# private collections ever been used to repopulate...



## josh raysin (Nov 28, 2005)

have any animals from private collections ever been used to repopulate natural habitats?

i personally like working with many different species.


----------



## bbrock (May 20, 2004)

josh raysin said:


> have any animals from private collections ever been used to repopulate natural habitats?
> 
> i personally like working with many different species.


To my knowledge no, but perhaps Ed could provide a better answer if he is watching.

But this is precisely why we formed the ASN. Private breeders have the husbandry and breeding skills to propagate animals as good, or better than, zoos. But in general the private breeders lack training in conservation science, record keeping protocols, and disease management to produce offspring suitable for reintroduction. To successfully conduct a captive breeding program for reintroducing animals to the wild is a highly technical process that requires knowledge about population genetics and disease management as well as husbandry and breeding skills. So it should be no surprise that private collections are rarely, if ever, used for reintroduction. In fact, it would be shocking if they were. But ASN wants to change that. Private breeders are the best of the best regarding skill in general husbandry and breeding and ASN will provide training and organization in the other areas to mould our skills into a useful resource for conserving wild amphibians. There are a few successful models out there to indicate this is possible. The question is whether we are up to the challenge.


----------



## defaced (May 23, 2005)

What is the ASN? Site/background info/purpose?


----------



## bbrock (May 20, 2004)

http://www.treewalkers.org

Go to the projects link


----------



## kyle1745 (Feb 15, 2004)

Also the post here:
http://www.dendroboard.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=20490


----------



## kyle1745 (Feb 15, 2004)

In relation to releasing animals...

If frogs are raised in captivity and kept from food that would allow them to generate their toxins what would be the effect of releasing them? Could they gain toxicity from the food after release or do captive animals lose that ability all together?


----------



## bbrock (May 20, 2004)

The evidence is they would regain the toxins. I don't have the citation handy but there was a paper that studied the Hawaiian auratus and found they contained toxins but the toxins were different from frogs in the ancestral population on Toboga. The inference is that the frogs are able to sequester a variety of akaloids to take advantage of what is available.

But this indicates the animals may need a "soft release" method where the animals are maintained in semiwild pens at the release site for awhile before being set free. This would give them time to accumulate toxins before being exposed to predators. Even better may be to deposit tadpoles in artificial phytotelmata and allow the morphs to complete their metamorphosis in the wild. Juvenile mortality would be higher but the survivors would be better adapted for life in the wild.


----------



## 955i (Mar 23, 2006)

bbrock said:


> This would give them time to accumulate toxins before being exposed to predators.


This should not be necessary unless the whole population in the area had been wiped out as any predators would already associate the colouration of the frogs with them being toxic


----------



## Ben_C (Jun 25, 2004)

> I don't have the citation handy but there was a paper that studied the Hawaiian auratus and found they contained toxins but the toxins were different from frogs in the ancestral population on Toboga.


Here's the paper I think bbrock is talking about:
Daly, J.W., Jr., S.I. Secunda, H.M. Garraffo, T.F. Spande, A. Wisnieski, C. Nishihira, and J.F. Cover, Jr. 1992. Variability in alkaloid profiles in neotropical poison frogs (Dendrobatidae): genetic versus environmental determinants. Toxicon 30:887-898.

I hope this helps,
B


----------



## bbrock (May 20, 2004)

955i said:


> bbrock said:
> 
> 
> > This would give them time to accumulate toxins before being exposed to predators.
> ...


In almost all cases, animals from captivity would never be released to the wild unless the species were completely extirpated from an area. Recovery of species in situ is always the preferred method under modern practices of conservation biology.

That said, there is a lot of debate over whether PDF are really aposematically colored to warn predators. D. auratus, for example, are almost certainly not as every I now who has seen them in the wild remarks at how camoflauged they are in the dappled shade. Regardless, warning colors only work as the result of testing and learning by predators. I can't remember if it was at the National Zoo in Washington DC or the National Aquarium in Baltimore where E. tricolor were released into the amazon exhibit and the birds began having a feast for awhile. Eventually things stabilized, possibly because the frogs built up toxins after foraging in the exhibit but the example serves to demonstrate that warning color alone is not enough. Of course that agrees with your point that if there were still some toxic wild animals in the area, then the predators would be pre-conditioned.


----------



## Ben_C (Jun 25, 2004)

> D. auratus, for example, are almost certainly not as every I now who has seen them in the wild remarks at how camoflauged they are in the dappled shade.


I will second (or third, fourth, whatever) this statement. Their 'aposematic' colouration can be very 'non-aposematic'!



> E. tricolor were released into the amazon exhibit and the birds began having a feast for awhile.


We observed birds eating D. auratus on a couple occasions in the field. Didn't get much chance to follow the birds but they didn't appear to suffer any immediate consequences.

~B


----------



## Rain_Frog (Apr 27, 2004)

I will say it again, but I really think the dart frog toxicity ALONE thing is false. I think it has more to do with mating and territorial displays. Yes, the poison is a benefit. But then why do so many toxic frogs like B. marinus are down right dull? They are not territorial like dart frogs are to my knowledge. Color can only be seen during daylight. B. marinus is mostly nocturnal. 

Brent, didn't you say once that your pumilio will change color depending on their mood? 

Basically, dart frogs feed on ants that are diurnal. They must be diurnal to eat them and get poisons. The poisons allow them to be in daylight. You can see in color in daylight. Perhaps then yes, if it wasn't for the poison, they wouldn't be "in color" because there would be no reason to see in color if you're nocturnal. But I highly doubt color alone warns predators.

Butterflies I believe are a good example. While yes, they do warn because they are nasty tasting, I believe I once read that it is also very important for attracting mates.

It seems like a dart frog, particularly a pumilio's worst enemy is another pumilio. 

But back to the subject, how would you contain a tiny frog the size of your nail in an outdoor pen? Wouldn't if they are released in an area with other dart frogs, predators would already know that they don't taste good?


----------



## bbrock (May 20, 2004)

Rain_Frog said:


> I will say it again, but I really think the dart frog toxicity ALONE thing is false. I think it has more to do with mating and territorial displays. Yes, the poison is a benefit. But then why do so many toxic frogs like B. marinus are down right dull? They are not territorial like dart frogs are to my knowledge. Color can only be seen during daylight. B. marinus is mostly nocturnal.


I'm with you. It is too easy to just say that if something is brightly colored and toxic, it must be warning coloration. I'm not saying that I don't thing any darts have warning colors, but Summers indicated that the brightest pumilio in a population were not necessarily the most toxic.



> Brent, didn't you say once that your pumilio will change color depending on their mood?


It wasn't me. But many dart frogs certainly become dull when they are stressed. 



> But back to the subject, how would you contain a tiny frog the size of your nail in an outdoor pen? Wouldn't if they are released in an area with other dart frogs, predators would already know that they don't taste good?


The pens would be just like are already used at frog farms. Screen houses plopped down onto the forest floor. As I said earlier, it is hard to imagine a situation where captive bred frogs would be released into an area that still contains wild ones of the same species. Conservation science practices that animals should be restored _in situ_ before being restored from captive bred populations.


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

Just a quick comment on this here

snip "D. auratus, for example, are almost certainly not as every I now who has seen them in the wild remarks at how camoflauged they are in the dappled shade. 


I will second (or third, fourth, whatever) this statement. Their 'aposematic' colouration can be very 'non-aposematic'! "endsnip

What we observe as the pattern may not be the pattern seen by the potential predators as the may be sensitive to different wave lengths (UV) or lack color vision. (For example compare Lampropeltis alterna patterns with those of the sympatric small rattlesnakes in black and white pictures or flowers under UV lighting). The pattern we percieve may not be the aposematic pattern. 

Ed


----------



## Ben_C (Jun 25, 2004)

> What we observe as the pattern may not be the pattern seen by the potential predators as the may be sensitive to different wave lengths (UV) or lack color vision. (For example compare Lampropeltis alterna patterns with those of the sympatric small rattlesnakes in black and white pictures or flowers under UV lighting). The pattern we percieve may not be the aposematic pattern.


Definitely true.

I haven't seen many studies examining UV reflectance but the one that comes to mind:

Summers, K., Cronin, T.W., Kennedy, T. 2003. Variation in spectral reflectance among populations of Dendrobates pumilio, the strawberry poison frog, in the Bocas del Toro Archipelago, Panama. Journal of Biogeography. 30(1). 35

where they found relatively little reflectance in the UV spectrum.

Also:
Lyytinen, A., Alatalo, V., Lindstrom, L., Mappes, J. 2001. Can ultraviolet cues function as aposematic signals. Behavioral Ecology 12(1) 65-70.

They studied possible UV reflectance as aposematism in prey items of the great tit and found little avoidance of any reflected pattern.

It would be really cool if somebody did spectral reflectance of D. auratus or some other less conspicuous species as well as studied species predators though!

~B


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

snip "have any animals from private collections ever been used to repopulate natural habitats?"endsnip

Other than Rana catesbiana? 


Indirectly yes, directly no. The Puerto Rican Crested Toad breeding stock came from private land but the breeding occurs at Zoos and other institutions (and some Zoos are private...) 

Ed


----------



## Dendrobait (May 29, 2005)

Here is one example of this I am aware of. Involves birds, but the wording suggests the hobbyists are directly involved...at least their animals.

http://www.gbwf.org/pheasants/cheer.html

Cheer pheasant.


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

this has been done with birds and some mammals but not with amphibians at this time. 

Ed


----------



## Afemoralis (Mar 17, 2005)

To comment on the aposematic colouration of Dendrobatids, I agree that in the field they can be cryptic. 

I think a good model of comparison are reef fishes- in which the colours are working in different ways at different visual scales. What may be 'display' colouration at 10cm, may be aposematic at 1m away, might be cryptic at 5m. 

There has been some great work done in this field in fishes. To my knowledge no one has done it with frogs. 

Cheers,

Afemoralis


----------



## spydrmn12285 (Oct 24, 2006)

I must not be getting something here, but how do predators know that a frog is poisonous simply through trial and error? From what I know, terribilis can kill from a lick, how do predators communicate this with others? I guess what I'm saying here is that how does a predator "live to tell about their unfortunate experience" if most PDF's can kill with minimal contact?


----------



## FishinAggie03 (Jan 27, 2007)

I have several responses to various points among this thread.
A project is currently underway to repopulate the wild with CB animals under Project Golden Frog. http://www.ranadorada.org/ The Panamanian Golden Frog is expect to become extinct in the wild this year. The AZA, in partnership with institutions in Panama and the Panamanian goverment have developed a SSP(species survival plan) in which institutions(zoos, aquariums, etc) within the US(and around the globe) breed the Golden Frog in an effort to eventually help repopulate Panama with them. The breeding of the frogs is all directed by the leader of the SSP, the "studbook keeper". The studbook keeper says who can and can not breed the frogs and which groups to breed with which groups. You can read more about it in the husbandry manual on the website.

Many species of dart frogs have been show to lose their toxic potency after a year in captivity. However, some species that produce poison on their own(not getting it from the food they eat) will not lose their toxicity in captivity. I believe terribilis are one example(I might be wrong, can't remember off the top of my head).

Many animals use bright, vivid colorations as a warning to potential predators. Some are poisonous, some taste very foul, etc. Instead of using camoflauge to try and blend in, they have evolved this bright coloration to keep from becoming food. 
As for their predators knowing that they can't eat them, some learn by trial and error, some have natural instincts to know that they cant eat them.


----------



## Frob Luger (Feb 3, 2007)

I dont know about dart frogs but i do know bombina bombina have been rereleased into the wild with great success in both adult and tad form.


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

snip "A project is currently underway to repopulate the wild with CB animals under Project Golden Frog. http://www.ranadorada.org/ The Panamanian Golden Frog is expect to become extinct in the wild this year. The AZA, in partnership with institutions in Panama and the Panamanian goverment have developed a SSP(species survival plan) in which institutions(zoos, aquariums, etc) within the US(and around the globe) breed the Golden Frog in an effort to eventually help repopulate Panama with them. The breeding of the frogs is all directed by the leader of the SSP, the "studbook keeper". The studbook keeper says who can and can not breed the frogs and which groups to breed with "endsnip

Except that at this time, there are no private holding of A. zeteki... 

Ed


----------

