Literature DB >> 18616746

Captive breeding, reintroduction, and the conservation of amphibians.

Richard A Griffiths1, Lissette Pavajeau.   

Abstract

The global amphibian crisis has resulted in renewed interest in captive breeding as a conservation tool for amphibians. Although captive breeding and reintroduction are controversial management actions, amphibians possess a number of attributes that make them potentially good models for such programs. We reviewed the extent and effectiveness of captive breeding and reintroduction programs for amphibians through an analysis of data from the Global Amphibian Assessment and other sources. Most captive breeding and reintroduction programs for amphibians have focused on threatened species from industrialized countries with relatively low amphibian diversity. Out of 110 species in such programs, 52 were in programs with no plans for reintroduction that had conservation research or conservation education as their main purpose. A further 39 species were in programs that entailed captive breeding and reintroduction or combined captive breeding with relocations of wild animals. Nineteen species were in programs with relocations of wild animals only. Eighteen out of 58 reintroduced species have subsequently bred successfully in the wild, and 13 of these species have established self-sustaining populations. As with threatened amphibians generally, amphibians in captive breeding or reintroduction programs face multiple threats, with habitat loss being the most important. Nevertheless, only 18 out of 58 reintroduced species faced threats that are all potentially reversible. When selecting species for captive programs, dilemmas may emerge between choosing species that have a good chance of surviving after reintroduction because their threats are reversible and those that are doomed to extinction in the wild as a result of irreversible threats. Captive breeding and reintroduction programs for amphibians require long-term commitments to ensure success, and different management strategies may be needed for species earmarked for reintroduction and species used for conservation research and education.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18616746     DOI: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2008.00967.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Conserv Biol        ISSN: 0888-8892            Impact factor:   6.560


  27 in total

1.  Warmer temperature and provision of natural substrate enable earlier metamorphosis in the critically endangered Baw Baw frog.

Authors:  Deon J Gilbert; Michael J L Magrath; Phillip G Byrne
Journal:  Conserv Physiol       Date:  2020-06-17       Impact factor: 3.079

2.  Body condition, skin bacterial communities and disease status: insights from the first release trial of the limosa harlequin frog, Atelopus limosus.

Authors:  Angie Estrada; Daniel Medina; Brian Gratwicke; Roberto Ibáñez; Lisa K Belden
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2022-07-13       Impact factor: 5.530

3.  Hormonal induction of spawning in 4 species of frogs by coinjection with a gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist and a dopamine antagonist.

Authors:  Vance L Trudeau; Gustavo M Somoza; Guillermo S Natale; Bruce Pauli; Jacqui Wignall; Paula Jackman; Ken Doe; Fredrick W Schueler
Journal:  Reprod Biol Endocrinol       Date:  2010-04-16       Impact factor: 5.211

4.  Expanded host and geographic range of tadpole associations with the Severe Perkinsea Infection group.

Authors:  Vanessa Smilansky; Miloslav Jirků; David S Milner; Roberto Ibáñez; Brian Gratwicke; Andrew Nicholls; Julius Lukeš; Aurélie Chambouvet; Thomas A Richards
Journal:  Biol Lett       Date:  2021-06-16       Impact factor: 3.703

5.  Mitigating amphibian disease: strategies to maintain wild populations and control chytridiomycosis.

Authors:  Douglas C Woodhams; Jaime Bosch; Cheryl J Briggs; Scott Cashins; Leyla R Davis; Antje Lauer; Erin Muths; Robert Puschendorf; Benedikt R Schmidt; Brandon Sheafor; Jamie Voyles
Journal:  Front Zool       Date:  2011-04-18       Impact factor: 3.172

6.  Populations, pools, and peccaries: simulating the impact of ecosystem engineers on rainforest frogs.

Authors:  Max Ringler; Walter Hödl; Eva Ringler
Journal:  Behav Ecol       Date:  2015-01-29       Impact factor: 2.671

7.  Biological sex identification in the endangered dusky gopher frog (Lithobates sevosa): a comparison of body size measurements, secondary sex characteristics, ultrasound imaging, and urinary hormone analysis methods.

Authors:  Katherine M Graham; Andrew J Kouba; Cecilia J Langhorne; Ruth M Marcec; Scott T Willard
Journal:  Reprod Biol Endocrinol       Date:  2016-08-02       Impact factor: 5.211

8.  Reproductive success of captively bred and naturally spawned Chinook salmon colonizing newly accessible habitat.

Authors:  Joseph H Anderson; Paul L Faulds; William I Atlas; Thomas P Quinn
Journal:  Evol Appl       Date:  2012-06-11       Impact factor: 5.183

9.  Impact of plant cover on fitness and behavioural traits of captive red-eyed tree frogs (Agalychnis callidryas).

Authors:  Christopher J Michaels; Rachael E Antwis; Richard F Preziosi
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-04-16       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Dramatic Declines of Montane Frogs in a Central African Biodiversity Hotspot.

Authors:  Mareike Hirschfeld; David C Blackburn; Thomas M Doherty-Bone; LeGrand Nono Gonwouo; Sonia Ghose; Mark-Oliver Rödel
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-05-05       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.