2017
DOI: 10.1007/s00049-017-0238-0
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Poison frogs, defensive alkaloids, and sleepless mice: critique of a toxicity bioassay

Abstract: In studies of defensive allomones, appropriate methods of presenting chemicals and measuring their deterrent effects on consumers are essential for understanding the contributions that chemicals make to the survivorship of potential prey. However, unnatural chemical presentations and/or ambiguous bioassay responses occasionally have left open questions on some allelochemical effects. This discussion critiques a toxicity bioassay of Neotropical poison frogs (Dendrobatidae), a group whose skins are known to poss… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2

Citation Types

0
10
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 28 publications
0
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…No complete information exists about possibly differing toxicities of these peptides on a predator, except about the lethal dose (LD) for mice by intra-peritoneal injection: LD 50 ≈ 10 mg pergidin/kg, and 2 mg lophyrotomin/kg 35 , 94 . Such toxicity tests clearly do not reflect natural predatory-prey interactions 95 . We cannot exclude that the two compounds strongly differ in their feeding deterrence and/or toxicity, knowing however that these hepta- and octapeptides are closely related 35 , 36 .…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…No complete information exists about possibly differing toxicities of these peptides on a predator, except about the lethal dose (LD) for mice by intra-peritoneal injection: LD 50 ≈ 10 mg pergidin/kg, and 2 mg lophyrotomin/kg 35 , 94 . Such toxicity tests clearly do not reflect natural predatory-prey interactions 95 . We cannot exclude that the two compounds strongly differ in their feeding deterrence and/or toxicity, knowing however that these hepta- and octapeptides are closely related 35 , 36 .…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Mice are the standard test subjects in many toxicity studies because they are believed to be a good proxy for humans, but, given that mice are not considered a potential natural predator or closely related to any potential predator of poison frogs and defensive secretions are ingested, not injected, the ecological or evolutionary relevance of the effects of these injections on mice is unclear (for further discussion, see Bolton et al. ; Weldon ). That is, injection of skin secretions might be highly toxic to mice while ingestion might have little or no effect on potential avian, snake, or arthropod predators, or they might have no effect on mice, but be extremely effective at inhibiting pathogens across a broad spectrum.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Researchers are beginning to work on unpalatability assays of anuran toxins in invertebrates (3436), but our unpalatability assay provides a practical assessment of distastefulness, as opposed to toxicity (33), of anuran alkaloids in avian predators in a controlled manner, without having to use live frogs (33, 37). While informative, toxicity assays do not give an evolutionary context to defensive compounds as predators experience these alkaloids through taste, not via toxicity effects in the bloodstream (38). Experiments with live frogs, on the other hand, do not account for interindividual or interpopulational differences in toxin profiles (as sampling complete alkaloid profiles is not possible with live frogs) or alkaloid amount, which we have found not to relate directly to unpalatability.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%