Mitigation of amphibian disease requires a stronger connection between research and management

The first requirement of evidence-based conservation is that evidence is available and relevant for decision-makers. We reviewed twenty years of literature on mitigation of amphibian chytridiomycosis to understand whether conservation science is providing relevant and applicable evidence to end-users in this field. Searching the Scopus database with terms relating to chytridiomycosis and management returned nearly 5000 publications. Of these, 530 had some implications for conservation, but suggestions for management were mostly confined to brief, qualitative mentions in the closing paragraphs of articles. Fewer than 20% of publications provided a direct evaluation of management actions and quantitative estimates of changes to population vital rates as a result of proposed mitigation actions, mostly based on theoretical studies or individual treatments in laboratory settings. Fewer than 4% of studies provided estimates of population persistence that could be used directly by managers to compare actions against this fundamental conservation objective. Estimates of costs were virtually absent (<1% of studies). These results suggest that although high-quality science is accumulating on amphibian chytridiomycosis, often with important implications for mitigation, the literature leaves the challenge of imagining and developing solutions to would-be managers. To reinforce the connection between science and management, research on amphibian disease mitigation must go beyond the suggestion phase, increasing field trials and adaptive implementation in the real world. More broadly, it is necessary to stimulate and strengthen applied research that converts basic knowledge into information that is immediately relevant to managers.