- What is Amphibian Species of the World?
- How to cite
- How to use
- Structure of the taxonomic records
- Running log of additions and corrections, 2024
- Logs of changes and additions, 2014–2023
- What is the right name?
- Curator's blog
- Amphibian Species of the World on social media
- History of the project, 1980 to 2024
- Comments on amphibian taxonomy relating to versions 3.0 to 6.2 (2004 to 2024)
- Scientific Nomenclature and its Discontents: Comments by Frost on Rules and Philosophy of Taxonomy, Ranks, and Their Applications
- Contributors, online editions
- Contributors and reviewers for Amphibian Species of the World: A Taxonomic and Geographic Reference (1985)
- Versions
- Museum abbreviations
- Links to useful amphibian systematic, conservation, collection management, informational, and/or regional sites
- Links to useful FREE library sites
- Copyright and terms of use
Adenomus Cope, 1861
Adenomus Cope, 1861 "1860", Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia, 12: 371. Type species: Adenomus badioflavus Cope, 1860, by monotypy.
Common Names
None noted.
Distribution
Sri Lanka.
Comment
Adenomus was placed in the synonymy of Bufo by Cope, 1862, Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia, 14: 358; Günther, 1864, Rept. Brit. India: 421; Cope, 1867, J. Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia, Ser. 2, 6: 193; and Boulenger, 1882, Cat. Batr. Sal. Coll. Brit. Mus., Ed. 2: 281. Manamendra-Arachchi and Pethiyagoda, 1998, J. South Asian Nat. Hist., 3: 215, resurrected Adenomus without discussion of diagnostic features or phylogenetic placement, a move that will likely prove controversial. Nevertheless, Dubois, 1987 "1986", Alytes, 5: 25, had resurrected the Adenominae for a number of genera (Ansonia, Bufoides, Leptophryne, Pedostibes, Pelophryne, and Pseudobufo), but did not include Adenomus (the type genus of the Adenominae) in this list, implying that he considered Adenomus badioflavus to fit into one of these nominal genera, none of which is Bufo, in which synonymy Adenomus sat at the time. 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, did not address Adenomus and its phylogenetic status remains questionable. Likely, several of the species of "Bufo" in southern India will prove to be cladistic near relatives of Adenomus (DRF). Smith and Chiszar, 2006, Herpetol. Conserv. Biol., 1: 6-8, implied that this taxon should be considered a subgenus of Bufo; see comment under Bufonidae. Van Bocxlaer, Biju, Loader, and Bossuyt, 2009, BMC Evol. Biol., 9 (e131): 1-10, and Van Bocxlaer, Loader, Roelants, Biju, Menegon, and Bossuyt, 2010, Science, 327: 679-682, suggested on the basis of molecular evidence that Adenomus is the sister taxon of Duttaphrynus + Xanthophryne. Pyron and Wiens, 2011, Mol. Phylogenet. Evol., 61: 543-583, confirmed this relationship, although finding Xanthophryne imbedded within Duttaphrynus. Meegaskumbura, Senevirathne, Wijayathilaka, Jayawardena, Bandara, Manamendra-Arachchi, and Pethiyagoda, 2015, Zootaxa, 3911: 245–261, discussed species boundaries of the species based on osteology, larval morphology, calls, ecological niche modeling, and a molecular tree.
Contained taxa (2 sp.):
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.
- For access to general information see Wikipedia
- For additional sources of general information from other websites search Google
- For access to relevant technical literature search Google Scholar
- For images search CalPhoto Images and Google Images
- To search the NIH genetic sequence database, see GenBank
- For related information on conservation and images as well as observations see iNaturalist