Cited by 0Amphibian and Reptile BiologyBat Biology and Ecology StudiesEntomopathogenic Microorganisms in Pest Control

Baseline prevalence of Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis in a Central African rainforest amphibian community

Open access
Madden, Joseph J., Forner, Emily, Champagne, Patrick S., Finney, Sverre, Ina, Hermine, Massala, Pierre, Ngoulou, Joris-Bloy, Bamba-Kaya, Abraham G. +3 more·2026·The Herpetological Journal

Abstract

Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis (Bd), the fungal pathogen that causes chytridiomycosis, has been implicated in severe amphibian population declines and extinctions globally, yet the pathogen’s distribution in Central Africa remains poorly documented. Gabon hosts exceptional amphibian diversity, but previous Bd surveys have been sparse or geographically restricted. We establish a baseline of Bd occurrence in Ngounié province, southern Gabon, by screening 276 adults, representing 57 species of anurans. Prevalence of Bd was 11.2% overall (31 individuals, 18 species). We report the first Bd detections in Gabon for Cardioglossa leucomystax and Leptopelis notatus, and the first global Bd records for Amnirana amnicola and Arthroleptis taeniatus. Infection was strongly associated with adult ecology: semi-aquatic and aquatic species showed significantly higher prevalence than arboreal or terrestrial taxa. Infection intensity was generally low, though one Hyperolius tuberculatus individual exhibited a very high load (> 5 × 10⁵ ITS copies) without visible signs of disease. We confirm Bd presence in southern Gabon and highlight aquatic habitats as Bd hotspots, providing baseline data for future monitoring and conservation in the region. Keywords: Chytridiomycosis, Gabon, frog, reproductive mode, amphibian disease

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 · 10.33256/36.4.288297

Cites

Statistics

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.

Authors
Madden, J. J., Forner, E., Champagne, P. S., Finney, S., Ina, H., Massala, P., Ngoulou, J.-B., Bamba-Kaya, A. G., Jongsma, G. F. M., Zamudio, K. R., & Basham, E. W.
Affiliations
  • University of Glasgow (GB)
  • Allegheny College (US)
  • The University of Queensland (AU)
  • Western Washington University (US)
  • New Brunswick Museum (CA)
  • The University of Texas at Austin (US)
Venue
The Herpetological Journal
Published
2026-10-01
Volume
36
Issue
4
Pages
288-297
ISSN
  • 1473-0928 (ISSN-L)
  • 2634-1387
OpenAlex
W7214891162
Cited by
0
References
0
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Herpetological Bulletin (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • University of Texas at Austin
  • Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique
  • Agence Nationale Des Parcs Nationaux
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Amphibian and Reptile Biology
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Bat Biology and Ecology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Insect Science › Entomopathogenic Microorganisms in Pest Control
Keywords
Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis, chytridiomycosis, amphibian disease, pathogen prevalence, Anura, Central African rainforest, Gabon, aquatic habitat, infection intensity, amphibian conservation

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