Firouzophrynus hololius (Günther, 1876)

Class: Amphibia > Order: Anura > Family: Bufonidae > Genus: Firouzophrynus > Species: Firouzophrynus hololius

Bufo hololius Günther, 1876 "1875", Proc. Zool. Soc. London, 1875: 569. Holotype: BMNH 1947.2.20.50 (formerly 1874.4.29.1297), according to A.G.C. Grandison in Inger, 1985, in Frost (ed.), Amph. Species World: 48. Type locality: "Malabar", India. Biju, 2001, Occas. Publ. Indian Soc. Conserv. Biol., 1: 8, noted the imprecision of this type locality, which could be anywhere within the entire region of the Western Ghats.

"Bufo" hololius — 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: 364. Excluded from Bufo and unassigned to genus.

Duttaphrynus hololius — Van Bocxlaer, Biju, Loader, and Bossuyt, 2009, BMC Evol. Biol., 9 (e131): 4.

Firouzophrynus hololius — Dubois, Ohler, and Pyron, 2021, Megataxa, 5: 447. 

Common Names

Malabar Toad (Frank and Ramus, 1995, Compl. Guide Scient. Common Names Amph. Rept. World: 42).

Günther's Toad (Das and Dutta, 1998, Hamadryad, 23: 63).

Günther's True Toad (Dinesh, Radhakrishnan, Deepak, and Kulkarni, 2023, Fauna India Checklist, vers. 5.0 : 2). 

Distribution

Central and northern Andhra Pradesh and central Telangana south to northeastern Tamil Nadu, eastern Kerala, Hyderabad, and southeastern Karnataka, South India. 

Geographic Occurrence

Natural Resident: India

Endemic: India

Comment

See Daniel, 1963, J. Bombay Nat. Hist. Soc., 60: 432, Pillai and Ravichandran, 1991, Rec. Zool. Surv. India, 88: 11–14, and Radhakrishnan and Ravichandran, 1999, Rec. Zool. Surv. India, 97: 203–204, for accounts. Dubois and Ohler, 1999, J. South Asian Nat. Hist., 4: 169, provisionally allocated this species to the Bufo stomaticus group. Biju, 2001, Occas. Publ. Indian Soc. Conserv. Biol., 1: 8, discussed the highly provisional nature of published ranges for this species, which he regarded to be known only from the holotype from a highly imprecise type locality. Dutta, 1997, Amph. India Sri Lanka: 46, and Chanda, 2002, Handb. Indian Amph.: 23–24, provided brief accounts. Das and Dutta, 2007, Hamadryad, 31: 154–181, noted no larval descriptions in the literature (as Bufo hololius). Dinesh, Radhakrishnan, Gururaja, and Bhatta, 2009, Rec. Zool. Surv. India, Occas. Pap., 302: 4, regarded the range to include Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Kerala, and Tamil Nadu. Chandramouli, Ganesh, and Baskaran, 2011, Herpetol. Notes, 4: 271–274, reported on color-in-life, morphology, and prelimary ecological observations. Ganesh, Kalaimani, Nath, and Kumar, 2013, Herpetotropicos, Mérida, 9: 5–8, reported on larval morphology. Srinivasulu, Ganesh, and Srinivasulu, 2013, J. Threatened Taxa, 5: 4784–4790, provided new records, provided a spot map, and commented on earlier misidentifications. Chandramouli and Kalaimani, 2014, Alytes, 31: 3–12, reported on larval morphology. Ganesh, Brihadeesh, Narayana, Hussain, and Kumar, 2020, Asian J. Conserv. Biol., 9: 71–78, discussed morphology, range, call, and breeding behavior. Srinivasulu and Kumar, 2022, J. Threatened Taxa, 14: 21268, reported the species from the state of Telangana, south-central India. Narayanan, Bhat, Paran, and Aravind, 2022, Curr. Herpetol., Kyoto, 41: 215–229, discussed the location of the type locality, provided new records, and provided distribution modelling predictions. 

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.