Attachment 2: compendium of getting the jump

Threatened Species Management
Information Circular No. 6
Hygiene Protocol for the Control of Disease in Frogs
NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service Acknowledgments
NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service Declining Frog Working Group who recommended thepreparation and provided input into the development of this strategy.
Ross Wellington (NPWS) is the principal author of this document with assistance from Ron Haering(NPWS).
Lee Berger, Arthur White, Julie Ravallion, Graham Pyke, Jeff Hardy and Jack Baker for their adviceand/or technical review.
This hygiene protocol is an adaptation of the Declining Amphibian Population Task Force (DAPTF)Fieldwork Code of Practice and the recommendations of Speare et al. (1999).
NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service Table of Contents
NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service Introduction
This information circular outlines measures to: • Prevent or reduce disease causing pathogens being transferred within and between wild • Ensure captive frogs are not infected prior to release.
• Deal safely with unintentionally transported frogs.
• Assist with the proper identification and management of sick and dead frogs in the wild.
Who should read this document?
This protocol is intended for use by all researchers, wildlife consultants, fauna surveyors and studentsundertaking frog field-work. In addition, the protocol should be read by National Parks and WildlifeService (NPWS) personnel, frog keepers, wildlife rescue and carer organisations, herpetological/froginterest groups/societies, fauna park/zoo operators/workers and other individuals who regularly dealwith or are likely to encounter frogs.
This protocol outlines the expectations of the NPWS regarding precautionary procedures to beemployed when working with frog populations. The intention is to promote implementation of hygieneprocedures by all individuals working with frogs. New licences and licence renewals will beconditional upon incorporation of the protocol. The NPWS recognises that some variation from theprotocol may be appropriate for particular research and frog handling activities. Such variationproposals should accompany any licence application or renewal to the NPWS.
The apparent decline of frogs, including extinctions of species and local populations, has attracted
increased international and national concern. Many potential causes for frog declines have been
proposed (eg see Pechmann et al., 1991; Ferrero and Bergin, 1993; Pechmann and Wilbur, 1994;
Pounds and Crump, 1994; Pounds et al., 1997). However, the patterns of decline at many locations
suggest that epidemic disease maybe the cause (Richards et al., 1993; Laurance et al., 1996; Alford and
Richards, 1997). Recent research has implicated a water-borne fungal pathogen Batrachochytrium as
the likely specific causative agent in many of these declines both in Australia and elsewhere (Berger et
al., 1998; 1999). This agent is commonly known as the Chytrid fungus and is responsible for the
disease Chytridiomycosis (Berger et al., 1999).
The NPWS established a Declining Frog Working Group (DFWG) in 1998 to develop specific frogconservation strategies and initiatives in NSW. An important issue identified by the DFWG, was theneed for a hygiene protocol for field workers to minimise the spread of the Chytrid fungus and otherpathogens, between sites where frogs occur and between individual frogs and/or tadpoles.
The objectives of the hygiene protocol are to:• Recommend best-practice procedures for NPWS personnel, researchers, consultants and other frog enthusiasts or individuals who handle frogs.
• Suggest workable strategies for those regularly working in the field with frogs or conducting fieldwork activities in wetlands and other aquatic environments where there is the potential forspreading pathogens such as the Chytrid fungus.
• Provide background information and guidance to people who provide advice or supervise frog • Provide standard licence conditions for workers engaged in frog related activities.
• Inform Animal Care and Ethics Committees (ACEC) for their consideration when granting Site Hygiene Management
Individuals studying frogs often travel and collect samples of frogs from multiple sites. Some frogpopulations can be particularly sensitive the introduction of infectious pathogens such as the Chytrid NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service fungus. Also, the arrangement of frog populations in the landscape may make them particularlyvulnerable to transmission of infectious pathogens. Therefore, it is important that frog workersrecognise the boundaries between sites and undertake measures which reduce the likelihood ofspreading infection.
Where critically endangered species or populations of particular risk are known to occur, this protocolshould be applied over very short distances ie a single site may need to be subdivided and treated asseparate sites.
A checklist of procedures is provided in Appendix 1.
Defining a Site
Defining the boundary of a site maybe problematic. In some places, the boundary between sites will beobvious but in others, less so. Undertaking work at a number of sites or conducting routine monitoringat a series of sites within walking distance creates obvious difficulties with boundary definitions. It islikely that defining the boundary between sites will differ among localities. It may be that a natural orconstructed feature forms a logical indicator of a site boundary eg a road/track, a large body of watersuch as a river or the sea, a marked habitat change or a catchment boundary.
As a guiding principle, each individual waterbody should be considered a separate site.
When working along a river or stream or around a wetland or a series of interconnecting ponds it isreasonable, in most instances, to treat such examples as a single site for the purposes of this protocol.
Where a stream consists of a series of distinctive tributaries or sub-catchments or where there is anobvious break or division then they should be treated as separate sites.
On-site Hygiene
When travelling from site to site it is recommended that the following hygiene precautions beundertaken to minimise the transfer of disease from footwear, equipment and/or vehicles.
Footwear must be thoroughly cleaned and disinfected at the commencement of fieldwork and
between each sampling site.

This can be achieved by initially scraping boots clear of mud and standing the soles in a disinfectingsolution. The remainder of the boot should be rinsed or sprayed with a disinfecting solution.
Disinfecting solutions should be prevented from entering any water bodies.
Rubber boots such as ‘gum boots’ or ‘Wellingtons’ are recommended because of the ease with whichthey can be cleaned and disinfected.
Several changes of footwear bagged between sites might be a practical alternative to cleaning.
Equipment such as nets, balances, callipers, bags, scalpels, headlamps, torches, wetsuits and waders
etc that are used at one site must be cleaned and disinfected before re-use at another site.

Disposable items should be used where possible. Non-disposable equipment should be used only onceduring a particular field exercise and disinfected later or disinfected at the site between uses usingprocedures outlined in 2.4 below.
NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service Vehicles
Where necessary, vehicle tyres should be sprayed/flushed with a disinfecting solution in high-risk

Transmission of disease from vehicles is unlikely to be a problem. However, if a vehicle is used totraverse a known frog site, which could result in mud and water being transferred to other bodies ofwater or frog sites, then wheels and tyres should undergo cleaning and disinfection. This should becarried out at a safe distance from water bodies, so that the disinfecting solution can infiltrate soil ratherthan run-off into a nearby water body.
Spraying with hospital grade ‘toilet duck’ (active ingredient benzalkonium chloride) is recommendedto disinfect car wheels and tyres. ‘Toilet Duck’ is also suitable for disinfecting footwear.
Cleaning of footwear will prevent the transfer of pathogens from/to vehicle floor and control pedals.
Handling of Frogs in the Field
The spread of pathogenic organisms, such as the Chytrid fungus, may occur as a result of handlingfrogs.
Frogs should only be handled when necessary.
Where handling of frogs is necessary the risk of pathogen transfer should be minimised as follows:• Hands should be either cleaned and disinfected between samples or a new pair of disposable gloves used for each sample. This may be achieved by commencing with a work area that has adish containing a disinfecting solution and paper towels.
• A ‘one bag – one frog’ approach to frog handling should be used especially where several people are working together with one person processing frogs and others doing the collecting. Bagsshould not be reused.
• A ‘one bag – one sample’ approach to tadpole sampling should be used. Bags should not be Toe clipping or Passive Integrated Transponder (PIT) tagging is likely to increase the risk oftransmitting disease between frogs due to the possibility of directly introducing pathogens into thefrogs’ system. This can be minimised by using: • Disposable sterile instruments• Instruments disinfected previously and used once• Instruments disinfected in between each frog Open wounds from toe clipping and PIT tagging should be sealed with a cyanoacrylate compound such
as Vetbond to reduce the likelihood of entry of pathogens. The NPWS ACEC further recommends the
application of topical anaesthetic Xylocaine cream and Betadine disinfectant solution before and
after any surgical procedure. This should then be followed by the wound sealant.
All used disinfecting solutions, gloves and other disposable items should be stored in a waste container
and disposed appropriately at the completion of fieldwork. Disinfecting solutions must not come into
contact with frogs or be permitted to contaminate any water bodies
Disinfection Methods
Disinfecting agents for hands and equipment must be effective against bacteria and both the vegetativeand spore stages of fungi. The following agents are recommended: • Chloramine and Chlorhexidine based products such as Halamid, Halasept or Hexifoam are
effective against both bacteria and fungi. These products are suitable for use on hands, footwear,instruments and other equipment. The manufacturers instructions should be followed when preparingthese solutions.
NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service • Bleach and alcohol (ethanol or methanol), diluted to appropriate concentrations can be effective against bacteria and fungi. However, these substances may be less practical because of theircorrosive and hazardous nature. When using methanol either: • immerse in 70% methanol for 30 minutes or• dip in 100% methanol then flame for 10 seconds or boil in water for 10 minutes Some equipment not easily disinfected in these ways can be effectively cleaned using medical standard
70% isopropyl alcohol wipes - Isowipes.
Captive Frog Hygiene Management
Housing Frogs and Tadpoles
Frogs and tadpoles should only be removed from a site when absolutely necessary.
When it is necessary for frogs or tadpoles to be collected and held for a period of time, the followingmeasures should be undertaken: • Animals obtained at different sites should be kept isolated from each other and from other captive • Aquaria set up to hold frogs should not share water, equipment or any filtration system. Splashes of water from adjacent enclosures or drops of water on nets may transfer pathogens betweenenclosures.
• Prior to housing frogs or tadpoles, ensure that tanks, aquaria and any associated equipment are • Tanks and equipment should be cleaned, disinfected and dried immediately after frogs/tadpoles are Tadpole Treatment
Release to the wild of tadpoles held or bred in captivity should be avoided
When contemplating a release of captive bred tadpoles for conservation purposes a TranslocationProposal should be submitted to the NPWS and pathological screening for disease should beundertaken (see also NPWS Draft Translocation Policy). Tadpoles can be tested by randomlyremoving 10 individuals at 6 weeks and again at 2 weeks before anticipated release. Testing could beundertaken by the pathology section at Taronga Zoo, Newcastle University, CSIRO Australian AnimalHealth Laboratories at Geelong and James Cook University at Townsville. Such an arrangement wouldneed to be negotiated by contacting one of these institutions well before the anticipated release date.
(see Appendix 2 for contact details) The NPWS intends to licence NSW Department of Education and Training (DET) to allow schoolstudents and/or teachers to remove tadpoles for classroom life cycle studies. They will be authorised toremove a maximum of 20 individuals from only one location and each school will also requireendorsement from DET Animal Care and Ethics Committee and comply with this protocol.
Tadpoles collected for these purposes are to be obtained from the local area of the school and are not tobe obtained from NPWS Reserves. As soon as tadpoles have transformed, froglets must be returned tothe exact point of capture. Tadpoles from different locations are not to be mixed.
Antifungal cleansing treatments to clear tadpoles of the Chytrid fungus are currently being trialed. Inthe future, such a treatment may be an added procedure required prior to froglet releases.
NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service Frog Treatment
The rigour with which frogs must be treated to ensure pathogens are not introduced to nativepopulations means that any proposal for the removal of adult frogs (particularly threatened species)from wild populations should be given careful consideration.
When it is essential for frogs to be removed from the wild, the following should apply.
Individuals to be released should be quarantined for a period of 2 months and monitored for any
signs of illness or disease.

Frogs must not be released if any evidence of illness or infection is detected. If illness is suspected,further advice must be sought from a Designated Frog Recipient (Appendix 2) as soon as possible todetermine the nature of the problem. Chytridiomycosis can be diagnosed in live frogs by microscopicalexamination of preserved toe clips or from shedding skin samples. Research is still in progress on thedevelopment of a simple technique for the detection of Chytridiomycosis and a treatment for infectedfrogs.
Current methods to be used are:• A technique for the treatment of potentially infected frogs is to place the frogs individually in a 1mg/L benzalkonium chloride solution for 1 hour on days 1, 3, 5, 9, 11 and 13 of the treatmentperiod. Frogs are then isolated/quarantined for two months (G. Marintelli, Amphibian ResearchCentre pers. comm.) to determine the success of the treatment. This and other possible treatmentsare documented in Berger and Speare (1998).
Betadine and Bactonex treatments have also been used on adult frogs with some success (M.
Mahony, Newcastle University pers. comm.).
Frogs undergoing treatment should be housed individually and kept separate from non-infectedindividuals.
Displaced Frogs
The incidence of frogs being unintentionally transported around the country with fresh produce iscommon and may significantly impact on local frog species. The introduced Cane Toad (Bufomarinus) may also occur in transported produce or landscaping supplies. Procedures to be undertakenwhen encountering introduced/displaced native frog species (as well as Cane Toads) are as follows.
Banana Box Frogs
‘Banana Box’ frog is the term used to describe several native frog species (usually Litoria gracilenta,L. infrafrenata, L. bicolor and L. caerulea) commonly transported in fruit and vegetable shipments andlandscaping supplies. In the past, well meaning individuals have attempted to return these frogs to theirplace of origin but this is usually impossible to do accurately. There is risk of spread of disease if thesefrogs are transferred from place to place.
Displaced Banana Box frogs should be treated as if they are infected and are not to be freighted
anywhere for release to the wild unless specifically approved by NPWS.

When encountering a displaced frog:• Contact a licensed wildlife carer organisation to collect the animal. The frog should then undergo a quarantine period of 2 months along with an approved disinfection treatment.
• Post-quarantine, the frog (if one of the species identified above) may be transferred to a licensed frog keeper. All other species require the permission from NPWS Wildlife Licensing (WLU) priorto transfer. Licensed carer groups are to record and receipt frogs obtained and disposed of in thisway.
• Licensed Frog Keepers are to list these frogs in their annual licence returns to NPWS.
NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service Frogs held by licensed Frog Keepers are not to be released to the wild except with specific NPWS
Displaced frogs may be made available to recognised institutions for research projects, displaypurposes or perhaps offered to the Australian Museum as scientific specimens once approval has beenprovided by the NPWS WLU.
Cane Toads
Cane Toads are known carriers of the Chytrid fungus and should not be knowingly transported or
released to the wild.

If a Cane Toad is discovered outside of its normal range, it should be humanely euthanased inaccordance with the recommended NSW Animal Welfare Advisory Council procedure (see Appendix3). Care should be taken to avoid euthanasia of native species due to mistaken identity. An NPWSinformation brochure titled ‘Cane Toads in NSW’ provides further information on Cane Toads andassistance with identification of some of the commonly misidentified native species.
Local Frog Species
Frogs encountered on roads, around dwellings and gardens or in swimming pools should not be
considered as displaced frogs.

Frogs encountered in these situations should be assisted off roads, away from dwellings, or out ofswimming pools preferably to the nearest area of vegetation or suitable habitat.
Incidences of frogs spawning or tadpoles appearing in swimming pools should be referred to a wildlifecarer/rescue organisation for assistance (see Appendix 4).
Sick or Dead Frogs
Unless an obvious cause of illness or death is evident (eg predation or road mortality): Sick or dead frogs encountered in the field should be collected and disposed of in accordance with
the procedures described in section 4.2 below.

The NPWS has been involved in a project to determine the areas and species affected by the Chytridfungus (as well as other diseases) and encourages those finding sick or dead frogs to assist this project.
Symptoms of Sick and Dying Frogs
Appearance (one or more symptoms)
• darker or blotchy upper (dorsal) surface• reddish/pink-tinged lower (ventral) surface and/or legs and/or webbing or toes• swollen hind limbs• very thin or emaciated• skin lesions (sores, lumps)• infected eyes Behaviour (one or more symptoms)
• lethargic limb movements, especially hind limbs
• abnormal behaviour (eg a nocturnal, burrowing or arboreal frog sitting in the open during the day
and making no vigorous attempt to escape when approached) NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service Diagnostic Behaviour Tests
Sick frogs will fail one or more of the following tests.
What To Do With Sick or Dead Frogs
A procedure for the preparation and transport of a sick or dead frog is given below. Adherence to thisprocedure will ensure the animal is maintained in a suitable condition for pathological examination andassist the NPWS and researchers to determine the extent of the disease and the number of speciesaffected.
• Disposable gloves should be worn when handling sick or dead frogs. Avoid handling food and touching your mouth or eyes as this could transfer pathogens and toxic skin secretions from somefrog species.
• New gloves and a clean plastic bag should be used for each frog specimen to prevent cross- contamination. When gloves are unavailable, use an implement to transfer the frog to a containerrather than using bare hands.
• If the frog is dead, keep the specimen cool and preserve as soon as possible (as frogs decompose quickly after death making examination difficult). Specimens can be fixed/preserved in 70%ethanol or 10% buffered formalin.
Cut open the belly and place the frog in about 10 times its own volume of preservative.
Alternatively, specimens can be frozen (although this makes tissues unsuitable for some tests). Ifnumerous frogs are collected, some should be preserved and some should be frozen. Portions of adead frog can be sent for analysis eg a preserved foot, leg or a portion of abdominal skin.
• The container should be labelled showing at least the species, date and location. A standardised collection form is provided in Appendix 5.
• If the frog is alive but unlikely to survive transportation (death appears imminent), euthanase the frog (see Appendix 3) and place the specimen in a freezer. Once frozen, the specimen is ready forshipment to the address provided below.
• If the frog is alive and likely to survive transportation, place the frog into either a moistened cloth bag with some damp leaf litter or into a plastic bag with damp leaf litter and partially inflatedbefore sealing. Remember to keep all frogs separated during transportation.
• Preserved samples can be sent in jars or wrapped in wet cloth, sealed in bags and placed inside a • Send frozen samples in an esky with dry ice (available from BOC/CIG Gas outlets) or with a frozen cooler brick in the bottom of the esky.
• Place live or frozen specimens into a small styrafoam esky (available from K-Mart/Big W for • Seal esky with packaging tape and address to one of the laboratories listed in Appendix 4.
• Send the package by courier (NPWS use TNT Express Overnight).
• Keep all receipts for esky, ice, cooler bricks and courier for reimbursement from NPWS Threatened Species Unit Northern Directorate (Appendix 3).
Further information on sick and dying frogs is available on the Amphibian Disease Home Page at In particular refer to - “What to do with dead or ill FrogsNSW National Parks and Wildlife Service References
Alford, R.A. and Richards, S.J. (1997) Lack of evidence for epidemic disease as an agent in the
catastrophic decline of Australian rainforest frogs. Conserv. Biol. 11: 1026-1029.
Berger, L., Speare, R. (1998) Chytridiomycosis – a new disease of amphibians. ANZCCART News
11(4): 1-3.
Berger, L., Speare, R., Daszac, P., Green, D.E., Cunningham, A.A., Goggin, C.L., Slocombe, R.,
Ragan, M.A., Hyatt, A.D., McDonald, K.R., Hines, H.B., Lips, K.R., Marantelli, G.
and Parkes, H.
(1998) Chytridiomycosis causes amphibian mortality associated with
population declines in the rainforests of Australia and Central America. Proc. Nat. Acad.
95: 9031-9036.
Berger, L., Speare, R. and Hyatt, A. (1999) Chytrid fungi and amphibian declines: Overview,
implications and future directions. In: Campbell, A. (Editor) Declines and disappearances
of Australian frogs. Biodiversity Group, Environment Australia.
Ferrero, T.J. and Bergin, S. (1993) Review of environmental factors influencing the declines of
Australian frogs. In: Lunney, D. and Ayers, D. (Editors) Herpetology in Australia: a
diverse discipline. Trans. R. Zool. Soc. Mosman.
Laurance, W.F., McDonald, K.R. and Speare, R. (1996) Epidemic disease and catastrophic decline
of Australian rainforest frogs. Conserv. Biol. 77: 203-212.
Pechmann, J.H.K. and Wilbur, H.M. (1994) Putting declining amphibian populations into
perspective: natural fluctuations and human impaccts. Herpetologica 50 : 64-84.
Pechmann, J.H.K., Scott, D.E., Semlitsch, R.D., Caldwell, J.P., Vitt, L.J. and Gibson, J.W.
(1991) Declining amphibian populations: the problem of separating human impacts from
natural fluctuations. Science 253: 892-895.
Pounds, J.A. and Crump, M.L. (1994) Amphibian declines and climate disturbance: the case for the
golden toad and harlequin frog. Conserv. Biol. 8 : 72-85.
Pounds, J.A., Fogden, M.P.L., Savage, J.M. and Gorman, G.C. (1997) Test of null models for
amphibian declines on a tropical mountain. Conserv. Biol. 11: 1307-1322.
Richards, S.J., McDonald, K.R. and Alford, R.A. (1993) Declines in populations of Australia’s
endemic tropical rainforest frogs. Pacific Conserv. Biol. 1: 66-77
Speare, R., Berger, L. and Hines, H. (1999) How to reduce the risk of you transmitting an
infectious agent between frogs and between sites. Amphibian Diseases Home Page22/1/99, (
NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service Appendix 1
Hygiene Protocol Checklist
This checklist is designed to assist with minimising the risk of transferring pathogens between frogs.
Have you considered the following questions before handling frogs in the field:
Has your proposed field trip been sufficiently well planned to consider hygiene issues? Have you taken into account boundaries between sites (particularly where endangered species or populations at risk are known to occur)? Have footwear disinfection procedures been considered and a strategy adopted? Have you planned the equipment you will be using and developed a disinfection strategy? Are you are planning to visit sites where vehicle disinfection will be needed (consider both vehicle wheels/tyres and control pedals) and if so, do you have a plan to deal with vehicledisinfection? Have handling procedures been planned to minimise the risk of frog to frog pathogentransmission? Do you have a planned disinfection procedure to deal with equipment, apparel and direct If you answered NO to any of these questions please re-read the relevant section of the NPWS
Hygiene Protocol for the Control of Disease in Frogs and apply a suitable strategy.

NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service Appendix 2
Designated Sick and Dead Frog Recipients
Contact one of the following specialists to arrange receipt and analyse sick and dead frogs. Make
contact prior to dispatching package

Lee Berger
Australian Animal Health Laboratory
CSIRO Australian Animal Health Laboratory
Ryrie St.
Contact Lee Berger or Alex Hyatt at the CSIRO AAHL[Phone: 03 52275397 or 03 52275000 Fax: 03 52275555 or e-mail ] Karrie RosePathologyTaronga Zoo PO Box 20 MOSMAN NSW 2088
[Phone: 99784749 Fax: 99784516]
Rick Speare (for all skin or toe-clip samples)
School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine
James Cook University
[Phone: 07 4722 5700 Fax: 07 4722 5788]
Michael Mahony
School of Biological Sciences
University of Newcastle
[Phone: 49216014 Fax: 49216923]
For reimbursement of costs associated with the transport of sick and dead frogs costs contact:
Nick Sheppard
Threatened Species Unit
NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service (Northern Directorate)
Locked Bag 914
Phone: 02 6659 8231 Fax: 02 6651 6187
For information on frog keeping licences and approvals to move some species of displaced frog

The ManagerNPWS Wildlife LicencingBiodiversity Research and Management DivisionPh 95856481 Fax 95856401Email: NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service Appendix 3
NSW Animal Welfare Advisory Council
The NSW Animal Welfare Advisory Council Procedure for humanely euthanasing Cane Toads orterminally ill frogs is stated as follows: • Using gloves, or some other implement, place Cane Toad or terminally ill frog into a plastic bag.
• Cool in the refrigerator to 4°C.
• Crush cranium with a swift blow using a blunt instrument.
Note: Before killing any frog presumed to be a Cane Toad, ensure that it has been correctly identified
and if outside the normal range for Cane Toads in NSW (north coast) that local NPWS regional office
is informed.
NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service Appendix 4
Licensed Wildlife Carer and Rescue Organisations
Following is a list of wildlife rehabilitation groups licensed by NSW National Parks and Wildlife

Northern NSW
A.S.R. (Australian Seabird Rescue), "Waverly", Pacific Highway, WEST BALLINA 2478
K.P.S.N. (Koala Preservation Society of NSW), PO BOX 236, PORT MACQUARIE 2444
N.R.W.C. (Northern Rivers Wildlife Carers), PO Box 6432, LISMORE SOUTH 2480
N.T.W.C. (Northern Tablelands Wildlife Carers), PO Box 550, ARMIDALE 2350
T.V.W.C. (Tweed Valley Wildlife Carers), PO Box 898, MURWILLUMBAH 2484
W.C.G.I. (Wildlife Carers of Glen Innes), PO Box 520, GLEN INNES 2370
Central Coast inc Sydney
A.W.A.R.E. (Aust. Wildlife Ambulance Rescue Service), PO Box 592, CARINGBAH 2229
A.W.H. (Australian Wildlife Hospital), PO Box 84, RAYMOND TERRACE 2324
C.C.F.F.C. (Cabramatta Creek Flying-fox Committee), PO Box 430 BONNYRIGG 2177
F.A.W.N.A. (For Aust Wildlife Needing Aid), P.O. Box 41, BEECHWOOD 2446
G.L.W.R. (Great Lakes Wildlife Rescue), c/- Huntley, The Lakes Way, BUNGWAHL 2423
H.K.P.S. (Hunter Koala Preservation Society), PO Box 544, RAYMOND TERRACE 2324
I.F.A.W. (International Fund for Animal Welfare Aust P/L) 29 Georgina St, NEWTOWN 2042
K.B.C.C. (Ku-ring-gai Bat Colony Committee), 45 Highfield Road, LINDFIELD 2070
K.P.C. (Kangaroo Protection Co-operative), GPO Box 3719, SYDNEY 2001
N.A.T.F. (Native Animal Trust Fund), 8 Conway St, TORONTO 2283
O.R.R.C.A. (Org. for the Rescue and Research of Cetaceans),PO Box 442, ARTARMON 2064
S.M.W.S. (Sydney Metropolitan Wildlife Services), 31 Chiltern Rd, INGLESIDE 2101
WILDLIFE ARC (Wildlife - Animal Rescue & Care), PO Box 2383, GOSFORD 2250
WIRES (Wildlife Information & Rescue Service), PO Box 260, FORESTVILLE 2087
(Note: WIRES has 25 Branches - addresses available separately) Southern NSW
L.A.O.K.O. (Looking After Our Kosciusko Orphans), 18 Kurrajong St, JINDABYNE 2627
N.A.N.A. (Native Animal Network Assoc.), P.O. Box 780, ULLADULLA 2539
S.W.C.G. (Sunraysia Wildlife Carers Group), PO Box 189, GOL GOL 2738
Western NSW
L.W.C. (Lachland Wildlife Carers), ‘Revenue’, CONDOBOLIN 2877
R.R.A.N.A. (Rescue & Rehab. of Aust. Native Animals), 107 Boughtman St, BROKEN HILL 2880
ACT Wildlife Foundation - not licensed in NSW . PO Box 207, JAMISON CENTRE ACT 2614
WCN(CW) (Wildlife Carers Network (Central West)), “Grunty Fen”, RUNNING STREAM 2850
NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service Appendix 5
Sick or Dead Frog Collection Form
NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service SICK OR DEAD FROG COLLECTION FORM
Sender Details:
Name: ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ Address: ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ Phone: (W) (H) ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ Collector Details: (where different to sender)
Name: ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Address: ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ Phone: (W) (H) ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ Specimen Details:
Species Name: ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ Date collected(day/mth/yr): / / Time collected: Sex: M/F Status at time of collection (healthy(H)/ sick(S)/ dead(D): Date sent (day/mth/yr): / / Location: ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ Batch details for multiple species collection:
Habitat Description:
Habitat Type: (eg Creek, Swamp, Forest) ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Vegetation Type: (eg rainforest, sedgeland) ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Micro Habitat: (eg.creek bank, under log, amongst emergent vegetation, on ground in the open)
Unusual behaviour of sick frogs: eg. lethargic, convulsions, sitting in the open during the day, showing little or no
movement when touched. ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Dead frogs appearance: eg. thin, reddening of skin on belly and/or toes, red spots, sore, lumps or discolouration on skin
Deformed frogs: eg. limb(s) missing, abnormal shape or length.
Dead/Sick Tadpoles: (eg no.s, behaviour)
Unusual appearance of egg masses: eg. grey or white eggs ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Recent use of agricultural chemicals in the area: eg pesticides, herbicides, fertilisers ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Other potential causes of sickness/mortality/comments/additional information: ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Contact Details
Please send specimens (each with completed copies of this form and the “Sick or Dead Record Form”) to:
University of Newcastle, CALLAGHAN, NSW 2308 Rick Speare, (for all skin or toe-clip samples) School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine MOSMAN NSW 2088
Phone: 07 4722 5700 Fax: 07 4722] Do NOT send specimens before you have contacted the relevant individual above to discuss the most appropriate mode and date of
Currently Northern Directorate TSU is paying packaging and transport costs. Please contact Dr Nick Sheppard to discuss means ofreimbursement.
Copies of this form should also be sent to: Dr. Nick SheppardNSW NPWS, PO Box 914,Coffs Harbour 2450.
Ph: 02 6659 8231 Fax: 02 6651 6187 E-mail:


Modulo no 4

Efectos Adversos de la Terapia Antirretroviral Dr. Raúl Gutiérrez Rodríguez, Dr. Leslie Soto Arquiñigo Médicos del Instituto de Medicina Tropical Alexander von Humboldt de la Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia Glóbulos rojos en condiciones de anemia Los efectos adversos han sido reportados con el uso de casi todos los antirretrovirales y son una de las condiciones

Diabetes ➊ Lifestyle interventions: Type 2 The authors state that these ‘remarkable’ findings are a ‘radical change in understanding T2DM’. This research ‘ carries major implications for information to be given to BJGP2013 ;63:60 newly diagnosed patients, who should know that they have a potentially reversible condition and not one that is inevitably This

Copyright © 2010-2014 Online pdf catalog