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; Jiménez de la Espada, 1875, Vert. Viaje Pacif. Verif. 1862–1865: 178.

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.

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.


Amazon river region from Peru to Manaus, Brazil, and Amazonian Ecuador; Caquetá, Colombia.

Geographic Occurrence

Natural Resident: Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador, Peru


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 margaritiferaOsorno-Muñoz, Gutiérrez-Lamus, and Blanco, 2011, Rev. Colomb. Amazon., 4: 143–160, reported the species from Caquetá Department, Colombia.  Bruschi, Sousa, Soares, Carvalho, Busin, Ficanha, Lima, Andrade, and Recco-Pimentel, 2019, Genet. Mol. Biol., 42: 445-451, reported on karyotype. In the Rhinella margaritifera clade, Rhinella margaritifera group of Pereyra, Blotto, Baldo, Chaparro, Ron, Elias-Costa, Iglesias, Venegas, Thomé, Ospina-Sarria, Maciel, Rada, Kolenc, Borteiro, Rivera-Correa, Rojas-Runjaic, Moravec, De la Riva, Wheeler, Castroviejo-Fisher, Grant, Haddad, and Faivovich, 2021, Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., 447: 1–156. Ferrão, Souza, Colatreli, Hanken, and Lima, 2022, Syst. Biodiversity, 20 (1: 2039317): 11, detailed the advertisement call and morphometrics from Manaus, Brazil. Schiesari, Rossa-Feres, Menin, and Hödl, 2022, Zootaxa, 5223: 33–34, detailed larval and metamorph morphology and natural history in central Amazonia, Brazil. Gagliardi-Urrutia, García Dávila, Jaramillo-Martinez, Rojas-Padilla, Rios-Alva, Aguilar-Manihuari, Pérez-Peña, Castroviejo-Fisher, Simões, Estivals, Guillen Huaman, Castro Ruiz, Angulo Chávez, Mariac, Duponchelle, and Renno, 2022, Anf. Loreto: 48–49, provided a brief account (as Rhinella aff. proboscidea), dot map, and genetic barcode for Loreto, Peru.  

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.