Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2010, 7 3231 places, and seems to prefer these to its natural habitat. These structures provide a dark, warm, humid atmosphere, close proximity to water, and protection from predators, conditions which are ideal for this animal. On every occasion that reservoir R3 was visited for water sampling purposes, mature specimens of L. caerulea were always found sleeping on the internal stairway, adjacent roof superstructure, and supporting columns within the reservoir. The suction pads on the toes of these animals enable them to easily climb vertical surfaces. At night this ambush predator comes to ground to prey on coleopterans and other insects as well as small vertebrates. The prey is engulfed, secured with its sticky tongue and vomerine teeth, and swallowed whole. As a consequence of this ground-feeding method the frog frequently ingests dried grass fragments and soil particles along with its prey, and these were commonly observed in the faecal pellets (Figure 2 a,c). These materials are natural substrates for many of the saprobic microfungi which were recovered from frog faecal pellets and also from water samples taken from the water body in the reservoirs [1]. Consequently it would be expected that such debris would introduce microfungal spores into the frog’s digestive system. Furthermore, many of the frog’s prey species are known to carry entomopathogenic fungi such as Paecilomyces spp. [10] which are also found in soil and on plants. The large number of fungal spores observed in needle-point samples of fresh frog faecal pellets also supports the theory that fungal spores are ingested with prey and extraneous debris, and pass through the animal’s digestive system unharmed. It is clear that in areas of Australia where L. caerulea is endemic, the species is a potential source of the microfungal population of drinking water systems, and this could occur in two ways. Firstly by introduction of fungal spores from outside the reservoir in the frog’s faeces which are, in most cases, voided directly into the water body of the reservoir. The frog’s ground-feeding method ensures ingestion of extraneous material along with spore-laden prey and it is clear from the data that many of those spores survive the frog’s digestive system. This is supported by the variety of filamentous microfungal genera recovered from the frog pellets and the occasional large percentages of individual genera. For example, Table 1 shows that 97.7% of microfungal CFU recovered from frog pellet #2 was Paecilomyces, a known entomopathogenic genus. Samples #4 and #11 carried high percentages of Penicillium spp. while 45.1% of the filamentous fungi CFU recovered from sample #8 were Aspergillus spp. These genera are saprobes of plant debris and are also found in soil. The data in Table 3 also suggests that the frog’s digestive system naturally supports very high yeast populations. With the sole exception of sample #2, high numbers of yeasts were recovered from all of the pellets tested. It is notable that yeast and yeast-like colonies were frequently recovered from water samples collected from reservoir R3 during the separate identification and enumeration investigation [1]. Secondly, when excrement is deposited onto the internal superstructure above the maximum water level it provides a substrate where microfungi grow and sporulate thus adding further to the airborne spore load within the reservoir and subsequently in the water body. The high prevalence and number of yeasts and yeast-like microfungi recovered from frog excrement and from skin swabs suggests that these microorganisms are resident commensals of the gut and skin of these animals. These high numbers, together with the knowledge that the animal carries high E. coli loads, suggests that L. caerulea should be excluded from reservoirs wherever possible and that adequate residual free chlorine levels should be maintained at all times. It is noteworthy that during the identification and enumeration study, 18 monthly water samples from reservoir R3, which