# Retained pathogens



## DragonSpirit1185 (Dec 6, 2010)

Do dart frogs retain their pathogens/bacteria in captivity?
Do they carry different bacteria and pathogens from different part of the world?

We have all seen over the years where it is advised that you shouldn't mix frogs from different locales due to them carrying different pathogens. 
There has been recent debates with people saying they loose their pathogens in captivity and they don't pose a threat to mixing. 

I read this article here: New study finds that frogs in captivity retain much of pathogen-fighting microbial community | Amphibians.org

The article talks about the frogs retaining 70% of their microbial community in captivity. That is their pathogens is it not?
What may be beneficial to one might not be beneficial to another from a different locale, right?

If you have better papers that talk about this then please post them 
Hopefully this is the best place to post this question/discussion.
Hopefully I'm understanding the article correctly. Feel free to clear things up if not. 
Thanks.


----------



## DragonSpirit1185 (Dec 6, 2010)

All these views and no one wants to weigh in?


----------



## Captain Awesome (Jan 13, 2018)

Unless an animal is rederived it has not lost its microbial community. Everything that happens to that animal will have an effect on the community but you can not completely replace without horrible consequences on the animal. We are a huge percentage by body weight of non self organisms. Animals that have lived in captivity for generations will have a different proportion of microbes and a different makeup of this community usually trending to the less diverse but it will never be a complete change over to a different set of pathogens. Quarantine periods will allow you to see the most obvious problems brought about by stress but often things can hide subclinically for much if not all of an animal's life. When a new animal that did not have exposure to this pathogen is exposed it can have horrible consequences. Just look at what happened when Europeans can to the new world. Many of the diseases that were not a problem for one group, destroyed the other. For a frog to be healthy it must have a thriving gut flora. This flora may change but not without huge effects on the frog.


----------



## salvz (Nov 3, 2014)

DragonSpirit1185 said:


> The article talks about the frogs retaining 70% of their microbial community in captivity. That is their pathogens is it not?
> Thanks.


Hi, the microbial community could include pathogens but the two are not the same. A pathogen is a bacterium, virus, or other microorganism that can cause disease. The article was aimed more at beneficial bacteria and "probiotics," which could help combat pathogens.


----------



## DragonSpirit1185 (Dec 6, 2010)

Thanks for the replies.
I understand that is beneficial bacteria but what I'm asking is doesn't the beneficial bacteria vary from locale to locale?
So what could be beneficial bacteria to one species from one locale could it be dangerous to a species from a different locale?

I know most reptiles and amphibians have salmonella and they live in symbiosis with it however if we contract it it can make us sick. 
That's pretty much what I'm getting at is how to better understand this whole not mixing different locales because of pathogens. 

I've heard it mentioned so much over the years but I want to understand the science behind it. 



Sent from my Samsung GALAXY Note4 using Tapatalk


----------



## SlyGrin (Jan 29, 2020)

It's pretty well documented that the microbiome of the gut can change drastically for any number of reasons. It's been shown that research mice that come from the same room at a specific vendor but are kept in different rooms in a given facility (but fed the same chow and water) can have widely different gut bacteria.

So it's not likely that animals from the wild or even from a given supplier will maintain the same microbiome over time. The resident bacteria, protozoa, and yeast (at least in the gut in this example) will likely change depending on the microenvironment they are housed in, i.e. become "normalized" to a given situation. That is if we assume that amphibian microbiome dynamics act in a similar manner to that of mammals.

The study of the microbiome (which can include GI Tract, Resp Tract, skin, etc) is a "relatively new" hot topic that is getting more and more attention in Academia.


----------



## Kmc (Jul 26, 2019)

The problem with discussing the "invited topic" on an informal basis is that there is a free commerce of opinion, where users per human tendency glom on statements that appease their personal beliefs and wants.

We are talking about Amphibians here. Its kind of Sacred Ground to me, their health and well being in the world and alternatively, behind glass. 

The pause in responding, could be, for all the critique about dated functionality of this forum, a true sense of responsibility and accountability for the animals of topic.

Its why I love this forum. 

The best place to start your journey DragonSpirit, is a deep dive into Microbiology. Start There.


----------



## Kmc (Jul 26, 2019)

Salmonella as a large genus complex of many serotypes. It does not stand as an adequate example for the query presented.

There are many other organisms, panoramic in genus and strain, viral, fungal, and mycobacterium, that can appear in sample without becoming pathogenic, and then conversely, wipe out significant portions of collections even well kept. I know of a circumstance personally, with a frog collection owned by a physician, whom had at his disposal an unlimited access to investigating cause, which in his case was a mycobacterium sp.

Mixing is something that is borne of a human aesthetic. It comprises a breach of biological hygiene. It also alters spatial and behavioral factors.

It all comes down to how interested one is, in the species they are keeping, versus the desire to create a diorama-like living picture for display purposes.


----------

