Discoglossus pictus Otth, 1837

Class: Amphibia > Order: Anura > Family: Alytidae > Genus: Discoglossus > Species: Discoglossus pictus

Discoglossus pictus Otth, 1837, Neue Denkschr. Allg. Schweiz. Ges. Naturwiss., 1: 6. Syntype(s): MZUT (2 specimens) according to Clarke, 1985, in Frost (ed.), Amph. Species World: 108. Type locality: "Sicilien und Spanien, wahrscheinlich auch Unter-Italien"; restricted to "Sizilien" (= Sicily) by Mertens and Müller, 1928, Abh. Senckenb. Naturforsch. Ges., 41: 15.

Pseudis pictaBonaparte, 1840, Mem. Accad. Sci. Torino, Ser. 2, 2: 445 (ascribed in error to Fitzinger); Duméril and Bibron, 1841, Erp. Gen., 8: 426.

Rana pictaSchlegel, 1841, in Wagner (ed.), Reisen Regentschaft Algier, 3: 106.

Pseudes pictusLeunis, 1844, Synops. Drei Naturr., Zool., Ed. 1: 146; Leunis, 1860, Synops. Drei Naturr., Zool., Ed. 2: 146.

Colodactylus coerulescens Tschudi, 1845, Arch. Naturgesch., 11: 168. Type(s): not designated, but presumably originally in MHNN, but not noted in recent type lists. Type locality: "Republica Peruana" (in error); given as "Quebrada von Huarochirin an dem sumpfigen Ufer eines kleinen Flüsschens auf einer Höhe von 4700 Füss u. M. gefunden", Peru, by Tschudi, 1846 "1845", Untersuch. Fauna Peruana, Herpetol.: 68. Tentative synonymy by Boulenger, 1882, Cat. Batr. Sal. Coll. Brit. Mus., Ed. 2: 445.

Discoglossus pictus var. pictaGünther, 1859 "1858", Cat. Batr. Sal. Coll. Brit. Mus.: 35 [sic].

Discoglossus algirus Lataste, 1879, Act. Soc. Linn. Bordeaux, Ser. 4, 3: 333. Syntypes: part of "No. 113" and "No. 634", collection presumably that of Lataste, presumably ultimately deposited in the BMNH. Type locality: "Alger" and "env. D'Alger", Algeria. Synonymy by Lanza, Nascetti, Capula, and Bullini, 1986, Bull. Soc. Herpetol. France, 40: 16, who incorrectly considered this name a nomen oblitum. Name unavailable for reason of being coined as a junior synonym of Discoglossus pictus; for discussion see Crochet and Dubois, 2006, Zootaxa, 1335: 51–53.

Discoglossus pictusBoulenger, 1882, Cat. Batr. Sal. Coll. Brit. Mus., Ed. 2: 445.

Colodactylus caerulescensBoulenger, 1882, Cat. Batr. Sal. Coll. Brit. Mus., Ed. 2: 445. Typographic error in synonymy.

Discoglossus pictus var. vittata Camerano, 1884 "1883", Mem. Accad. Sci. Torino, Ser. 2, 35: 208. Type(s): Mpt stated; presumably MZUT. Type localities: "Spagnuoli ed Algerini".

Discoglossus pictus var. ocellata Camerano, 1884 "1883", Mem. Accad. Sci. Torino, Ser. 2, 35: 209. Type(s): Not stated, but presumably MZUT. Type locality: "Sicilia", Italy.

Discoglossus pictus var. pictusCamerano, 1884 "1883", Mem. Accad. Sci. Torino, Ser. 2, 35: 209, by implication.

Discoglossus auritus Herón-Royer, 1888, Bull. Soc. Zool. France, 13: 205. Syntype(s): Not designated but including BMNH 1892.4.18.49–50 (reregistered 1947.2.25.99 and 1947.2.26.1) according to museum records. Type locality: "des environs d'Alger", Algeria. Synonymy by Boulenger, 1895, Trans. Zool. Soc. London, 13: 160.

Discoglossus pictus auritusLanza, Nascetti, Capula, and Bullini, 1986, Bull. Soc. Herpetol. France, 40: 16.

English Names

Painted Frog (Wood, 1863, Illust. Nat. Hist., 3: 161; Arnold and Burton, 1978, Field Guide Rept. Amph. Brit. Eur.: 62; Ananjeva, Borkin, Darevsky, and Orlov, 1988, Dict. Amph. Rept. Five Languages: 51; Stumpel-Rienks, 1992, Ergänzungsband Handbuch Rept. Amph. Eur., Trivialnamen der Herpetofauna Eur.: 47; Frank and Ramus, 1995, Compl. Guide Scient. Common Names Amph. Rept. World: 51; Arnold, 2002, Rept. Amph. Eur., Ed. 2: 62).


Mediterranean Africa in Morocco (east of the Moulouya River), Tunisia and northern Algeria; Sicily (Italy) and Malta; introduced in northeastern Spain and adjacent southwestern France.


 Lanza, Cei, and Crespo, 1975, Monit. Zool. Ital., N.S., Suppl., 9: 153–162, provided immunological evidence for the species distinctiveness of Discoglossus pictus and Discoglossus sardusLanza, 1983, Guide Reconoscimento Spec. Animali, Anf. Rett.: 86–91, reported on the Italian populations. See Lanza, Nascetti, Capula, and Bullini, 1986, Bull. Soc. Herpetol. France, 40: 16–27, for subspecies. Glaw and Vences, 1991, Amphibia-Reptilia, 12: 385–394, described and discussed the advertisement call. Nöllert and Nöllert, 1992, Die Amph. Eur.: 267–268, provided an account and polygon map. Llorente, Montori, Santos, and Carretero, 1995, Atlas Amf. Rept. Catalunya Andorra: 55–57, provided an account and detailed range map for Catalunya. See account by Salvador, 1996, Smithson. Herpetol. Inform. Serv., 109: 13. Veith and Martens, 1997, in Gasc et al. (eds.), Atlas Amph. Rept. Eur.: 104–105, discussed relevant literature and distribution. Llorente, Montori, Santos, and Carretero, 1997, in Pleguezuelos (ed.), Dist. Biogeogr. Anf. Rep. Esp. Portugal: 137–139, provided a brief account, photograph, and detailed map for Spain. Arnold, 2002, Rept. Amph. Eur., Ed. 2: 62, provided a brief account, figure, and map. Lever, 2003, Naturalized Rept. Amph. World: 140, reported on introduced populations in southern France and northeastern Spain. Zangari, Cimmaruta, and Nascetti, 2006, Biol. J. Linn. Soc., 87: 515–516, reported on allozymic and mtDNA phylogeography and rejected subspecies. Franch, Llorente, Montori, Richter-Boix, and Carranza, 2007, Herpetol. Rev., 38: 356–359, discussed the range of the introduced European component. See detailed account for Italy by Capula, 2007, in Lanza et al. (eds.), Fauna d'Italia, 42 (Amph.): 312–318. Amor, Odierna, Chinali, Said, and Picariello, 2010, Cytogenet. Genome Res., 127: 33–42, reported on an karyology. Amor, Velo-Antón, Farjallah, and Said, 2010, Afr. Zool., 45: 121–128, reported a lack of genetic phylogeographic structure in Tunisia. Rivera, Escoriza, Maluquer-Margalef, Arribas, and Carranza, 2011, Amf. Rept. Catalunya: 63–65, provided a brief account for northeastern Spain and adjacent France. Mateo, Ayres, and López-Jurado, 2011, Bol. Asoc. Herpetol. Esp., 22: 4, discussed introduced populations in northeastern Spain. Reques, Pleguezuelos, Busack, and de Pous, 2013, Basic & Appl. Herpetol., 27: 23–50, discussed the range and conservation status in Morocco. Amor, Kalboussi, and Said, 2013, Basic & Appl. Herpetol., 27: 85–100, discussed the range in Tunisia and its conservation status. Mateo, Géniez, and Pether, 2013, Basic & Appl. Herpetol., 27: 51–83, provided a range map, comments on the range and population status in Algeria. Beukema, de Pous, Donaire-Barroso, Bogaerts, Garcia-Porta, Escoriza, Arribas, El Mouden, and Carranza, 2013, Zootaxa, 3661: 35–36, provided an account for Morocco. Vences, de Pous, Nicolas, Díaz-Rodríguez, Donaire-Barroso, Hugemann, Hauswaldt, Amat, Barnestein, Bogaerts, Bouazza, Carranza, Galán, González de la Vega, Joger, Lansari, El Mouden, Ohler, Sanuy, Slimani, and Tejedo, 2014, Amphibia-Reptilia, 35: 305–320, reported on molecular phylogenetics. Llorente, Montori, and Pujol-Buxó, 2015, Bol. Asoc. Herpetol. Esp., 26: 12–17, reported on the state of knowledge of the species in the Iberian Peninsula. Mediani, Brito, and Fahd, 2015, Basic & Appl. Herpetol., 29: 81–107, provided a dot map for northern Morocco. Speybroeck, Beukema, Bok, and Van Der Voort, 2016, Field Guide Amph. Rept. Brit. Eur.: 128–129, provided a brief account and distribution map. See detailed account by Escoriza and Ben Hassine, 2019, Amph. N. Afr.: 120–132. Channing and Rödel, 2019, Field Guide Frogs & Other Amph. Afr.: 38–39, provided a brief account, photograph, and range map. Mabrouki, Taybi, Skalli, and Sánchez-Vialas, 2019, Basic & Appl. Herpetol., 33: 19–32, commented on and mapped the species in the Mouloua River Basin and adjacent areas in eastern Morocco. See Dufresnes, 2019, Amph. Eur., N. Afr., & Middle East: 35, for brief summary of range, identification morphology, and biology as well as a photograph (see p. 193 for photographs and map of nominal subspecies). Renet, Duguet, Policain, Piquet, Fradet, Priol, Deso, Grimal, Sotgiu, and Vences, 2020, Amph. Rept. Conserv., 14: 189–199, reported on introduced populations in France.   

External links:

Please note: these links will take you to external websites not affiliated with the American Museum of Natural History. We are not responsible for their content.