Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Head-start amphibians for release Twenty-two studies head-started amphibians from eggs and monitored them after release. Six of 10 studies (including five replicated studies) in Denmark, Spain, the UK and USA and a global review found that released head-started tadpoles, metamorphs or juveniles established breeding frog populations or increased populations of frogs or toads. Two found mixed results with breeding populations established in 12 of 17 studies reviewed or at two of four sites. Two found that head-started metamorphs or adults did not prevent a frog population decline or establish a breeding toad population. For five of the studies, release of captive-bred individuals, translocation or habitat management were also carried out. Nine of 10 studies (including nine replicated studies) in Australia, Canada, Europe and the USA found that head-started amphibians released as tadpoles, metamorphs or adults metamorphosed successfully, tended to survive the first season, winter or year or bred successfully. One found adult survival was 1–17% over four years and one found limited breeding following the release of adults. Four replicated studies in Australia, the UK and USA found that frog survival to metamorphosis and size at metamorphosis was greater and time to metamorphosis shorter in head-started compared to wild animals. One replicated study in Canada found that young head-started leopard frogs were smaller than those in the wild. One replicated study in Australia found that corroboree frog tadpoles released earlier had higher survival, but metamorphosed two weeks later than those released a month later. Three studies (including one replicated study) in the USA only provided results for head-starting in captivity. Two found that Houston toad eggs could be captive-reared to tadpoles, but only one successfully reared adults. Three studies (including two replicated studies) in Canada and the USA found that during head-starting, amphibian growth rate, size, stress levels and survival was affected by the amount of protein provided, housing density or enclosure location. One found that mass, stress levels and survival were not affected by the amount of food or habitat complexity.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F881https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F881Fri, 13 Sep 2013 13:02:34 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use antifungal treatment to reduce chytridiomycosis infection Twelve of 16 studies (including four randomized, replicated, controlled studies) in Europe, Australia, Tasmania, Japan and the USA found that antifungal treatment cured or increased survival of amphibians with chytridiomycosis. Four studies found that treatments did not cure chytridiomycosis, but did reduce infection levels or had mixed results. Six of the eight studies (including two randomized, replicated, controlled studies) in Japan, Tasmania, the UK and USA testing treatment with itraconazole found that it was effective at curing amphibians of chytridiomycosis. One study found that it reduced infection levels and one found mixed effects. Six studies found that specific fungicides caused death or other negative side effects in amphibians.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F882https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F882Fri, 13 Sep 2013 13:44:14 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use hormone treatment to induce sperm and egg release during captive breeding One review and nine of 10 replicated studies (including two randomized, controlled studies) in Austria, Australia, China, Latvia, Russia and the USA found that hormone treatment of male amphibians stimulated or increased sperm production (Mansour, Lahnsteiner & Patzner 2010, Silla 2011) or resulted in successful breeding in captivity. One found that hormone treatment of males and females did not result in breeding. Four found that the amount and viability of sperm produced was affected by the type, amount or number of doses of hormone. One review and nine of 14 replicated studies (including six randomized and/or controlled studies) in Australia, Canada, China, Ecuador, Latvia and the USA found that hormone treatment of female amphibians had mixed results, with 30–71% of females producing viable eggs following treatment, or with egg production depending on the combination, amount or number of doses of hormones. Three found that hormone treatment stimulated egg production or successful breeding in captivity. Two found that hormone treatment did not stimulate or increase egg production. Five replicated studies (including one controlled study) in Canada, Latvia and the USA found that eggs induced by hormone treatment were raised successfully to tadpoles, toadlets or froglets in captivity. Two replicated studies, one of which was small, in Ecuador and the USA found that most toads died before or soon after hatching.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F883https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F883Fri, 13 Sep 2013 15:54:08 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Install culverts or tunnels as road crossings Thirty-two studies investigated the effectiveness of installing culverts or tunnels as road crossings for amphibians. Six of seven studies (including three replicated studies) in Canada, Germany, Italy, Hungary and the USA found that installing culverts or tunnels significantly decreased amphibian road deaths; in one study this was the case only when barrier fencing was also installed. One found no effect on road deaths. Fifteen of 24 studies (including one review and 17 replicated studies) in Australia, Canada, Europe and the USA found that culverts/tunnels were used by amphibians, by 15–85% of amphibians or 3–15 species, or that 23–100% of culverts or tunnels were used by amphibians or used in 12 of 14 studies reviewed. The majority of culverts/tunnels had barrier fencing to guide amphibians to entrances. Four found mixed effects depending on species, or for toads depending on the site or culvert type. Five found that culverts were used by less than 10% of amphibians or were not used. The use of culverts/tunnels was affected by diameter in three of six studies, with wider culverts used more, length in one of two studies, with long culverts avoided, lighting in all three studies, with mixed effects, substrate in three of six studies, with natural substrates used more, presence of water in two of three studies, with mixed effects, entrance location in one and tunnel climate in one study. Six studies (including one replicated, controlled study) in Canada, Spain, the Netherlands and USA investigated the use of culverts with flowing water and found that they were used by amphibians, or rarely used by salamanders or not used, and were used more or the same amount as dry culverts. Certain culvert designs were not suitable for amphibians; one-way tunnels with vertical entry chutes resulted in high mortality of common toads and condensation deposits from steel culverts had very high metal concentrations. One study found that thousands of amphibians were still killed on the road.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F884https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F884Mon, 16 Sep 2013 12:20:30 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: xxxx TESTxxxxCollected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3984https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3984Wed, 13 Mar 2024 14:37:58 +0000
What Works 2021 cover

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read the latest volume: Volume 21

Go to the CE Journal

Discover more on our blog

Our blog contains the latest news and updates from the Conservation Evidence team, the Conservation Evidence Journal, and our global partners in evidence-based conservation.


Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape ProgrammeRed List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Mauritian Wildlife Supporting Conservation Leaders
Sustainability Dashboard National Biodiversity Network Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Bat Conservation InternationalPeople trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust