Rhinella proboscidea (Spix, 1824)

Class: Amphibia > Order: Anura > Family: Bufonidae > Genus: Rhinella > Species: Rhinella proboscidea

Bufo (Oxyrhynchus) proboscideus Spix, 1824, Animal. Nova Spec. Nov. Test. Ran. Brasil.: 52. Type(s): Not designated, although including animal figured on pl. 21, fig. 4 of the original publication. ZSM 1145/0 is holotype according to Hoogmoed and Gruber, 1983, Spixiana, München, Suppl., 9: 319-415, and Glaw and Franzen, 2006, Spixiana, München, 29: 162. Type locality: "flumen Solimoens" (= Rio Solimoes), Brazil.

Oxyrhynchus proboscideusFitzinger, 1826, Neue Class. Rept.: 39.

Rhinella proboscideaFitzinger, 1826, Neue Class. Rept.: 39.

Bufo (Rhinella) proboscideusCuvier, 1829, Regne Animal., Ed. 2, 2: 111, by implication.

Eurhina proboscideusFitzinger, 1843, Syst. Rept.: 32.

Oxyrhynchus proboscideusJiménez de la Espada, 1875, Vert. Viaje Pacif. Verif. 1862–1865: 178.

Bufo proboscideusHoogmoed, 1986, in Rocek (ed.), Studies in Herpetol.: 147-150. Hoogmoed, 1990, in Peters and Hutterer (eds.), Vert. Tropics: 117-120.

Rhinella proboscideaFrost, 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: 366.

English Names

None noted.

Distribution

Amazon river region from Peru to Manaus, Brazil; presumably in Amazonian Colombia and possibly in Amazonian Ecuador.

Comment

See discussion by Hoogmoed, 1986, in Rocek (ed.), Studies in Herpetol.: 147-150, and Hoogmoed, 1990, in Peters and Hutterer (eds.), Vert. Tropics: 117-120, who noted that this species was referred to erroneously as Bufo dapsilis by Zimmerman and Bogart, 1988, J. Herpetol., 22: 97-108, and who removed it from the synonymy of Rhinella margaritifera (referred to as Bufo typhonius), where it had been placed by Boulenger, 1882, Cat. Batr. Sal. Coll. Brit. Mus., Ed. 2: 315. Zimmerman and Bogart, 1984, Acta Amazonica, 14: 473–520, reported on vocalization. The diagnostic differences between this form and geographically proximate members of Rhinella are not well documented. See comment under Rhinella margaritiferaBruschi, Sousa, Soares, Carvalho, Busin, Ficanha, Lima, Andrade, and Recco-Pimentel, 2019, Genet. Mol. Biol., 42: 445-451, reported on karyotype. 

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.