Literature DB >> 19845728

An examination of amphibian sensitivity to environmental contaminants: are amphibians poor canaries?

Jacob L Kerby1, Kathryn L Richards-Hrdlicka, Andrew Storfer, David K Skelly.   

Abstract

Nearly two decades ago, the global biodiversity crisis was catapulted to the front pages of newspapers with the recognition of worldwide amphibian declines. Amphibians earned their appellation, 'canaries in a coal mine', because of apparent high sensitivity to human-mediated environmental change. The most frequently cited causes for high susceptibility include permeable skin, a dual aquatic-terrestrial life cycle and a relatively rudimentary immune system. While some researchers have questioned the basis for the canary assertion, there has been no systematic evaluation of amphibian sensitivity to environmental challenges relative to other taxa. Here, we apply a database representing thousands of toxicity tests to compare the responses of amphibians relative to that of other taxonomic groups. The use of standardized methods combined with large numbers of identical challenges enables a particularly powerful test of relative effect size. Overall, we found that amphibians only exhibit moderate relative responses to water-borne toxins. Our findings imply that, as far as chemical contaminants are concerned, amphibians are not particularly sensitive and might more aptly be described as 'miners in a coal mine'. To the extent that amphibian declines have been mediated by chemical contaminants, our findings suggest that population losses and extinctions may have already occurred in a variety of taxa much more sensitive than amphibians.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19845728     DOI: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2009.01399.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ecol Lett        ISSN: 1461-023X            Impact factor:   9.492


  26 in total

Review 1.  Natural history collections as windows on evolutionary processes.

Authors:  Michael W Holmes; Talisin T Hammond; Guinevere O U Wogan; Rachel E Walsh; Katie LaBarbera; Elizabeth A Wommack; Felipe M Martins; Jeremy C Crawford; Katya L Mack; Luke M Bloch; Michael W Nachman
Journal:  Mol Ecol       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 6.185

2.  Differential sensitivity to the antifouling chemical medetomidine between wood frog and American toad tadpoles with evidence for low-dose stimulation and high-dose inhibition of metamorphosis.

Authors:  Peter P Fong; Olivia J Lambert; Margot L Hoagland; Emily R Kurtz
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2018-05-05       Impact factor: 4.223

3.  The cause of global amphibian declines: a developmental endocrinologist's perspective.

Authors:  T B Hayes; P Falso; S Gallipeau; M Stice
Journal:  J Exp Biol       Date:  2010-03-15       Impact factor: 3.312

Review 4.  The relative impact of toxic heavy metals (THMs) (arsenic (As), cadmium (Cd), chromium (Cr)(VI), mercury (Hg), and lead (Pb)) on the total environment: an overview.

Authors:  Zeeshanur Rahman; Ved Pal Singh
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2019-06-08       Impact factor: 2.513

5.  Do frogs really eat cardamom? Understanding the myth of crop damage by amphibians in the Western Ghats, India.

Authors:  Arun Kanagavel; Sethu Parvathy; Nithula Nirmal; Nithin Divakar; Rajeev Raghavan
Journal:  Ambio       Date:  2017-02-23       Impact factor: 5.129

Review 6.  Macroparasite infections of amphibians: what can they tell us?

Authors:  Janet Koprivnikar; David J Marcogliese; Jason R Rohr; Sarah A Orlofske; Thomas R Raffel; Pieter T J Johnson
Journal:  Ecohealth       Date:  2012-07-19       Impact factor: 3.184

7.  Effects of 3-Nitro-1,2,4-triazol-5-one on Survival, Growth and Metamorphosis in the Northern Leopard Frog, Lithobates pipiens.

Authors:  David A Pillard; William S Eck; Mark S Johnson; Stephanie Packard
Journal:  Ecotoxicology       Date:  2017-08-11       Impact factor: 2.823

8.  Validity of fish, birds and mammals as surrogates for amphibians and reptiles in pesticide toxicity assessment.

Authors:  Manuel E Ortiz-Santaliestra; Joao P Maia; Andrés Egea-Serrano; Isabel Lopes
Journal:  Ecotoxicology       Date:  2018-02-28       Impact factor: 2.823

9.  Toxicity of the aquatic herbicide, reward®, to the northwestern salamander.

Authors:  Michael L Moreton; Vicki L Marlatt
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2019-08-27       Impact factor: 4.223

10.  Intraspecific variation overrides origin effects in impacts of litter-derived secondary compounds on larval amphibians.

Authors:  Laura J Martin; Bernd Blossey
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2013-03-03       Impact factor: 3.225

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.