# Frog Necropsy Reports for Comment



## Catfur (Oct 5, 2004)

These are two necropsy reports I just recently recieved on two frogs that died. Both were D. quinquevittatus and exhibited the same symptoms before death: failure to eat, followed by wasting and then death. Both were seemingly fat and healthy before abruptly going downhill. 

First Frog


> *Clinical Diagnosis:* Open
> *
> Gross:* Received in formalin is one frog to 3.5 cm in greatest dimension that is processed in one block.
> 
> ...


Second Frog


> *Clinical Diagnosis:* Open.
> 
> *Gross:* Received in formalin is one frog to 3.5 cm in greatest dimension that is processed in one block.
> 
> ...


Both animals were kept in approx. two gallon (1.75 I think?) clear tubs, with pothos and leaf litter over coco fiber. Tubs were changed out approximately once every other month. Feeding was mostly melanogaster with occasional springtails. Dusting was rep-cal/herptivite (fresh, not expired). I had several similar frog deaths among the frogs in the quarantine area, these were the only two I was able to preserve fresh for examination.


----------



## kyle1745 (Feb 15, 2004)

Very interesting data, I hope some of the people with experience can offer some clarification. 

My take is bacteria, and stress. My understanding is that bacteria can or almost always is present instantly after death. Someone correct me if I am wrong and maybe I can get a buddy to check this thread out and post.


----------



## elmoisfive (Dec 31, 2004)

Kyle,

You are correct that bacteria can or will be present at the time of death or shortly there after....the exfiltration of inflammatory cells (neutrophils, lymphocytes) suggests a more persistent infection, cachectic state (due to and because of tissue atrophy/degeneration) or both.

Bill



kyle1745 said:


> Very interesting data, I hope some of the people with experience can offer some clarification.
> 
> My take is bacteria, and stress. My understanding is that bacteria can or almost always is present instantly after death. Someone correct me if I am wrong and maybe I get a buddy to check this thread out and post.


----------



## Brian's Tropicals (May 8, 2005)

Sorry Kyle, I can't add much to this. Bacteria are always present, even when alive, the overgrowth is due to the frog being dead awhile before being preserved. The neutrophils say there was inflammation from an infection but the infection may have started because the frog was already almost dead. Other than that it just says they starved to death, but there's no cause apparent. I'm not sure why it says one of them was immunosuppressed, I don't see any method of looking at that. Either the frogs were dying of something and then the bacteria finished them off, or there was some sort of unidentified bacterial infection that made them ill and then they started starving. I think the only way to distinguish would be to catch a sick frog when it's only barely looking sick, nowhere close to dying, and then plate out its organs looking for a whopping load of bacteria where they shouldn't be. if there's none there, something else is causing the decline and the bacteria are just opportunistic at the end. If there's something there, it might be the cause and could be sent to a hospital for ID. We do this plating and ID'ing thing all the time in my lab. Unfortunately, all I said in this post was "I don't know".


----------



## Dane (Aug 19, 2004)

Clayton,
It's been my experience that bacterial buildup in "quarantine" size enclosures can quicly escalate to levels that are beyond anything that a dart's immune system can normalize. I've lost several otherwise healthy frogs due to infrequently cleaned temporoary tanks. Even with a substrate of sphagnum and pothos instead of sterile paper towels, fecal matter accumulates much faster than any bacterial or nematodal forces can utilize and break down. With frequent mistings to wash down waste materials, the basin of the container will still become a cesspool very quickly. I'd reccomend changing out the furnishings/substrate more often, maybe every 2 weeks? For more easily stressed frogs, I think that a larger QT enclosure with a partial soil substrate might be better, and not necessitate the constant disturbances. It does look like your vet did a pretty thorough examination, though. Mind if I ask who you use? Pm is fine.


----------



## Catfur (Oct 5, 2004)

Northwest Zoopath was the lab, Dr. Frye was the go-between (nothing on the report is his).


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

I'll bite here and add some comments.. 

With the bacterial buildup in the quarantine enclosures, this will occur regardless but there appears to be a strong thought that these bacteria are all bad.... Deaths in small enclosures that occur in the first 30-60 days of setting up the small enclosure (sterile or thin layer of sphagnum etc) can also be due to ammonia/nitrite toxicity as this will have been insufficient for the nitrogen fixing bacteria to become established. (Depending on the pH of the sphagnum, the acidity in this substrate may be sufficient to inhibit the nitrogen cycle). Even if the levels are insufficient to kill the frog the additional stress may be sufficient to allow ubiquitous pathnogenic bacteria such as Aeromonas and Pseudomonas (to name two common genera out of a bunch of them) to infect and kill the frog. Washing down the sides will not only concentrate the waste but it will also concentrate the ammonia and nitrite.... 


I am not a vet but some thoughts... 
With the rhabdomyolysis, this can be indicative of heat stress in mammals but I don't know if this carries over into amphibians. 
In the other frog, the mineralization of the renal tubes can be indicative of excess D3 in the diet.. 

Some thoughts, 

Ed


----------



## Dendro Dave (Aug 2, 2005)

Perhaps we should all consider making our quarunteen (my spelling sucks) enclosures more like actual vivs, just much more simple. But with all the same basic componets. drainage layer, soil, plants, ect.... And allow them to cycle...before frogs are added to them.


----------



## rozdaboff (Feb 27, 2005)

In my opinion - with the extent and variation of the bacterial signs (bilateral suppurative uteritis, bilateral bacterial keratitis, bacterial overgrowth of the esophagus, etc.) - I would say that the immunosuppression was the primary problem, and that oppportunistic bacterial infections occurred secondarily. The noted presence of limited neutrophils and lymphocytes given the bacterial load noted supports.

Whether or not the muscle and adipose atrophy (signs of starvation) were secondary to the other signs or a complicating primary sign is hard to say. 

Were these frogs from the same clutch?


----------



## vet_boy77 (Feb 10, 2005)

My two cents:
The report of infiltrates and bacteria through multiple body systems is consistent with a systemic infection, most likely sepsis. The infiltrating white blood cells along with the atrophy of the fat stores, changes in the liver (hepatic atrophy), mineralized kidney tubules, suggest somthing was going on before death. 
However, what brought all this on is the real question. Were they eating beforehand? How long did you have them ? Any bloating?
Stress, bacterial overgrowth in the tank are good possibilities. Bacteria often grow on dead things, and love ulcerated surfaces. When I see esophageal ulcers I think viruses, though I am rusty on my amphibian virology, which is another complement: stress->immunosuppresion->virus->secondary infection->sepsis-> death while wasting away.

Sorry to hear about the loss. Thanks for sharing the report with us. 

John


----------

