoo) and conservation agencies have supported building a center to house the animals. The Houston Zoo manages contributions to frog conservation efforts.

In captivity, each frog must be kept quarantined from any materials that might bring the disease into their cages and as far as is known can never be released into the wild. To make the job even more difficult, it is not possible to maintain just a few frogs of each species because a minimum amount of genetic diversity is necessary to save a species. So, many individuals of each species must be housed. Furthermore, little is known about the mating and food requirements for many of the species, so research into these details is required.

Edgardo and Heidi were the first local collaborators (they became closer collaborators when they got married) on the conservation project, and now several zoos have pitched in to consult and provide financial support. Many hours of work a day at the Rescue Center are required to keep the frogs healthy including collecting the insects that each species needs to survive. Before the Rescue Center gained the ability to culture them in the lab, these insects had to be collected from the wild.

The golden frogs like termites, and many of the other frogs like cicadas, crickets, or other insects. The very small frogs need fruit flies or other tiny insects. A huge amount of work goes into cleaning cages, treating sick frogs, quarantining frogs that have been collected, keeping track of where each frog came from and recording breeding activity. This last is important to avoid inbreeding on one hand and to avoid breeding what might be distinct sub-species from different areas on the other.

Videos were coming out on the frog extinctions and the rescue center. I saw interviews of Edgardo, and pictures of the facilities and Heidi and Edgardo collecting insects to feed the frogs. Soon I would be able to visit and see for myself.

What are the lessons from the Panamanian frog extinctions? One is that diseases can wipe out species before people can find a cure. We are part of the natural world and are not exempt from the generalization. A disease could arise that kills much or all of humanity. With rapid air travel, pandemic’s are more likely. With more contact with wild animals, the probability increases that an animal disease will jump to humans. When people live in close contact with livestock (particularly pigs and waterfowl) development of diseases is particularly likely. It is not impossible that one of these diseases will be lethal enough to sweep through humanity causing mass mortality. If it can happen to frogs, it might happen to us.

Another lesson from the frog extinctions is that we need to preserve the species we can because we will lose many anyway from the unintended consequences of human activity. As already stated, humans are causing massive extinctions. If some of those can be avoided, the unintended extinctions we cause will have less of an overall impact on the planet’s diversity.

A third lesson is that we should not introduce species to other habitats (such as the African Clawed Frog) because there is always the potential for unintended harm. Species introductions have caused damage to numerous species and are in important factor in endangerment of many species. The chitryd and the frogs may be the most extreme example of a single introduction leading to extinction of 10’s to 100’s of species, but the lesson is an important one. These lessons still seem to me to be small comfort in the face of the loss of hundreds of frog species from our planet.