Climate change may boost frog disease

[Robert_S]

Climate change may boost frog disease chytridiomycosis
Richard Black By Richard Black Environment correspondent, BBC News


More changeable temperatures, a consequence of global warming, may be helping to abet the threat that a lethal fungal disease poses to frogs.

Scientists found that when temperatures vary unpredictably, frogs succumb faster to chytridiomycosis, which is killing amphibians around the world.

The animals' immune systems appear to lose potency during unpredictable temperature shifts.

The research is published in Nature Climate Change journal.

Chytridiomycosis, caused by the parasitic fungus Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis (Bd), was identified only in 1998.

It affects frogs and their amphibian relatives - salamanders, and the worm-like caecilians - and has caused a number of species extinctions.

"I'm not convinced that the effect we've discovered could be considered responsible for declines or extinctions in the ways way that the spread of Bd can be considered responsible," said Thomas Raffel, lead scientist on the new research.

"It might be, however, that climate change has sped up the decline or extinction after the parasite arrived," the Oakland University researcher told BBC News.


Story continues...

[SteveB]

Does this mean we have to kill JimC?

[SteveB]

Never mind we should protect him some more.

[mistermack]

They always make this claim, that warming means more changeable temperatures

There's no good evidence for that. There is equal evidence that cooling means more changeable temperatures.

And that temperatures standing still means more changeable temperatures.

After all, global temperatures have stood still for more than ten years now. So today's changeable temperatures are obviously the result of no change.

[Woodbutcher]

They always make this claim, that warming means more changeable temperatures

There's no good evidence for that. There is equal evidence that cooling means more changeable temperatures.

And that temperatures standing still means more changeable temperatures.

After all, global temperatures have stood still for more than ten years now. So today's changeable temperatures are obviously the result of no change.

No they haven't. It's still a warming trend.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/global- ... ediate.htm
Try reading this.

[mistermack]

They always make this claim, that warming means more changeable temperatures

There's no good evidence for that. There is equal evidence that cooling means more changeable temperatures.

And that temperatures standing still means more changeable temperatures.

After all, global temperatures have stood still for more than ten years now. So today's changeable temperatures are obviously the result of no change.

No they haven't. It's still a warming trend.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/global- ... ediate.htm
Try reading this.

It's a raving loony one-issue totally biased blog site. Why on earth should I waste time on that?

[Woodbutcher]

They always make this claim, that warming means more changeable temperatures

There's no good evidence for that. There is equal evidence that cooling means more changeable temperatures.

And that temperatures standing still means more changeable temperatures.

After all, global temperatures have stood still for more than ten years now. So today's changeable temperatures are obviously the result of no change.

No they haven't. It's still a warming trend.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/global- ... ediate.htm
Try reading this.

It's a raving loony one-issue totally biased blog site. Why on earth should I waste time on that?

They're skeptics. Looking for proof. You' on the other hand will read a shithouse rhyme and believe it if it reinforces your bias. You don't even release your sources, if you even have any. You're right and 20000 climate scientists are wrong, it's a conspiracy, I heard at work, etc.

[JimC]

Does this mean we have to kill JimC?

Gin has made me immune...

But it is a bugger for all those lovely little amphibians...