Content uploaded by Alessandro Catenazzi
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Alessandro Catenazzi on Jul 11, 2016
Content may be subject to copyright.
Herpetological Review 47(2), 2016
AMPHIBIAN AND REPTILE DISEASES 207
AMPHIBIAN AND REPTILE DISEASES
AMPHIBIAN AND REPTILE DISEASES
Herpetological Review, 2016, 47(2), 207–209.
© 2016 by Society for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles
Amphibian: A Case Denition and Diagnostic Criteria for
Batrachochytrium salamandrivorans Chytridiomycosis
A newly described chytrid fungus, Batrachochytrium sala-
mandrivorans (Bsal), has caused several die-offs in salaman-
ders in Europe (Martel et al. 2013; Cunningham et al. 2015).
This pathogen is similar to the species B. dendobatidis (Bd) that
has caused massive amphibian population declines globally. As
the United States is home to the world’s most diverse salaman-
der assemblage, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service has
sought to increase protection of native salamander populations
via an interim rule under the Lacey Act (18 USC 42- USFWS
2016). This rule, effective 28 January 2016, limits international
and interstate movement of 20 genera of salamanders. Concur-
rent with this work, a U.S. Bsal Task Force (Grant et al. 2016)
was formed to help prevent and manage cases that might oc-
cur in North America. The diagnostics committee of this Task
Force developed the following Bsal case definition to promote
standardized communication of results and consistent national
reporting of this invasive pathogen among multiple diagnostic
laboratories in order to provide reliable information to wildlife
managers.
Case definitions typically include field, gross, histopatholo-
gy, laboratory, and epidemiologic criteria for assigning an indi-
vidual to a specific disease or condition. The diagnostic criteria
including field signs, gross pathology and histopathology have
been established from Bsal cases in free-ranging salamanders
in Europe and North American species examined during exper-
imental infection trials (Martel et al. 2013; A. P. Pessier, unpubl.
data). As an emerging pathogen some aspects of Bsal ecology,
including variation in species susceptibility and field signs for
North American species, are unknown. The case definition,
therefore, errs on the side of specificity over sensitivity by re-
quiring both histopathologic and laboratory confirmation to be
considered a confirmed Bsal case. However, we also included
a category for reporting the presence of the Bsal fungus in the
absence of corroborating evidence of disease (i.e., histopathol-
ogy) since consistent reporting of this information will be use-
ful for examining pathogen spread in new geographic locations
and susceptibility in new host species.
The case definition presented here represents the current
knowledge of Bsal infection in amphibians and is intended to
provide background information on this new pathogen and the
clinical and histopathogical presentation of the disease. Criteria
for diagnoses are provided and should be used for determining
disease presence. However, it should be noted that since this
disease has not been found in free-ranging North American am-
phibian species, variation in its presentation for these new pop-
ulations is unknown, and the definitions proposed below may
evolve with geographical, environmental, and host expansion.
C. LEANN WHITE
USGS-National Wildlife Health Center, Madison, Wisconsin 53711, USA
MARÍA J. FORZÁN
Canadian Wildlife Health Cooperative, Atlantic Veterinary College,
University of Prince Edward Island, Charlottetown,
Prince Edward Island C1A4P3, Canada
ALLAN P. PESSIER
Institute for Conservation Research, San Diego Zoo Global,
San Diego, California 92112, USA
MATTHEW C. ALLENDER
Wildlife Epidemiology Lab, Department of Veterinary Clinical Medicine,
University of Illinois, Urbana, Illinois 61802, USA
JENNIFER R. BALLARD
US Fish and Wildlife Service, Wildlife Health Oce,
Natural Resource Program Center, National Wildlife Refuge System,
Fort Collins, Colorado 80525, USA
ALESSANDRO CATENAZZI
Department of Zoology, Southern Illinois University Carbondale,
Carbondale, Illinois 62901, USA
HEATHER FENTON
Southeastern Cooperative Wildlife Disease Study, College of
Veterinary Medicine, Department of Population Health,
University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia 30602, USA
AN MARTEL
FRANK PASMANS
Department of Pathology, Bacteriology and Avian Diseases,
Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, Merelbeke, Belgium
DEBRA L. MILLER
Center for Wildlife Health, University of Tennessee, Knoxville,
Tennessee 37996, USA
ROBERT J. OSSIBOFF
Department of Population Medicine and Diagnostic Sciences,
Cornell University, Ithaca, New York 14853, USA
KATHERINE L. D. RICHGELS
USGS-National Wildlife Health Center, Madison, Wisconsin 53711, USA
University of Wisconsin-Madison, School of Veterinary Medicine,
Department of Pathobiological Sciences, Madison, Wisconsin 53706, USA
JACOB L. KERBY*
Department of Biology, University of South Dakota, Vermillion,
South Dakota 57069, USA
*Corresponding author; e-mail: Jacob.Kerby@usd.edu
Herpetological Review 47(2), 2016
208 AMPHIBIAN AND REPTILE DISEASES
CHytrid Fun gus in tHe order rHiZoPHydiaLes, genus
Batrachochytrium , sPeCies sal amandrivoran s
I. Individual, Place, and Time
Individual.—Post-metamorphic amphibians (especially
salamanders) are known to be susceptible. Although larval Fire
Salamanders (Salamandra salamandra) are not susceptible
(Van Rooij et al. 2015), larval susceptibility in other species is
unknown. There is increased index of suspicion for mortality
events involving multiple salamander species (and notably not
involving co-occurring frog species), or North American spe-
cies with laboratory confirmed susceptibility to Bsal chytrid-
iomycosis, specifically Notophthalmus viridescens (Eastern
Newt), Taricha granulosa (Rough-skinned Newt).
Place.—There are currently no specific restrictions for
where Bsal can occur.
Time.—There are currently no specific restrictions for when
Bsal can occur.
II. Diagnostic Description
Field observations.—A clinically compatible case includes
amphibians with skin ulcers and lethargy, leading to a typically
high mortality rate. Weak or erratic swimming may also occur.
Gross necropsy observations.—On post-mortem examina-
tion, clinically compatible cases may present with subtle to
severe skin ulcers or erosions; some cases will have no lesions
visible on gross post-mortem examination. In addition to Bsal
infection, biologists, veterinarians, and diagnosticians are re-
minded to consider differentials for ulcerative or erosive lesions
in amphibians such as viral, bacterial, parasitic or other fungal
infections as well as lesions due to trauma or environmental
conditions (Green 2001). Lesions due to Bsal infection may oc-
cur at any site on the head, body, limbs, or tail of infected in-
dividuals. Chytridiomycosis is not known to be associated with
internal gross lesions (Martel et al. 2013). Although clinical com-
patibility may raise the index of suspicion for a positive diag-
nosis, its presence is not required for diagnostic categorization.
Histopathology.—Histopathological evidence most sugges-
tive of Bsal infection in the epidermis of salamanders is multi-
focal epidermal necrosis with loss of distinction between layers
of keratinocytes associated with myriad intracellular and extra-
cellular chytrid-type fungal thalli (Fig. 1) (Martel et al. 2013; A.
P. Pessier, unpubl. data). Thalli have a diameter of 6.9–17.2 μm
(average 12.2 ± 1.9 μm, N = 50). Lesions multifocally have areas
of erosion or ulceration. In early lesions and at the periphery of
older lesions, chytrid thalli may be observed within keratino-
cyte cytoplasm with margination of cell nuclei.
Necrotizing lesions most suspicious for Bsal (Bsal-type
chytridiomycosis) can be contrasted with those typical of Bd
infection (Bd-type chytridiomycosis) in which the epidermis
is predominantly hyperplastic and hyperkeratotic with many
superficial intracytoplasmic chytrid-type fungal thalli (Fig. 1).
However, there is overlap in these infection patterns.
General histologic features of chytrid (Batrachochytrium
spp.) fungal thalli are 5–20 μm diameter, round to slightly oval
organisms, that may contain 2–3 μm basophilic spores (zoo-
spores) or a discharge tube (giving a flask-like appearance)
(Berger et al. 2005). However, developing thalli or empty thalli
(those that have already discharged zoospores) often predomi-
nate. A highly characteristic feature of chytrid thalli are colonial
thalli that have internal septa. Colonial thalli are most easily
observed when empty or with stains that highlight fungal cell
walls (e.g., Grocott’s methenamine silver or periodic acid-
Schiff). Features of chytrid thalli that are more consistent with
Bsal over than Bd are numerous colonial thalli (compared to
infrequent) with multiple internal septa (rather than single).
However, these two species cannot be definitively distinguished
histologically at this time.
III. Laboratory Criteria for Diagnosis
Current molecular methods for verification of Bsal via poly-
merase chain reactions (PCR) are provided by Martel et al. (2013)
and via quantitative PCR by Blooi et al. (2013). Methods for cul-
turing Bsal are available in Martel et al. (2013).
Fig. 1. Comparison of Bd and Bsal-type chytridiomycosis. Notophthalmus viridescens. Hematoxylin and eosin stain 1000×. Bd-type chy-
tridiomycosis (A) is proliferative with epidermal hyperplasia and hyperkeratosis and numerous chytrid thalli in superficial keratinocytes
(arrows). The keratinocytes are arranged in distinct layers with intact nuclei (N). In contrast, Bsal-type chytridiomycosis (B) has almost
full-thickness necrosis of keratinocytes with myriad chytrid thalli (arrows) that frequently have internal septa (colonial thalli). Note the loss
of distinct layers of keratinocytes. At the periphery of this area of necrosis, a remaining keratinocyte has two intracytoplasmic chytrid thalli
that marginate the nucleus (circle).
Herpetological Review 47(2), 2016
AMPHIBIAN AND REPTILE DISEASES 209
Case CLassiFiCation
Below we provide criteria for three diagnostic categories of
Bsal based on diagnostic criteria. PCR and culturing methods al-
low for confirmation of the presence of Bsal but do not necessar-
ily indicate infection or the presence of disease. Histopathology
can provide support for chytridiomycosis in the salamander, but
as some histopathological findings such as necrosis and ulcer-
ation in the absence of chytrid fungi are non-specific and can be
caused by a wide variety of pathogens and environmental con-
ditions (Green 2001), a definitive diagnosis must include both
identification of the pathogen and demonstration of disease in
the salamander.
Bsal present.—Positive Bsal PCR or Bsal culture from skin
tissue of an animal for which compatible gross lesions were not
observed and for which histopathology was either not done or
was not consistent with Bsal histopathology (lacking epidermal
necrosis associated with chytrid zoosporangia).
OR
Positive Bsal PCR or Bsal culture from a sample (e.g., swab
from individual or environmental sample) for which gross pa-
thology was not observed or recorded and for which histopathol-
ogy was not done or was not consistent with Bsal histopathology
(lacking epidermal necrosis associated with chytrid zoosporan-
gia).
Further verification (via additional samples or alternative
methodology) of a Bsal positive sample in a new area of detec-
tion is highly recommended.
Suspect Bsal chytridiomycosis.—Histopathology consistent
with Bsal infection (epidermal necrosis associated with chytrid
zoosporangia) in the absence of corroborating Bsal PCR or Bsal
fungal culture (either negative results or specimen unsuitable for
analysis).
Further verification (via additional diagnostics such as PCR
or culture) of a Bsal suspect sample is necessary for a definitive
diagnosis.
Confirmed Bsal chytridiomycosis.—Histopathology con-
sistent with Bsal infection (epidermal necrosis associated with
chytrid zoosporangia) and positive Bsal PCR or Bsal culture from
skin samples
OR
Histopathology consistent with chytridiomycosis AND posi-
tive Bsal PCR or Bsal culture and Bd PCR or culture negative.
If Bd is also detected, further investigation into the cause of
the disease is highly recommended.
Conclusion.—As with all emerging diseases there are limited
data and many knowledge gaps for Bsal. This case definition pro-
vides guidelines for reporting Bsal chytridiomycosis. Any diag-
nosis of Bsal should be reported immediately to a regional, state,
or federal wildlife agency. This case definition will be updated as
further information is reported and a current version will be lo-
cated at www.salamanderfungus.org.
Acknowledgments.—We thank Julie Ellis, Michael Garner, Deb-
orah Iwanowicz, James Lewis, Steven Lloyd, Jeffrey Lorch, Laura
Sprague, Craig Stephen, Tom Waltzek, John Wood, and Julia Lank-
ton for reviewing drafts of this document. Authors and reviewers are
members of the Bsal Diagnostics Committee of the U.S. Bsal Task
Force. This group was initiated at a meeting hosted by USGS Powell
Center for Analysis and Synthesis, which was supported by the USGS
Ecosystems mission area. The findings and conclusions in this article
are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views
of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Use of trade, product, or firm
names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorse-
ment by the U.S. government.
Literature Cited
Berger, L., a. d. Hyatt, r. sPeare, and J. e. LongCore. 2005. Life cycle
stages of the amphibian chytrid fungus, Batrachochytrium den-
drobatidis. Dis. Aquat. Org. 68:51–63.
BLooi, m., F. Pasmans, J. e. LongCore, a. sPitZen-van der sLuiJs, F. ver-
Cammen, and a. marteL. 2013. Duplex real-time PCR for rapid si-
multaneous detection of Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis and Ba-
trachochytrium salamandrivorans in amphibian samples. J. Clin.
Micro. 51(12):4173–4177.
CunningHam, a. a., k. BeCkmann, m. Perkins, L. FitZPatriCk, r. Cromie, J.
redBond, m. F. o’Brien, P. gHosH, J. sHeLton, and m. C. FisHer. 2015.
Emerging disease in UK amphibians. Vet. Rec. 176:468.
grant, e. H. C., e. mutHs, r. a. katZ, s. Canessa, m. J. adams, J. r. BaL-
Lard, L. Berger, C. J. Briggs, J. CoLeman, m. J. gray, m. C. Harris, r. n.
Harris, B. HossaCk, k. P. Huyvaert, J. e. koLBy, k. r. LiPs, r. e. LoviCH,
H. i. mCCaLLum, J. r. mendeLson, iii, P. nanJaPPa, d. H. oLson, J. g.
Powers, k. L. d. riCHgeLs, r. e. russeLL, B. r. sCHmidt, a. sPitZen-van
der sLuiJs, m. k. watry, d. C. woodHams, and C. L. wHite. 2016. Sala-
mander chytrid fungus (Batrachochytrium salamandrivorans) in
the United States—Developing research, monitoring, and man-
agement strategies: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report
2015–1233, 16 pp., http://dx.doi.org/10.3133/ofr20151233.
green, d. e. 2001. Pathology of amphibians. In K. M. Wright and B. R.
Whitaker (eds.), Amphibian Medicine and Captive Husbandry, pp.
401–485. Krieger Publishing Company, Malabar, Florida.
marteL, a, a. sPitZen-van der sLuiJs, m. BLooi, w. Bert, r. duCateLLe, m.
C. FisHer, a. woeLtJes, w. Bosman, k. CHiers, F. Bossuyt, and F. Pas-
mans. 2013. Batrachochytrium salamandrivorans sp. nov. causes
lethal chytridiomycosis in amphibians. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci.
110(38):15325–15329.
u.s. FisH and wiLdLiFe serviCe. 2016. Injurious Wildlife Species; List-
ing salamanders due to risk of salamander chytrid fungus. Federal
Register 81(8):1534–1556.
van rooiJ, P., a. marteL, F. HaeseBrouCk, and F. Pasmans. 2015 Amphibian
chytridiomycosis: a review with focus on fungus-host interactions.
Vet. Res. 46:137.