If Only Lando Griffin Could Save The Poison Frogs

I’m not sure how many of you are fans of Family Guy, but if you are, do you remember the episode (Let’s Go to the Hop) where there’s a craze in the high school and the kids are licking toads to get high? Well, I’m not sure how many of us would actually want to lick a toad, and personally I wouldn’t do it for sanitary reasons, (who knows what other toxins could be found on the skin?), but I’m not surprised if anyone out there has done so. Of course, if they knew that the toad is poisonous, then it’s very likely that they wouldn’t even bother licking it. And if humans would avoid poisonous or toxic things, then similarly, animals would avoid them as well.

One such example would be that of the poison frogs found in Madagascar. Toxic frogs like these are usually avoided by predators for obvious reasons, and the poison itself is used as a defense mechanism against said predators. However, recent studies have shown that these frogs are actually losing their toxicity due to human development.

How is human development a threat, you ask? Well, these poison frogs consume alkaloid-containing insects, and in turn, the alkaloids will accumulate in their bodies, thus providing a defense mechanism that would be lethal. However, with the result of human development, the habitats of these frogs have been altered, and so, possibly, their diet was also affected; thus resulting in the decrease in toxicity.

Valerie C. Clark of Cornell University in Ithaca, New York, studied frogs in three different habitats:

1. an unaffected forest habitat
2. a forest patch surrounded by agricultural fields
3. a “moderately disturbed” habitat

She found that frogs from the first habitat had about 30 different alkaloids in their skin, as compared to a measly number of 12 different alkaloids found in the skin of the frogs from the second habitat. As for the “moderately disturbed” habitat, she found about 15 alkaloids on the frogs. Whether it’s 12 or 15, the differences are quite high when compared to 30.

John Daly, a pharmacologist at the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases at Bethesda, Maryland, studied some frogs from a Panamanian island, and he confirmed that there are decreases in alkaloids found in their skins. In fact, he even stated that he and his colleagues found new alkaloids in their skins as well. It was later to be discovered that the alkaloids came from a millipede.

And so, with the result of human development, the potential threats of these poison frogs are dwindling. As Cornell University’s Clark states, “predators currently trained to avoid the brightly colored poison frogs may learn they have nothing to fear and start attacking the newly defenseless amphibians.” This situation, she adds, “may alter the ecology and geographic distribution of poison frogs” and also noted that “additional research are necessary.” If this proves to be true, it would further explain the results of John Daly, and the addition of new alkaloids in the frogs’ skins.

The findings of both Clark and Daly leave another gaping hole in human activities. Do we, now that we have some brief information about these poison frogs, continue disrupting their habitats, or do we leave them alone? Though there aren’t enough studies done to prove that we are the cause of the changes in the frogs’ toxicity, it should still be noted that we are a threat to these frogs, let alone the other organisms in this world.

posted by kkaye (12)