Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 507

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 42 of the 42 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Enzootic and epizootic dynamics of the chytrid fungal pathogen of amphibians

Open access
Briggs, Cheryl J., Knapp, Roland A., Vredenburg, Vance T.·2010·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract

Chytridiomycosis, the disease caused by the chytrid fungus, Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis (Bd), has contributed to amphibian population declines and extinctions worldwide. The impact of this pathogen, however, varies markedly among amphibian species and populations. Following invasion into some areas of California's Sierra Nevada, Bd leads to rapid declines and local extinctions of frog populations ( Rana muscosa , R. sierrae ). In other areas, infected populations of the same frog species have declined but persisted at low host densities for many years. We present results of a 5-year study showing that infected adult frogs in persistent populations have low fungal loads, are surviving between years, and frequently lose and regain the infection. Here we put forward the hypothesis that fungal load dynamics can explain the different population-level outcomes of Bd observed in different areas of the Sierra Nevada and possibly throughout the world. We develop a model that incorporates the biological details of the Bd-host interaction. Importantly, model results suggest that host persistence versus extinction does not require differences in host susceptibility, pathogen virulence, or environmental conditions, and may be just epidemic and endemic population dynamics of the same host–pathogen system. The different disease outcomes seen in natural populations may result solely from density-dependent host–pathogen dynamics. The model also shows that persistence of Bd is enhanced by the long-lived tadpole stage that characterize these two frog species, and by nonhost Bd reservoirs.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1073/pnas.0912886107

Cites

42 of 42 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 42 references

Cited by

See all 507

Metadata

Authors
Briggs, C. J., Knapp, R. A., & Vredenburg, V. T.
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
2010-05-10
Volume
107
Issue
21
Pages
9695-9700
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
OpenAlex
W1987756781
Cited by
507
References
42
FWCI
34.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Enzootic and epizootic dynamics of the chytrid fungal pathogen of amphibians. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1073/pnas.0912886107
The paper
Briggs, C. J., Knapp, R. A., & Vredenburg, V. T. (2010). Enzootic and epizootic dynamics of the chytrid fungal pathogen of amphibians. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0912886107

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.