Eleutherodactylus nitidus (Peters, 1870)

Class: Amphibia > Order: Anura > Superfamily: Brachycephaloidea > Family: Eleutherodactylidae > Subfamily: Eleutherodactylinae > Genus: Eleutherodactylus > Species: Eleutherodactylus nitidus

Liuperus nitidus Peters, 1870 "1869", Monatsber. Preuss. Akad. Wiss. Berlin, 1869: 878–879. Holotype: ZMB 6669 according to Kellogg, 1932, Bull. U.S. Natl. Mus., 160: 121. Type locality: "wareren Gegenden Mexicos (Matamoros u.a.o.)" = warmer parts of Mexico (Matamoros and other areas); rendered as "State of Puebla, Mexico, possibly from the vicinity of Matamoros" by Kellogg, 1932, Bull. U.S. Natl. Mus., 160: 121; probably near Matamoros [Puebla, Mexico] according to Smith and Taylor, 1948, Bull. U.S. Natl. Mus., 194: 49.

Leiuperus nitidus — Brocchi, 1881, Miss. Scient. Mex. Amer. Centr., Rech. Zool., 3(2, livr. 1): 23.

Paludicola nitida — Boulenger, 1882, Cat. Batr. Sal. Coll. Brit. Mus., Ed. 2: 237.

Tomodactylus amulae Günther, 1900, Biol. Centr. Amer., Rept. Batr., Vol. 7, Part 155: 219. Syntypes: BMNH 1901.12.19.9–12 according to Kellogg, 1932, Bull. U.S. Natl. Mus., 160: 121, now renumbered 1947.2.18.29–32 according to museum records. Type locality: "Mexico, Amula in Guerrero". Synonymy by Kellogg, 1932, Bull. U.S. Natl. Mus., 160: 121; Dixon, 1957, Texas J. Sci., 9: 385.

Tomodactylus nitidus — Parker, 1927, Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., Ser. 9, 20: 451; Kellogg, 1932, Bull. U.S. Natl. Mus., 160: 120–123.

Tomodactylus nitidus nitidus — Dixon, 1957, Texas J. Sci., 9: 385.

Eleutherodactylus (Syrrhophus) nitidus — Hedges, 1989, in Woods (ed.), Biogeograph. W. Indies: 318–319; Heinicke, Duellman, and Hedges, 2007, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, Suppl. Inform., 104: Table 2.

Syrrhophus nitidus — Frost, Grant, Faivovich, Bain, Haas, Haddad, de Sá, Channing, Wilkinson, Donnellan, Raxworthy, Campbell, Blotto, Moler, Drewes, Nussbaum, Lynch, Green, and Wheeler, 2006, Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., 297: 362.

Euhyas nitida — Dubois, Ohler, and Pyron, 2021, Megataxa, 5: 433.

Common Names

Shiny Peeping Frog (Syrrhophus nitidus: Liner, 1994, Herpetol. Circ., 23: 20; Frank and Ramus, 1995, Compl. Guide Scient. Common Names Amph. Rept. World: 77; Liner and Casas-Andreu, 2008, Herpetol. Circ., 38: 24).

Shiny Peeping Frog (Syrrhophus nitidus nitidus: Liner, 1994, Herpetol. Circ., 23: 20; Liner and Casas-Andreu, 2008, Herpetol. Circ., 38: 24).

Shiny Whistling Frog (Grünwald, Reyes-Velasco, Franz-Chávez, Morales-Flores, Ahumada-Carrillo, Rodriguez, and Jones, 2021, Amph. Rept. Conserv., 15(e272): 35). 

Distribution

Southern Tlaxcala, southern Puebla, Morelos, D.F., and southwestern México into northern Guerrero, southern Puebla, and the highlands of Oaxaca, Mexico. 

Geographic Occurrence

Natural Resident: Mexico

Endemic: Mexico

Comment

Literature prior to 2021 should be used with caution given the major redelimitation of species found in Grünwald, Reyes-Velasco, Franz-Chávez, Morales-Flores, Ahumada-Carrillo, Rodriguez, and Jones, 2021, Amph. Rept. Conserv., 15(e272): 1–35, provided key comparative characters (external morphology and advertisement call) for identification of members of their Eleutherodactylus nitidus group, as well as a molecular tree to place the species and who mapped this species as well as named and unnamed lineages formerly covered under this name. Sánchez-Aguilar, Montero-Vachier, Castillo-Sánchez, and García-Vázquez, 2024, Check List, 20: 692–699, provided a record from Mexico City. Vázquez-Hernández, Serrano-Serrano, Ramírez-Julián, Hernández-Medina, and Ochoa-Ochoa, 2024, Bioacoustics, 33: 138–156, reported on geographic variation in advertisement calls. 

Older literature: Subspecies not recognized (in the sense of including at least Eleutherodactylus petersi) by Lynch, 1991, Copeia, 1991: 1138–1139. In the Eleutherodactylus (Syrrhophus) nitidus group according to Lynch and Duellman, 1997, Univ. Kansas Mus. Nat. Hist. Spec. Publ., 23: 229. Mendoza-Quijano, Mejenes-López, Reynoso-Rosales, Estrada-Hernandez, and Rodriguez-Blanco, 2001, Anal. Inst. Biol., Univ. Nac. Aut. Mexico, Ser. Zool., 72: 233–243, provided the record from Guanajuato (Sierra Santa Rosa). In the Eleutherodactylus (Syrrhophus) longipes species series, Eleutherodactylus modestus species group of Hedges, Duellman, and Heinicke, 2008, Zootaxa, 1737: 91–92, and of Padial, Grant, and Frost, 2014, Zootaxa, 3825: 132. McCranie and Wilson, 1984, Herpetol. Rev., 15: 22, provided a record for Aguascalientes, Mexico (which almost surely is assignable to an unnamed species). López-Mejía and Goyenechea, 2012, Herpetol. Rev., 43: 298, provided a record for Hidalgo, Mexico (almost surely assignable to another species), and commented on the range. García-Vázquez and Trujano-Ortega, 2012, Rev. Mexicana Biodiversidad, 83: 856–858, provided records for Tlaxcala and central Puebla, Mexico. García-Padilla and Mata-Silva, 2014, Herpetol. Rev., 45: 468, provided a record for the Municipality of Santa Catarina Lachatao, Oaxaca, Mexico, and briefly discussed the documented range in that state. Grünwald, Reyes-Velasco, Franz-Chávez, Morales-Flores, Ahumada-Carrillo, Jones, and Boissinot, 2018, Mesoam. Herpetol., 5: 69, recognized Eleutherodactylus nitidus orarius as a distinct species, and as part of a discussion noting Eleutherodactylus nitidus as a species complex, commented on the status of Eleutherodactylus nitidus petersi of the Sierra de Coalcomán, Michoacán, Mexico. Lemos-Espinal, Smith, and Valdes-Lares, 2019, Amph. Rept. Durango: 62, provided a brief account for Durango, Mexico (again, assignable to an unnamed species). Lemos-Espinal and Dixon, 2016, Amph. Rept. Hidalgo: 366–367, provided a brief account and map for Hidalgo, Mexico.  Correa-Quezada and Durán, 2019, ZooKeys, 8631–15, commented on the impact of vulcanism in the Trans-Volcanic belt of Mexico on biogeography. In the Eleutherodactylus (Syrrhophus) nitidus clade of Hernández-Austria, García-Vázquez, Grünwald, and Parra-Olea, 2022, Syst. Biodiversity, 20 (1: 2014597): 1–20, who reported on molecular phylogenetics.

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.