| Literature DB >> 23894506 |
Jeanne Tarrant1, Dirk Cilliers, Louis H du Preez, Ché Weldon.
Abstract
Chytridiomycosis has been identified as a major cause of global amphibian declines. Despite widespread evidence of Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis infection in South African frogs, sampling for this disease has not focused on threatened species, or whether this pathogen poses a disease risk to these species. This study assessed the occurrence of Bd-infection in South African Red List species. In addition, all known records of infection from South Africa were used to model the ecological niche of Bd to provide a better understanding of spatial patterns and associated disease risk. Presence and prevalence of Bd was determined through quantitative real-time PCR of 360 skin swab samples from 17 threatened species from 38 sites across the country. Average prevalence was 14.8% for threatened species, with pathogen load varying considerably between species. MaxEnt was used to model the predicted distribution of Bd based on 683 positive records for South Africa. The resultant probability threshold map indicated that Bd is largely restricted to the wet eastern and coastal regions of South Africa. A lack of observed adverse impacts on wild threatened populations supports the endemic pathogen hypothesis for southern Africa. However, all threatened species occur within the limits of the predicted distribution for Bd, exposing them to potential Bd-associated risk factors. Predicting pathogen distribution patterns and potential impact is increasingly important for prioritising research and guiding management decisions.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23894506 PMCID: PMC3718833 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0069591
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Locality data for Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis testing in threatened South African frog species, by province.
| Site Name | Province | Latitude | Longitude | Target species | Red List Category 2010 |
|
| Coffee Bay | EC | −31.93496 | 29.08826 |
| NT | 1 |
| Dwesa-Cwebe NR | EC | −32.25348 | 28.87046 |
| EN | 1 |
| Geelhoutboom River | EC | −33.79434 | 25.06377 |
| EN | 32 |
| Hogsback A | EC | −32.59892 | 26.94552 |
| EN | 3 |
| Hogsback B | EC | −32.54774 | 26.91443 |
| CR | 1 |
| Martins River | EC | −33.79326 | 25.03819 |
| EN | 2 |
| Adam's Mission | KZN | −29.99183 | 30.78328 |
| CR | 1 |
| Cato River | KZN |
| VU | 2 | ||
| Cedara | KZN | −29.55784 | 30.255406 |
| NT | 1 |
| Cowies Hill | KZN | −29.82436 | 30.59567 |
| EN | 1 |
| Mtunzini | KZN | −28.96782 | 31.75322 |
| CR | 4 |
| Fort Nottingham | KZN | −29.4449 | 29.90642 |
| NT | 9 |
| Hilton | KZN | −29.53916 | 30.28625 |
| NT | 2 |
| Isipingo | KZN | −29.99185 | 30.9056 |
| CR | 46 |
| Kamberg NR | KZN | −29.37361 | 29.725 |
| NT | 3 |
| Lake Merthley | KZN | −29.02242 | 30.58106 |
| EN | 10 |
| Mt. Moreland | KZN | −29.6382 | 31.09754 |
| CR | 28 |
| Port Durnford | KZN | −28.90521 | 31.85801 |
| CR | 6 |
| Prospecton | KZN | −29.98328 | 30.938 |
| CR | 14 |
| Rosetta | KZN | −29.30417 | 29.9625 |
| NT | 2 |
| Tala NR | KZN | −29.82954 | 30.53535 |
| NT | 2 |
| Umlalazi NR | KZN | −28.95805 | 31.76472 |
| CR | 1 |
| Vernon Crookes NR | KZN | −30.2786 | 30.59596 |
| EN | 17 |
| Widenham | KZN | −30.21718 | 30.795353 |
| CR | 1 |
| Haernertsburg | LP | −23.93619 | 29.93916 |
| EN | 2 |
| Hanglip | LP | −22.99959 | 29.88359 |
| EN | 1 |
| Soutspanberg | LP | −22.99599 | 29.88353 |
| EN | 2 |
| Woodbush | LP | −23.81111 | 29.96365 |
| EN | 16 |
| MacDougal's Bay | NC | −29.26172 | 16.87107 |
| VU | 4 |
| Bergvliet | WC | −34.04864 | 18.44789 |
| EN | 22 |
| Cape Agulhas | WC | −34.74106 | 19.67883 |
| EN | 25 |
| Cape Point | WC | −34.30603 | 18.44133 |
| EN | 25 |
| Disa Stream | WC | −33.98586 | 18.39072 |
| CR | 26 |
| Kennilworth | WC | −33.99637 | 18.48486 |
| CR | 20 |
| Kirstenhof | WC | −34.08555 | 18.4525 |
| EN | 7 |
| Noordhoek | WC |
| VU | 5 | ||
| Silvermine NR | WC | −34.10095 | 18.44809 |
| VU | 35 |
| Skeleton Gorge | WC | −33.98586 | 18.39072 |
| CR | 8 |
| University of Cape Town | WC | −33.95818 | 18.45746 |
| NT | 2 |
| Youngsfield Military Base | WC | −34.00419 | 18.49025 |
| EN | 2 |
|
|
|
|
|
EC = Eastern Cape; KZN = KwaZulu-Natal; LP = Limpopo Province; NC = Northern Cape; WC = Western Cape.
NR = Nature Reserve.
Environmental variables, and their percentage contribution, included in the final MaxEnt niche model for predicted distribution of Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis in South Africa.
| Key | Variable | Contribution to final model (%) |
| BIO2 | Mean Diurnal Range (Mean of monthly (max temp – min temp) | 5.3 |
| BIO9 | Mean Temperature of Driest Quarter (°C) | 6.4 |
| BIO10 | Mean Temperature of Warmest Quarter (°C) | 3.7 |
| BIO11 | Mean Temperature of Coldest Quarter (°C) | 11.8 |
| BIO15 | Precipitation Seasonality (Coefficient of Variation) | 5.2 |
| BIO16 | Precipitation of Wettest Quarter (mm) | 8.5 |
| BIO19 | Precipitation of Coldest Quarter (mm) | 9 |
| Topo | Topography | 19.6 |
| dist to water | Distance to water | 16.8 |
| Biomes | Biomes | 5.1 |
| Slope | Slope | 3 |
| Aspect | Aspect | 5.5 |
Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis infection data from threatened (Red List 2010) South African frog species.
| Species | Red List category |
|
| Mean zoospore equivalents |
|
| VU | 20 | 62.5 | 1375.6 |
|
| EN | 31 | 6.8 | 7.792 |
|
| EN | 3 | 0 |
|
|
| VU | 2 | 0 | – |
|
| VU | 4 | 0 | – |
|
| EN | 21 | 0 | – |
|
| VU | 35 | 0 | – |
|
| EN | 34 | 79.4 | 49.78 |
|
| CR | 34 | 50 | 18.97 |
|
| VU | 2 | 0 | – |
|
| VU | 5 | 0 | – |
|
| CR | 101 | 7 | 2.92 |
|
| EN | 10 | 15.4 | 61.12 |
|
| CR | 20 | 22.7 | 6.81 |
|
| EN | 19 | 0 | – |
|
| CR | 1 | 0 | – |
|
| EN | 50 | 2.4 | 0.16 |
|
|
|
|
|
Figure 1Map showing Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis swab sample sites for threatened species in South Africa.
Pie-charts represent prevalence (black = positive samples, white = negative); size gives an indication of sample size.
Known Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis occurrence points in South Africa used for predictive distribution modelling (Bd+ = infected).
| Province | Tested individuals | Number of species (of which threatened) |
| Geo-referenced |
| EC | 81 | 15 (5) | 45 | 9 |
| FS | 133 | 7 (0) | 26 | 14 |
| GP | 10 | 1 (0) | 0 | 0 |
| KZN | 348 | 20 (5) | 79 | 48 |
| LP | 219 | 8 (1) | 12 | 7 |
| MP | 89 | 6 (0) | 5 | 12 |
| NC | 137 | 10 (1) | 108 | 3 |
| NW | 225 | 8 (0) | 155 | 0 |
| WC | 616 | 15 (7) | 200 | 28 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
each species was counted in every province that it occurred.
EC = Eastern Cape; FS = Free State; GP = Gauteng Province; KZN = KwaZulu-Natal; LP = Limpopo Province; MP = Mpumalanga Province; NC = Northern Cape; NW = North West Province; WC = Western Cape.
Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis (Bd) occurrence records (1938–2012) from frog genera in South Africa used in the MaxEnt model.
| Genus | N | Prevalence (%) | Geo-referenced |
|
| 466 | 38.8 | 39 |
|
| 41 | 53.7 | 27 |
|
| 109 | 11.0 | 62 |
|
| 4 | 0 | 2 |
|
| 4 | 0 | 0 |
|
| 32 | 0 | 32 |
|
| 79 | 29.1 | 9 |
|
| 32 | 0 | 32 |
|
| 5 | 20 | 5 |
|
| 6 | 50 | 8 |
|
| 85 | 63.5 | 70 |
|
| 7 | 42.8 | 3 |
|
| 148 | 16.2 | 65 |
|
| 31 | 19.4 | 4 |
|
| 44 | 22.7 | 13 |
|
| 22 | 22.7 | 22 |
|
| 13 | 0 | 13 |
|
| 24 | 37.5 | 5 |
|
| 14 | 28.6 | 4 |
|
| 23 | 60.9 | 9 |
|
| 4 | 0 | 0 |
|
| 73 | 49.3 | 35 |
|
| 46 | 28.3 | 10 |
|
| 2 | 50 | 2 |
|
| 263 | 9.9 | 212 |
|
|
|
|
|
Geo-referenced localities (GPS co-ordinates) include duplicates (multiple records from same locality).
Figure 2Probability threshold map for predicted occurrence of Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis in South Africa.
Grey indicates areas of medium to high probability of occurrence at a 10% threshold.