Search tool	Example of search string in box	What that means to the database
* = "wildcard". Allows a partial letter string to be entered and implies either no or various extension on this letter string	Hyl*	Will find all uses of "Hyl . . ." anywhere in a record: e.g., Hylarana, Hyla, Hylidae, Hylinae, Hylaedactyla.
* = "wildcard". Allows a partial letter string to be entered and implies either no or various extension on this letter string	*Hyla	Will find all uses of ". . . hyla" anywhere in a record: e.g., Hyla, Hylidae, Plectrohyla, Ptychadena hylaea, Adenomera hylaedactyla
	Hyla	Will find all records that contain stand-alone uses of Hyla: e.g., Hyla, Hyla arenicolor
Strings of words without quotation marks	Lithobates pipiens	Interprets this as "Lithobates OR pipiens" so will find the union of all records that contain either "Lithobates" or "pipiens": e.g., Lithobates omiltemanus, Hylorana pipiens
Strings of word with quotation marks	"Lithobates pipiens"	Interprets this as "Lithobates AND pipiens" so will return all records that have the character string "Lithobates pipiens" anywhere within a record: e.g., all members of the Lithobates pipiens complex.
AND statement. Means that the results of the search must include both words held together by an AND	Lithobates AND pipiens	Same as "Lithobates pipiens"
OR statement. Means that the results of the search will all records that have either of the terms held together by an OR	Lithobates OR "Costa Rica"	Recovers all records that contain the word "Lithobates" or "Costa Rica": 402 records inasmuch as this will include all records for the entire amphibian fauna of Costa Rica
Combining Boolean operators within the Basic Search box (AND, OR, NOT, quotation marks)	Lithobates AND "Costa Rica" NOT forreri	Recovers only records that contain the word Lithobates AND "Costa Rica", but excludes any record that contains the word "forreri" in any part of the record: 9 records
Printable HELP file

Search tool	Example of search string in box	What that means to the database
* = "wildcard". Allows a partial letter string to be entered and implies either no or various extension on this letter string	Hyl*	Will find all uses of "Hyl . . ." anywhere in a record: e.g., Hylarana, Hyla, Hylidae, Hylinae, Hylaedactyla.
* = "wildcard". Allows a partial letter string to be entered and implies either no or various extension on this letter string	*Hyla	Will find all uses of ". . . hyla" anywhere in a record: e.g., Hyla, Hylidae, Plectrohyla, Ptychadena hylaea, Adenomera hylaedactyla
Single word	Hyla	Will find all records that contain stand-alone uses of Hyla: e.g., Hyla, Hyla arenicolor
Strings of words without quotation marks	Lithobates pipiens	Interprets this as "Lithobates OR pipiens" so will find the union of all records that contain either "Lithobates" or "pipiens": e.g., Lithobates omiltemanus, Hylorana pipiens
Strings of word with quotation marks	"Lithobates pipiens"	Interprets this as "Lithobates AND pipiens" so will return all records that have the character string "Lithobates pipiens" anywhere within a record: e.g., all members of the Lithobates pipiens complex.
AND statement. Means that the results of the search must include both words held together by an AND	Lithobates AND pipiens	Same as "Lithobates pipiens"
OR statement. Means that the results of the search will all records that have either of the terms held together by an OR	Lithobates OR "Costa Rica"	Recovers all records that contain the word "Lithobates" or "Costa Rica": 402 records inasmuch as this will include all records for the entire amphibian fauna of Costa Rica
Combining Boolean operators within the Basic Search box (AND, OR, NOT, quotation marks)	Lithobates AND "Costa Rica" NOT forreri	Recovers only records that contain the word Lithobates AND "Costa Rica", but excludes any record that contains the word "forreri" in any part of the record: 9 records
Printable HELP file

Dryophytes chrysoscelis (Cope, 1880)

Class: Amphibia > Order: Anura > Family: Hylidae > Subfamily: Hylinae > Genus: Dryophytes > Species: Dryophytes chrysoscelis

Hyla femoralis chrysoscelis Cope, 1880, Bull. U.S. Natl. Mus., 17: 29. Holotype: Not stated; formerly ANSP 13672, according to Malnate, 1971, Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia, 123: errata (not ANSP 13762 as mentioned on page 350), now lost; TNHC 37293 designated neotype by Opinion 1716, Anonymous, 1993, Bull. Zool. Nomencl., 50: 94, which also placed this name on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology. Type locality: "near Dallas", Texas, USA; neotype from "2 miles west of the Colorado River on Highway 969, Bastrop County, Texas", USA (according to Smith, Fitzgerald, and Guillette, 1992, Bull. Zool. Nomencl., 49: 152.

Hyla versicolor chrysoscelis — Strecker, 1910, Proc. Biol. Soc. Washington, 23: 117; Smith and Brown, 1947, Proc. Biol. Soc. Washington, 60: 49.

Hyla versicolor sandersi Smith and Brown, 1947, Proc. Biol. Soc. Washington, 60: 48. Holotype: USNM 123978, by original designation. Type locality: "8 miles southwest of Somerset, Atascosa County, Texas", USA. Synonymy by Johnson, 1966, Texas J. Sci., 18: 361.

Hyla chrysoscelis — Johnson, 1966, Texas J. Sci., 18: 361.

Hyla (Dryophytes) chrysoscelis — Fouquette and Dubois, 2014, Checklist N.A. Amph. Rept.: 336.

Dryophytes chrysoscelis — Duellman, Marion, and Hedges, 2016, Zootaxa, 4104: 23.

Common Names

Cope's Chameleon Tree Frog (Hyla chrysoscelis: Strecker, 1915, Baylor Univ. Bull., 18: 50).

Western Common Tree Frog (Hyla versicolor chrysoscelis: Viosca, 1949, Pop. Sci. Bull., Louisiana Acad. Sci., 1: 10).

Southern Gray Tree Frog (Hyla chrysoscelis: Schmidt, 1953, Check List N. Am. Amph. Rept., Ed. 6: 73).

Southern Gray Treefrog (Hyla chrysoscelis: Conant, Cagle, Goin, Lowe, Neill, Netting, Schmidt, Shaw, Stebbins, and Bogert, 1956, Copeia, 1956: 176).

Cope's Tree Frog (Wright and Wright, 1933, Handb. Frogs Toads U.S. Canada: x).

Cope's Gray Treefrog (Hyla chrysoscelis: Collins, Huheey, Knight, and Smith, 1978, Herpetol. Circ., 7: 11; Frank and Ramus, 1995, Compl. Guide Scient. Common Names Amph. Rept. World: 54; Collins, 1997, Herpetol. Circ., 25: 12; Crother, Boundy, Campbell, de Queiroz, Frost, Highton, Iverson, Meylan, Reeder, Seidel, Sites, Taggart, Tilley, and Wake, 2001 "2000", Herpetol. Circ., 29: 10; Frost, McDiarmid, and Mendelson, 2008, in Crother (ed.), Herpetol. Circ., 37: 6; Collins and Taggart, 2009, Standard Common Curr. Sci. Names N. Am. Amph. Turtles Rept. Crocodil., ed. 6: 7; Frost, McDiarmid, Mendelson, and Green, 2012, in Crother (ed.), Herpetol. Circ., 39: 15; Frost, Lemmon, McDiarmid, and Mendelson, 2017, in Crother (ed.), Herpetol. Circ., 43: 11).

Central Texas Tree Frog (Hyla versicolor sandersi [no longer recognized]: Schmidt, 1953, Check List N. Am. Amph. Rept., Ed. 6: 73).

Central Texas Treefrog (Hyla versicolor sandersi [no longer recognized]: Conant, Cagle, Goin, Lowe, Neill, Netting, Schmidt, Shaw, Stebbins, and Bogert, 1956, Copeia, 1956: 176; Conant, 1958, Field Guide Rept. Amph. E. Cent. N. Am.: 282).

Distribution

Southern Manitoba, southern Ontario, southern Quebec, and southern New Brunswick (Canada) south through Minnesota, eastern North Dakota, southeastern South Dakota, northeastern Nebraska, Minnesota, Wisconsin, south to Missouri and eastern Kansas to central and south-central Texas, east to through southern Illinois to Pennsylvania, Maryland, and to and including all of Florida, USA.

Geographic Occurrence

Natural Resident: Canada, United States of America, United States of America - Alabama, United States of America - Arkansas, United States of America - Connecticut, United States of America - Delaware, United States of America - District of Columbia, United States of America - Florida, United States of America - Georgia, United States of America - Illinois, United States of America - Indiana, United States of America - Iowa, United States of America - Kansas, United States of America - Kentucky, United States of America - Louisiana, United States of America - Maine, United States of America - Maryland, United States of America - Massachusetts, United States of America - Michigan, United States of America - Minnesota, United States of America - Mississippi, United States of America - Missouri, United States of America - Nebraska, United States of America - New Hampshire, United States of America - New Jersey, United States of America - New York, United States of America - North Carolina, United States of America - North Dakota, United States of America - Ohio, United States of America - Oklahoma, United States of America - Pennsylvania, United States of America - Rhode Island, United States of America - South Carolina, United States of America - South Dakota, United States of America - Tennessee, United States of America - Texas, United States of America - Vermont, United States of America - Virginia, United States of America - West Virginia, United States of America - Wisconsin

Comment

Cocroft and Ryan, 1995, Animal Behav., 49: 283–303, discussed advertisement call in an evolutionary context. In the Hyla versicolor group of Faivovich, Haddad, Garcia, Frost, Campbell, and Wheeler, 2005, Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., 294: 102. Hyla chrysoscelis is one of a pair of cryptic species with Hyla versicolor. Holloway, Cannatella, Gerhardt, and Hillis, 2006, Am. Nat., 167: E88–E101, provided an analysis that discussed the role of Hyla chrysoscelis in the formation of the tetraploid Hyla versicolor, discussed previous literature and provided a revised range. Cline, 2005, in Lannoo (ed.), Amph. Declines: 449–452, and Dodd, 2013, Frogs U.S. and Canada, 1: 250–262, provided accounts that summarized the literature of the species and discussed the difficulty of identification between this species and the closely-related Hyla versicolor. Indeed, the original holotype of Hyla chrysoscelis had to be replaced by a neotype because the holotype turned out to be a representative of Hyla versicolor on histological examination (Fitzgerald, Smith, and Guillette, 1981, J. Herpetol., 15: 356–360). Elliot, Gerhardt, and Davidson, 2009, Frogs and Toads of N. Am.: 66–67, provided an account, photos, and advertisement call. Altig and McDiarmid, 2015, Handb. Larval Amph. US and Canada: 199–201, provided an account of larval morphology and biology. Tye, Geluso, and Harner, Herpetol. Rev., 48: 382–382, provided a record for central Nebraska, USA, and discussed the range and possibility of introductions in Nebraska and South Dakota, USA. Ruhe, Poston, and Urban, 2019, Herpetol. Rev., 50: 96–97, provided a record from Washington County, Pennsylvania, USA. Guyer and Bailey, 2023, Frogs and Toads of Alabama: 187–190, provided a detailed account for the species in Alabama, USA. Bassett, 2023, Reptiles & Amphibians, 30(e18486): 1–18, provided an updated county distribution map for Texas, USA.

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 additional information see AmphibiaWeb report
For information on conservation status and distribution see the IUCN Redlist
For information on distribution, habitat, and conservation see the Map of Life
For related information on conservation and images as well as observations see iNaturalist