Response to Comment on "Amphibian fungal panzootic causes catastrophic and ongoing loss of biodiversity".
Ben C ScheeleFrank PasmansLee F SkerrattLee BergerAn MartelWouter BeukemaAldemar A AcevedoPatricia A BurrowesTamilie CarvalhoAlessandro CatenazziIgnacio De la RivaMatthew C FisherSandra V FlechasClaire N FosterPatricia Frías-ÁlvarezTrenton W J GarnerBrian GratwickeJuan M GuayasamínMareike HirschfeldJonathan E KolbyTiffany A KoschEnrique La MarcaDavid B LindenmayerKaren R LipsAna V LongoRaúl ManeyroCait A McDonaldJoseph R MendelsonPablo Palacios-RodriguezGabriela Parra-OleaCorinne L Richards-ZawackiMark-Oliver RödelSean M RovitoClaudio AzatLuís Felipe ToledoJamie VoylesChé WeldonSteven M WhitfieldMark WilkinsonKelly Raquel ZamudioStefano CanessaPublished in: Science (New York, N.Y.) (2020)
Lambert et al question our retrospective and holistic epidemiological assessment of the role of chytridiomycosis in amphibian declines. Their alternative assessment is narrow and provides an incomplete evaluation of evidence. Adopting this approach limits understanding of infectious disease impacts and hampers conservation efforts. We reaffirm that our study provides unambiguous evidence that chytridiomycosis has affected at least 501 amphibian species.