Scheele, Ben C.Pasmans, FrankLee F, SkerrattLee, BergerAn, MarteWouter, BeukemaAcevedo, AldemarBurrowes, PatriciaCarvalho, TamilieCatenazzi, AlessandroDe la Riva, IgnacioFisher, Matthew CFlechas, Sandra VFoster, Claire NFrías-Álvarez, PatriciaTrenton W. J, . GarnerGratwicke, BrianGuayasamin, Juan MHirschfeld, MareikeKolby, Jonathan. Kosch, TiffanyLa Marca, EnriqueLindenmayer, David B.Lips, Karen RLongo, Ana VManeyro, RaúlMcDonald, Cait AMendelson III, JosephPalacios-Rodriguez, PabloParra-Olea, GabrielaCorinne L, Richards-ZawackRödel, Mark-OliverRovito, Sean M.Soto-Azat, ClaudioToledo, Luís FelipeVoyles, JaimeWeldon, ChéWhitfield, Steven M.Wilkinson, Mark W. Zamudio, Kelly RCanessa, Stefano2021-07-212021-07-212020-03ScienceOpen AccessVolume 367, Issue 648420 March 2020 Article number aay 290500368075http://repositorio.unab.cl/xmlui/handle/ria/19464Indexación: ScopusLambert 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.enAmphibians; Animals; Biodiversity; Chytridiomycota; Mycoses; Retrospective Studies Species IndexArtículo