A DECADE OF AMPHIBIAN CONSERVATION IN PANAMA 125
Int. Zoo Yb. (2008) 42: 125–135 DOI:10.1111/j.1748-1090.2008.00043.x
The principles of rapid response for amphibian conservation, using the programmes in Panama as an example R. GAGLIARDO1, P. CRUMP2, E. GRIFFITH3, J. MENDELSON3, H. ROSS4 & K. ZIPPEL5 1Atlanta Botanical Garden, Atlanta, Georgia 30309, USA, 2Houston Zoo, Houston, Texas 77030, USA, 3El Valle Amphibian Conservation Center, El Valle de Anton, Panama, 4Zoo Atlanta, Atlanta, Georgia 30315, USA, 5Amphibian Ark/CBSG, Apple Valley, Minnesota 55124, USA E-mail: [email protected]
As a direct response to many threats facing seriously Endangered amphibians: the Panamanian threatened amphibian species, including habitat loss, golden frog Atelopus zeteki (Plate 1) (Zippel, pollution and, more recently, emerging infectious dis- ease, ex situ captive-breeding programmes have proven 2002; IUCN, 2007). PGF became an interna- valuable tools in species preservation. Uniting scientific tional and multi-institutional initiative that research and conservation initiatives, here the growth of has included primary partners at Cı´rculo ex situ conservation for nearly a decade in central Panama Herpetolo´gico de Panama´, the Cleveland is discussed. Looking at three specific projects, it can be Zoo, the Columbus Zoo, the Denver Zoo, the demonstrated that collaborative efforts and multiple- response methods yield positive results in amphibian Detroit Zoo, Lee University, the Maryland conservation and species preservation. At the same time, Zoo in Baltimore, Messiah College, the the lessons learned will be examined in each of these Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute and projects to allow for future amphibian conservation the Universidad de Panama´. At the onset of programmes to consider. PGF, Bd was still well over 100 km to the Key-words: amphibians; chytridiomycosis; conserva- west of the range of the Panamanian golden tion; ex situ breeding; Panama; rapid response. frog but all indications were that it was progressing south-eastward and eliminating (among others) species of montane bufonids INTRODUCTION in its path (e.g. Atelopus sp from Monte Amphibian declines in Central America were Verde, Atelopus senex, Atelopus chiriquiensis, first noted in the 1980s with the loss of much Atelopus varius and the Golden toad Bufo of the amphibian community at Monte Verde, periglenes). Because traditional in situ con- Costa Rica (Pounds et al., 1997). At that time, servation measures, such as habitat protec- scientists did not know of amphibian chytrid tion, were ineffective against Bd, the decision fungus Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis (or was made to remove representative popula- Bd) and, therefore, it was not sought in the tions from the wild for ex situ management. declining populations. However, it has since In September 2004, Dr Karen Lips from been associated with subsequent mass mor- the University of Southern Illinois and her tality events occurring sequentially south-east research team discovered the first Bd-positive through the Central American isthmus (Fig. 1; sample, as well as small numbers of dead or see Lips et al., 2006). Project Golden Frog dying amphibians in and around the streams (PGF, http://www.projectgoldenfrog.org) was in El Cope´, Panama (Fig. 1). By December of officially formed in 1999 in proactive re- the same year, hundreds of dead amphibians sponse to what was perceived as the pending had been found and collected along the study extinction of one of the world’s most recog- transects. The suddenness and scale of the nizable, culturally significant and Critically event were disturbing, even though declines
Int. Zoo Yb. (2008) 42: 125–135. c 2008 The Authors. Journal compilation c 2008 The Zoological Society of London 126 AMPHIBIAN CONSERVATION
Fig. 1. Spatiotemporal spread of amphibian chytridiomycosis (caused by fungal pathogen Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis) in Costa Rica and Panama; figure modified and updated with new data presented herein from Fig. 1 in Lips et al., 2006.
tions recorded before the arrival of Bd (Lips et al., 2006). The conclusion was that c. 50% of amphibian species and c. 80% of indivi- duals may disappear in a short period of time. These data instigated the call for a meeting of concerned scientists in Atlanta, Georgia, USA. The simple question ‘What can we do?’ provided the group with the challenge to take action, which led to the formation of the Amphibian Recovery and Conservation Coa- lition (ARCC) project. Similar to circum- stances that initiated PGF, this group was faced with a challenge of attempting to ward Plate 1. Panamanian golden frog Atelopus zeteki. Ron off a major loss of biodiversity. What makes Gagliardo, Atlanta Botanical Garden. the ARCC project unique is the attempt to salvage multiple species during a ‘crash’ had been witnessed and studied in other using triage techniques under less than ideal locations in both Panama and Costa Rica for conditions. The drastic declines observed at over a decade (Lips et al., 2005). In December El Cope´ were predicted in El Valle, possibly 2004, there was a clear correlation between the last ‘upland’ area of reasonably undis- the sudden decline of an amphibian popula- turbed fauna and habitat of the Talamancan tion and the first arrival of Bd at long-term highlands region of eastern Costa Rica and study transects in central Panama (Lips et al., western Panama, instigating the ARCC pro- 2006). The transects within the Parque Na- ject, where individuals were exported be- cional General de Divisio´n Omar Torrijos cause of a lack of facilities; however, Herrera, near the town of El Cope´, were simultaneously, the feasibility of performing surveyed for over 4 years and declines were this work in Panama was investigated. documented in local populations of most The El Valle Amphibian Conservation amphibians that were far above the fluctua- Center (EVACC) was created to provide an
Int. Zoo Yb. (2008) 42: 125–135. c 2008 The Authors. Journal compilation c 2008 The Zoological Society of London A DECADE OF AMPHIBIAN CONSERVATION IN PANAMA 127 in-country ex situ facility in which assurance Church, in press). As a direct result of this colonies of seriously threatened, regional en- meeting, two things became immediately demics and other specifically selected species clear that would alter the course of EVACC. could be maintained long term until pertinent First, despite the original intention to do so, threats could be mitigated and the species animals that had been exported from Panama, could be reintroduced. Batrachochytrium housed in the United States in less-stringent dendrobatidis has travelled eastwards along quarantine, should not be returned to Panama the mountain range (Lips et al., 2006) and at to prevent any risk of inadvertently introdu- the time of project initiation was only 50 km cing any novel pathogens. Second, with the away. large number of species requiring ex situ The creation of the EVACC was a direct breeding action, it quickly became clear that response to the need identified by PGF to EVACC would have to do more than breed breed golden frogs in Panama and to the Panamanian golden frogs and display a few political and logistical challenges encoun- other frog species. With this new mandate, tered by ARCC who exported rescued am- the facilities’ ultimate goals were now solidi- phibians because of the lack of suitable in- fied. The primary objectives of EVACC are country facilities. Both these projects relied twofold. The first is to serve as a repository to heavily on the political and logistical frame- prevent the extinction of the threatened am- work put in place by PGF. Initially, three phibian species of El Valle and to use these goals were set. The first aimed to create and populations as a source for reintroductions at maintain an ex situ colony of Panamanian the appropriate time in the future. The second golden frogs in country. Many zoos, tourist is to foster appreciation and raise awareness destinations and hotels in central Panama use of the amphibian fauna of El Valle through these frogs to attract visitors. This ex situ conservation education and research. This colony could be used to supply captive-born paper summarizes the work of PGF and individuals for such displays, alleviating ARCC that led to the creation of the first in- pressure on wild populations. The second country facility in Panama for protection of goal was to house, display and breed amphi- significant amphibian biodiversity. bians rescued from El Cope´ and El Valle during the ARCC project. The third goal was METHODOLOGY AND to serve as an educational centre for the IMPLEMENTATION citizens of Panama, to learn about their native amphibian fauna. It must be noted that initi- Obtaining proper permitting licenses from the ally, the intention was that golden frogs Panamanian agency in charge of the protec- would be returned to Panama to stock tion of natural flora and fauna in country EVACC from PGF and other species from (Autoridad Nacional del Ambiente, ANAM) the ARCC, for project publicity purposes. and making important contacts, PGF initiated Thus, most of the animals destined to be their project focusing on research in streams housed and displayed at EVACC would be in central Panama. From 2001 to 2005, PGF returned from the United States. established seven transects in streams to Fifty ex situ specialists representing 14 gather data on stream quality, as well as countries and every amphibian-inhabited survey adult, metamorphosed froglets and continent held a meeting in El Valle in tadpole populations in A. zeteki, and egg February 2006 (Zippel et al., 2006) with a masses in streams. PGF used these data to goal to discuss the approach that the eclectic establish Evolutionarily Significant Units assortment of zoos, aquariums, botanical gar- (ESUs) of Panamanian golden frogs, reveal- dens, academic institutions and private indi- ing that the Panamanian golden frog actually viduals could adopt to address ex situ aspects spans two species: A. zeteki and A. varius of the Amphibian Conservation Action Plan (Zippel et al., 2007). The exportation of (ACAP: Gascon et al., 2007; Moore & animals then began in 2001. In May of 2005,
Int. Zoo Yb. (2008) 42: 125–135. c 2008 The Authors. Journal compilation c 2008 The Zoological Society of London 128 AMPHIBIAN CONSERVATION
PGF sent a team down to Panama to collect ing to detect Bd and prophylactically treated their last group of golden frogs, animals with Itraconazole according to the method of possibly infected at the advanced Bd front Nichols & Larimande (2000). Sampling for and treated in the field. Bd was performed daily during the 11 day ARCC began their project utilizing bureau- treatment regime. All PCR analyses were cratic, logistical and personal relationships performed by M. Poore and M. Levy at North put in place by its predecessor, PGF. With Carolina State University, USA. Panamanian biologists, ARCC first secured At El Valle, staff worked to collect up to 40 the support and directive from the Panama- individuals (20
Int. Zoo Yb. (2008) 42: 125–135. c 2008 The Authors. Journal compilation c 2008 The Zoological Society of London A DECADE OF AMPHIBIAN CONSERVATION IN PANAMA 129
SPECIES IUCN PGF ARCC EVACC for Bd by PCR. Until this point, construction of EVACC had been progressing slowly and Panamanian golden frog Atelopus zeteki CR X X housing amphibians at the facility was out of Harlequin frog the question. A temporary facility was again Atelopus varius CR X established at the Hotel Campestre in El Rana de Corona Valle. In May 2006, permits were granted Anotheca spinosa NT X X from ANAM and collection of select amphi- Ranita de Cristal bian species began. Upon entering the collec- Cochranella albomaculata LC X tion, each specimen was identified to the Ranita de Cristal species, sexed, weighed (in grams), snout– Cochranella granulosa LC X vent length was measured (using dial calipers Vicente’s poison frog in mm) and swabbed for subsequent Bd Dendrobates vicentei DD X X testing. Individuals were then immediately Gastrotheca cornuta LC X X entered into a prophylactic treatment course Ecnomiohyla fimbrimembra EN X X for chytrid fungus infection using the method Hyloscirtus palmeri LC X X based on Nichols & Larimande (2000). Each specimen was carefully cataloged to track Rana mususas feeding, defaecation history (for retrospective Eleutherodactylus museosus EN X X analysis of gut parasites and diet) and all Craugastor gollmeri LC X medical treatments. Once animals completed Eleutherodactylus pardalis VU X their treatment course, they were re-weighed, Craugastor bufoniformis LC X X examined, re-swabbed and usually trans- Craugastor punctariolus EN X X ferred to a clean room unless under special Hylomantis lemur DD X X medical circumstances. Individuals were fed Colostethus flotator LC X daily or every other day depending on the Colostethus pratti LC X species, and enclosures and substrates were Craugastor tabasarae CR X cleaned and disinfected with 10% sodium Hemiphractus fasciatus NT X hypochlorite (bleach) on the days between feedings. This allowed workers to monitor Hyloscirtus colymba EN X fresh faecal material and uneaten food items Table 1. Priority taxa for each of the Panama pro- as well as to maintain maximum hygiene jects. IUCN criteria: CR, Critically Endangered; EN, standards. Water used for the amphibians Endangered; VU, Vulnerable; NT, Near Threatened; was potable tap water run through a 0 Á 5 mm DD, Data Deficient; LC, Least Concern (IUCN, 2007). carbon block filter to remove any chlorine, PGF, Project Golden Frog; ARCC, Amphibian Re- pesticides or other harmful substances (after covery and Conservation Coalition; EVACC, El Valle Amphibian Conservation Center. the water was filtered, it was stored in a 95 litre bucket in the bathroom of each room). Strict quarantine protocols were also im- advisory group) and the selection criteria posed, namely dedicated, disinfected foot- developed at the February 2006 meeting wear was used for each person entering each (Zippel et al., 2006). Thus, EVACC identified room and equipment was not transferred the species in Table 1 from El Valle as between rooms. A pair of disposable, pow- requiring ex situ conservation tactics. It was der-free, vinyl gloves was used for every also decided that if presumed extinct amphi- individual enclosure for a single use. All bian species were suddenly rediscovered discarded enclosure refuse, used gloves and somewhere in the Panamanian Talamancan collection material were disinfected with 10% highlands, a captive colony would be estab- sodium hypochlorite before it was discarded lished at EVACC from salvaged individuals. as trash to prevent the spread of any patho- In April 2006, an anuran from a stream gens from the collection. The floors of both inside the El Valle watershed tested positive rooms and the immediate area outside the
Int. Zoo Yb. (2008) 42: 125–135. c 2008 The Authors. Journal compilation c 2008 The Zoological Society of London 130 AMPHIBIAN CONSERVATION rooms were mopped daily with 10% sodium and Cleveland for initial quarantine and hypochlorite. maintenance. At the time of writing, 41 of At first, providing adequate quantities of the wild-caught animals are represented with the appropriate food proved to be a challenge. over 1500 animals in the captive-bred popu- Daily collection of wild invertebrates and lation at nearly 50 Association of Zoos and meticulous note taking on the preferences of Aquariums (AZA) institutions. Batrachochy- the species allowed for an adaptive approach trium dendrobatidis is currently sweeping to arriving at the correct type of food and through the eastern-most extent of the Pana- quantity. Techniques for invertebrate collec- manian golden frog range and extinction in tion ranged from sweep nets, attractant lights the wild seems imminent. Although PGF and hand collecting to ingenious devices intends to continue its programmes in re- involving circular fluorescent lights and an search, outreach and captive management, extractor fan. More recently, colonies of focus will be broadened to support conserva- Domestic crickets Acheta domestica obtained tion work with other species in the Critically from a source within Panama have been set Endangered genus through an initiative called up to produce an adequate supply for feeding the Atelopus Conservation Trust (see http:// the collection. Two species of Fruit fly www.projectgoldenfrog.org). Drosophila melanogastor and Drosophila ARCC collected only about 60 individuals hydei, and Springtails Collembela sp were from the El Cope´ site. The taxa in greatest imported from the United States and are numbers included centrolenid and leptodac- being cultured on site. Collection of larger tylid frogs. The findings in El Valle were insects is still necessary for large anurans but much more productive because Bd had not plans are in place to culture these species. yet arrived. Hundreds of individuals in total In March 2007, the first amphibians were from nearly 30 species were collected (Table transferred from the hotel to the EVACC 1). Not all individuals encountered were facility. Correct water management was ne- collected as once 20 of each sex were ob- cessary to ensure that chytrid-free animals are tained, duplicates were released. not reinfected by source water and that para- In captivity, some species, such as Hylos- site and other micro-organisms are not trans- cirtus palmeri and Hemiphractus fasciatus ferred between enclosures. The source water (Plate 2), proved extremely difficult to main- at EVACC was filtered in several stages, the tain either in Panama or Atlanta. Several last of which excluded any organism larger species are actively breeding, however, in- than 0 Á 5 mm. Once water has left an enclo- cluding Hylomantis lemur, Colostethus pratti, sure, it is taken directly to a drain. The ends of Eleutherodactylus gaigae, Gastrotheca cornuta the waste lines are fitted with strainers and (Plate 3), Anotheca spinosa, Dendrobates check valves to prevent both water and vicentei and Minyobates minutus. In some potential disease vectors (flushed feeder in- cases, these breeding events, some taking sects, etc.) from entering the ecosystem. place within temporary ARCC triage or Individuals have been monitored for parasites EVACC quarantine facilities, represent the during the course of their time in captivity. first in captivity. Environmental factors, such as extreme barometric fluctuations, local food RESULTS items or even regular disturbance from en- closure cleaning, were possible triggers. In PGF secured ex situ populations of three Hy. lemur, hundreds of F1 offspring produced ESUs of Panamanian golden frogs, thereby in Atlanta have been dispersed to over 15 preventing their outright extinction. From facilities in three countries, increasing the 2001 to 2005, 111 animals were collected, ex situ safety net for this particular species. including 26 amplectant pairs and 59 newly Offspring of the Rocket frog C. pratti have metamorphosed froglets. These individuals also been distributed. Other taxa, such as the were exported to zoos in Detroit, Baltimore Marsupial frog G. cornuta, despite several
Int. Zoo Yb. (2008) 42: 125–135. c 2008 The Authors. Journal compilation c 2008 The Zoological Society of London A DECADE OF AMPHIBIAN CONSERVATION IN PANAMA 131
them (medium term) and overcome any is- sues relating to captive management, such as dietary and habitat needs and ability to pro- duce F2s (long term). Anotheca spinosa, Pristimantis diastema, G. cornuta, He. fas- ciatus and Hy. lemur have been successfully reproduced so far and dozens of captive-bred amphibians exist as a result. Some priority taxa are yet to breed, some are yet to be collected and it may turn out to be too late for those species. Amphibians that have died have been submitted for comprehensive ne- cropsy to Dr Allan Pessier at the San Diego Zoological Society. Preliminary necropsy re- sults are suggestive of malnutrition likely associated with captive diets as a significant source of mortality along with lungworm infections. Finally, after taking a step back, it is important to remember that through the transfer of skills related to amphibian husban- dry for the first time, there is a building in Panama where a skilled staff cares for and Plate 2. Casque-headed frog Hemiphractus fasciatus. reproduces threatened Panamanian amphibians. Edgardo Griffith, El Valle Amphibian Conservation Center. CRITICISMS OF THESE PROJECTS WITH RECOMMENDATIONS FOR SIMILAR PROJECTS At the time PGF was removing animals from the wild, no facilities existed in Panama to manage the animals within their range coun- try. The same conditions still existed several years later at the inception of the ARCC project. Thus, in both cases, the animals were exported to the United States. This has cre- ated several complications that could have Plate 3. Horned marsupial frog Gastrotheca cornuta. been avoided had the animals been kept in the Gravid , with eggs in pouch. Ron Gagliardo, Atlanta range country. The planning and construction Botanical Garden. of EVACC addressed many of these issues. successful breeding events, have proved dif- ficult in terms of raising juveniles to adult- Biosecurity hood owing to nutritional issues. This indicates that there is still much to learn about In moving animals across vast geographical the captive care of many species. barriers, the risk of exposing naı¨ve popula- For the EVACC project, it is still too early tions to new pathogens is elevated. The to declare success or failure. Measurable problems of exposing imported species to achievements of the project are simple and potential pathogens in existing collections primarily concerned with our ability to keep are only surpassed by the potential of native the individuals alive (short term), reproduce species to succumb to novel exotic pathogens
Int. Zoo Yb. (2008) 42: 125–135. c 2008 The Authors. Journal compilation c 2008 The Zoological Society of London 132 AMPHIBIAN CONSERVATION brought in by wild collected animals. If mals from the wild. Trying to move animals animals must be removed from their range across international borders adds another countries, appropriate biosecurity measures layer of complexity and expense to the pro- should be put in place to protect both the cess. In addition, regardless of the exporter’s captive and the nearby wild populations. If motives, scientific reasoning and government the Panamanian animals in the United States support, removing animals from their country are ever to be returned to the wild, it will be of origin can have negative publicity implica- the responsibility of the institutions involved tions (Fig. 2). Gathering host-country na- to do everything in their power to study the tional support in areas where the projects are pathogens present in the candidate animals. being carried out is also helpful. Finally, one The institutions must determine whether the must consider how the ‘internal’ regulations pathogens came in with the original founders of zoological associations, wildlife agencies or whether they were subsequently intro- and agriculture departments can affect (nega- duced and must therefore be eliminated be- tively or positively) the overall conservation fore release. Of course, one can only test for mission of a programme. Are we keeping the those pathogens that are already known, and a best interest of the species in mind? significant risk remains in introducing un- known, undetectable pathogens. Controlled Resources and funding laboratory exposure experiments should also be carried out to test for any negative impacts In addition to biosecurity and permitting of introduced amphibians on the remaining expenses, there are other financial incentives wild amphibian populations. Most of these to keep programmes in range countries. The complications could have been avoided had materials and labour to construct facilities can the animals remained in Panama. Captive be cheaper outside the United States, and amphibian populations would benefit if more because of cost-of-living differences, biolo- could be understood about long-term effects gists can be trained and used for less. Labour or artefacts of simply being raised under may be less expensive in some parts of the controlled captive conditions and subsequent world but we must consider the amount of issues when these animals are repatriated. For materials purchased outside of host countries now, the recommendation is that any rescue and shipped in for these projects. This will colonies, anywhere in the world, remain with- increase costs beyond normal levels; we may in the range country. This will reduce stress on quickly lose the ability to generalize about animals and eliminate risks of disease trans- where projects are less expensive to imple- mission across international borders. Working ment. The situation in Panama is likely to be at the hotel in Panama presented some unique different from other countries. The availabil- challenges with respect to biosecurity; for ity of almost any material needed for con- example, staff found native Marine toads struction and Panama’s use of the US dollar Rhinella marina inside the ‘clean’ (post-chy- as its currency certainly had a positive effect trid treatment) room. Marine toads are known on logistics. One key point to consider here is carriers of Bd (Berger et al., 1998) and the that the funding necessary to begin and results of swabs taken from toads that were implement a project is only the beginning able to gain access to the rooms are eagerly and in the case of ARCC, funding was some- anticipated. Toad faeces were also found on times sporadic, resulting in some minor de- top of enclosures. This obviously has implica- lays with parts of the project. Owing to the tions for the spread of parasites. rapid response needed and accelerated time- lines, it was difficult to put all funding in place before beginning the project. EVACC Politics started with a very modest budget and very It is often time-consuming and expensive to modest goals. During the course of the pro- obtain the necessary permits to remove ani- ject both were allowed to grow. In contrast to
Int. Zoo Yb. (2008) 42: 125–135. c 2008 The Authors. Journal compilation c 2008 The Zoological Society of London A DECADE OF AMPHIBIAN CONSERVATION IN PANAMA 133
Fig. 2. Clipping from Panamanian newspaper showing ‘mixed emotions’ of having their animals exported. Usted Decide, 11 September 2006. the ARCC, a gradually changing budget ARCC and EVACC programmes as staff did likely worked better under these circum- not have the advantages of easy access to stances because of the nature of the project. resources, such as ordering of food items or If the budget had been tightly restricted and immediate access to veterinary facilities. Co- not been allowed to grow to match the chan- ordination of these activities in country is ging goals of the project, it may well have sometimes made more difficult by host-coun- failed. try regulations; for example, importing do- mestic crickets (a common food item for captive amphibians) has proven very diffi- Capacity cult. Collection of wild native food was a While the United States might have more large drain on manpower, although the nature expertise and physical space for managing of this type of response to a biodiversity crisis amphibians, their capacity is still quite lim- excludes the possibility of establishing inver- ited. In 2000, a survey of AZA institutions tebrate food cultures well ahead of time. This revealed ‘only enough space . . . to accom- is something that should be established as modate 10 taxa of amphibians’ (K. Wright, rapidly as possible once the need is identified. pers. comm.). Clearly, the AZA community At EVACC, manpower, through staff and cannot lead many such rescues before their volunteers, was gradually increased as the capacity is exceeded. If additional capacity number of amphibians in captivity grew. A must be built, better to build it where it is period of time did exist where staffing level needed, train host-country nationals to run it was inadequate. Establishing an appropriate and plan to support operations in country. quantity of staff in advance of the need, so Some of these were specific hurdles in the that training can be provided under less
Int. Zoo Yb. (2008) 42: 125–135. c 2008 The Authors. Journal compilation c 2008 The Zoological Society of London 134 AMPHIBIAN CONSERVATION stressful conditions, is suggested. All three these principles are more specific aspects projects involved some bilingual staff and including the procurement of funding, secur- volunteers, but there were still instances ing government support and assembling the where the lack of language proficiency cre- proper staff (from team leaders to veterinar- ated delays or hurdles. Specific issues regard- ians). Once these actions are taken, another ing facility design and the project objectives part of the process comes into play for are numerous and potential solutions for implementation including species prioritiza- future efforts are provided by Pfaff & Crump tion, establishing local staff and agencies to (2007). take part, confirming funding and finally, In addition to the specifics of capacity beginning physical collections and triage. issues, there is a more philosophical issue to As zoological, academic and private stake- consider. This is the concept of institutional holders transform into conservation stewards commitment. The individuals taken in by all and become more active in these types of three projects need careful stewarding that projects, action must follow a clear under- takes not only individual commitments from standing of the commitments required. Fol- keepers and organizers but also institutional lowing the recommendations proposed by the commitments by various partners. Individual Amphibian Ark (http://www.AmphibianArk. zoo staff members might come and go, but org; Zippel et al., 2006) and ACAP (Moore & programmes that involve the preservation of Church, in press) as a guide and keeping species need to continue seamlessly; this long-term goals in mind along the way, these requires unwavering institutional commit- types of programmes could succeed. There ment. How long will PGF, ARCC and are many ways to accomplish the overall goal EVACC be supported by organizations? of species preservation and using accepted protocols of biosecurity, handling as much of CONCLUSIONS the work in range country and making the commitments necessary to carry the projects With amphibians facing more threats and through to completion will ultimately be very challenges than ever, careful choices must be important considerations for long-term survi- made in order to preserve as much biodiver- val of some of our most threatened species. sity as possible. The problems of amphibians are likely to increase in the future, along with PRODUCTS MENTIONED IN THE the urgency of the response required. In too many cases, ex situ breeding work may be the TEXT only short-term solution for taxa that may Itraconazole: supplied by PCCA Inc., Hous- otherwise disappear. This is an opportunity ton, TX, USA. for academic researchers and zoological in- stitutions to work together in synergy. REFERENCES Whether removing animals for research or as ANNIS, S., DASTOOR,F.P.,ZIEL, H., DASZAK,P.& LONG- CORE, J. E. (2004): A DNA-based assay identifies Ba- part of a rescue operation, full consideration trachochytrium dendrobatidis in amphibians. Journal of must be given to the consequences. This work Wildlife Diseases 40: 420–428. must be carried out carefully, with adequate BERGER, L., SPEARE, R., DASZAK, P., GREEN, D., CUNNING- planning and forethought. Thus, there are HAM, A., GOGGIN, C., SLOCOMBE, R., RAGAN, M., HYATT, several principles of rapid-response pro- A., MCDONALD, K., HINES, H., LIPS, K., MARANTELLI,G.& PARKES, H. (1998): Chytridiomycosis causes amphibian grammes: being clear of the overall goals of mortality associated with population declines in the rain the project, establishing the infrastructure forests of Australia and Central America. Proceedings of including administration and operations to the National Academy of Sciences United States of properly channel the resources needed to America 95: 9031–9036. FROST, D. R. (2007): Amphibian species of the world: an implement and maintain it and defining pro- online reference: version 5.1 (10 October 2007). New tocols for implementation and operation be- York, NY: American Museum of Natural History. http:// fore initiating the programme. Embedded in research.amnh.org/herpetology/amphibia/index.php
Int. Zoo Yb. (2008) 42: 125–135. c 2008 The Authors. Journal compilation c 2008 The Zoological Society of London A DECADE OF AMPHIBIAN CONSERVATION IN PANAMA 135
GASCON, C., COLLINS, J. P., MOORE, R. D., CHURCH, D. R., source manual: 31–41. Grow, S. & Poole, V. A. (Eds). MCKAY,J.E.& MENDELSON III, J. R. (Eds). (2007): Silver Spring, MD: Association of Zoos and Aquariums. Amphibian Conservation Action Plan. Gland, Switzer- http://www.aza.org/ConScience/Documents/Amphibian_ land, and Cambridge, UK: IUCN/SSC Amphibian Spe- Resource_Manual.pdf cialist Group. POUNDS, J. A., FOGDEN, M. P., SAVAGE,J.M.& GORMAN, IUCN (2007): 2007 IUCN red list of threatened species. G. C. (1997): Test of null models for amphibian declines Gland: IUCN. http://www.iucnredlist.org/ on a tropical mountain. Conservation Biology 11: 1307– LIPS, K. R., BURROWES, P. A., MENDELSON,J.R.& PARRA- 1322. OLEA, G. (2005): Amphibian population declines in Latin ZIPPEL, K., LACY,R.& BYERS, O. (Eds) (2006): CBSG/ America: a synthesis. Biotropica 37: 222–226. WAZA amphibian ex situ conservation planning work- LIPS, K. R., BREM, F., BRENES, R., REEVE, J. D., ALFORD, shop final report. Apple Valley, MN: IUCN/SSC Con- R. A., VOYLES, J., CAREY, C., LIVO, L., PESSIER,A.P.& servation Breeding Specialist Group. http:// COLLINS, J. P. (2006): Emerging infectious disease and the www.amphibianark.org/CBSG_WAZA_AmphibianEx loss of biodiversity in a Neotropical amphibian commu- SituConservationPlanningWorkshopFinalReport.pdf nity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences ZIPPEL, K. C. (2002): Conserving the Panamanian Golden United States of America 103: 3165–3170. Frog: Proyecto Rana Dorada. Herpetological Review 33: MOORE,R.D.& CHURCH, D. R. (In press): Implementa- 11–12. tion of the Amphibian Conservation Action Plan. ZIPPEL, K. C., IBA´ N˜ EZ, D. R., LINDQUIST, E. D., RICHARDS, International Zoo Yearbook 42. DOI: 10.1111/j.1748- C. L., JARAMILLO,A.C.A.& GRIFFITH, E. J. (2007): 1090.2007.00041.x. Implicaciones en la conservacio´n de las ranas doradas de NICHOLS,D.K.& LARIMANDE, E. W. (2000): Treatment of Panama´, asociadas con su revisio´n taxono´mica. Herpeto- cutaneous chytridiomycosis in blue-and-yellow poison tropicos 3: 29–39. dart frogs (Dendrobates tinctorius). In Getting the jump! On amphibian disease; 51. Moore, K. & Speare, R. (Eds). Cairns: Rainforest CRC. PFAFF,S.& CRUMP, P. (2007): Building ex situ facilities Manuscript submitted 18 June 2007; revised within range countries. In Amphibian conservation re- 30 November 2007; accepted 8 January 2008
Int. Zoo Yb. (2008) 42: 125–135. c 2008 The Authors. Journal compilation c 2008 The Zoological Society of London