Scinax ruber (Laurenti, 1768)

Common Names

Red Snouted Treefrog (Hyla rubra: Lacépède, 1802, Nat. Hist. Ovip. Quadruped. (Kerr transl.): 269).

Red Snouted Treefrog (Scinax ruber: Frank and Ramus, 1995, Compl. Guide Scient. Common Names Amph. Rept. World: 64).

Allen's Snouted Treefrog (Scinax alleni [no longer recognized]: Frank and Ramus, 1995, Compl. Guide Scient. Common Names Amph. Rept. World: 63).

Common Snouted Treefrog (Hedges, Powell, Henderson, Hanson, and Murphy, 2019, Caribb. Herpetol., 67: 14). 

Two-striped Snouted Treefrog (Villacampa-Ortega, Serrano-Rojas, and Whitworth, 2017, Amph. Manu Learning Cent.: 202).

Distribution

With confidence, only recorded from southeastern Venezuela (Bolivar), Guyana, Suriname, French Guiana, and Martinique (where introduced). Likely in the Guianan parts of Brazil as well as Trinidad and Tobago and St Lucia. Records from Amazonian Brazil, Bolivia, Peru, Ecuador, and Colombia, as well as additional populations in French Guiana, Panama, and the introduced populations on Puerto Rico, apply to unnamed (or without existing names assigned) lineages. 

Geographic Occurrence

Natural Resident: French Guiana, Guyana, Suriname, Venezuela

Likely/Controversially Present: Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Puerto Rico, Saint Lucia, Trinidad and Tobago

Introduced: Martinique, Puerto Rico, Saint Lucia

Comment

In the Scinax nasicus group of Araujo-Vieira, Lourenço, Lacerda, Lyra, Blotto, Ron, Baldo, Pereyra, Suárez-Mayorga, Baêta, Ferreira, Barrio-Amorós, Borteiro, Brandão, Brasileiro, Donnelly, Dubeux, Köhler, Kolenc, Leite, Maciel, Nunes, Orrico, Peloso, Pezzuti, Reichle, Rojas-Runjaic, Silva, Sturaro, Langone, Garcia, Rodrigues, Frost, Wheeler, Grant, Pombal, Haddad, and Faivovich, 2023, S. Am. J. Herpetol., 27 (Special Issue): 119–120 (and citations noted within that publication), who discussed the phylogenetics of this species complex and noted at least 6 species under the name. The authors discussed the issues extensively and were particularly granular in their discussion of earlier literature, much of which had come to similar conclusions on both molecular and morphological grounds of this name previously being applied to a species complex. As a result the synonymy of this species as currently contains names that will ultimately be applied to at least some of these lineages, and the statement of range will evolve accordingly. Santos, Feio, and Nomura, 2023, Biota Neotrop., 23 (3:e20231486): 1–43, characterized tadpole morphology for a member of the Scinax ruber group as part of an identification key to the tadpoles of the Brazilian Cerrado.  

Previous (before 30 Aug 2023) comment for Scinax ruber (sensu lato): In the Scinax ruber clade of Faivovich, Haddad, Garcia, Frost, Campbell, and Wheeler, 2005, Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., 294: 96. Duellman, 1978, Misc. Publ. Mus. Nat. Hist. Univ. Kansas, 65: 163–164, provided a brief account including characterization of call and tadpole. See account by Duellman and Wiens, 1993, Occas. Pap. Mus. Nat. Hist. Univ. Kansas, 153: 37–42. Langone, 1992, Bol. Asoc. Herpetol. Argentina, 8: 5–6, suggested that status needed to be reviewed of Hyla madeira Bokermann, 1966, Hyla lindneri Müller and Hellmich, 1936, and Hyla parkeri Gaige, 1929 (all three now junior synonyms of Scinax fuscomarginatus); Scinax trilineatus (Hoogmoed and Gorzula, 1979); and Hyla robertsimoni Donoso-Barros, 1966 (now a junior synonym of Scinax ruber). See De la Riva, Márquez, and Bosch, 1994, Bijdr. Dierkd., 64: 75–85, for advertisement call. Rodríguez and Duellman, 1994, Univ. Kansas Mus. Nat. Hist. Spec. Publ., 22: 50, provided a brief account for the Iquitos region of northeastern Peru as Hyla rubra. De la Riva, Köhler, Lötters, and Reichle, 2000, Rev. Esp. Herpetol., 14: 37, suggested that the species is composite. Lescure and Marty, 2000, Collect. Patrimoines Nat., Paris, 45: 168–169, provided a photo and brief account for French Guiana. Murphy, 1997, Amph. Rept. Trinidad Tobago: 76–78, provided a brief account for Trinidad. Gorzula and Señaris Vasquez, 1999 "1998", Scient. Guaianae, 8: 41–43, commented on range in Venezuela. Barrio-Amorós, 1999 "1998", Acta Biol. Venezuelica, 18: 37, commented on nomenclature. Lever, 2003, Naturalized Rept. Amph. World: 184, reported on introduced populations on St. Lucia, St. Martin, and Puerto Rico. Fouquet, Vences, Salducci, Meyer, Marty, Blanc, and Gilles, 2007, Mol. Phylogenet. Evol., 43: 567–582, suggested on the basis of analysis of molcular data that nominal Scinax ruber may be composed of as many as 6 species, forming a paraphyletic group with respect to Scinax x-signatus, Scinax cruentommus, and Scinax boesemani. Duellman, 2005, Cusco Amazonico: 245–247, provided an account (adult and larval morphology, description of the call, life history). Brusquetti and Lavilla, 2006, Cuad. Herpetol., 20: 23, suggested that early records of this species for Paraguay are based on Scinax nasicus. Fouquet, Gilles, Vences, Marty, Blanc, and Gemmell, 2007, PLoS One, 10 (e1109): 1–10, provided molecular evidence that this is a species complex. Kok and Kalamandeen, 2008, Intr. Taxon. Amph. Kaieteur Natl. Park: 200–201, provided an account. França and Venâncio, 2010, Biotemas, 23: 71–84, provided a record for the municipality of Boca do Acre, Amazonas, with a brief discussion of the range. Bernarde, Machado, and Turci, 2011, Biota Neotrop., 11: 117–144, reported specimens from Reserva Extrativista Riozinho da Liberdade, Acre, Brazil. See account for Suriname population by Ouboter and Jairam, 2012, Amph. Suriname: 184–185. See Cole, Townsend, Reynolds, MacCulloch, and Lathrop, 2013, Proc. Biol. Soc. Washington, 125: 416–417, for brief account and records for Guyana. Henderson and Powell, 2009, Nat. Hist. Rept. Amph. W. Indies: 90, summarized the natural history literature for the introduced Puerto Rican population. Köhler, 2011, Amph. Cent. Am.: 262–264, provided a brief summary of natural history and identification key for the species of Scinax in Central America and provided a range map and photograph for this species. Morales, 2011, Caribb. Herpetol., 21: 1, reported this introduced species into southwestern Puerto Rico. Méndez-Narváez, Ortiz-Navia, and Bolívar-García, 2014, Check List, 10: 409–410, reported the species in the Cauca Valley in the Departamento de Valle de Cauca, Colombia. Palacio Baena, Muñoz Escobar, Gallo Delgado, and Rivera-Correa, 2006, Anfibios y Reptiles del Valle de Aburrá: 78–80, provided a brief account and photograph. Lynch and Suárez-Mayorga, 2011, Caldasia, 33: 235–270, illustrated the tadpole and included the species in a key to the tadpoles of Amazonian Colombia. Señaris Vasquez, Lampo, Rojas-Runjaic, and Barrio-Amorós, 2014, Guía Ilust. Anf. Parque Nac. Canaima: 186–187, provided a photograph and a brief account for the Parque Nacional de Canaima, Venezuela. Schulze, Jansen, and Köhler, 2015, Zootaxa, 4016: 50–51, described, diagnosed, and pictured the larva they referred to Scinax ruber F. Guarnizo, Paz, Muñoz-Ortiz, Flechas-Hernández, Méndez-Narváez, and Crawford, 2016, PLoS One, 10(5: e0127312): 1–20, suggested on the basis of molecular evidence that three species likely exist in Colombia under this binomial. Zimmerman, 1983, Herpetologica, 39: 235–246, reported on advertisement call, as Hyla rubra. Ovalle-Pacheco, Camacho-Rozo, and Arroyo, 2019, Check List, 15: 397, reported the species from Boyacá, Colombia, and commented on the range in Colombia. See Barrio-Amorós, Rojas-Runjaic, and Señaris Vasquez, 2019, Amph. Rept. Conserv., 13 (1: e180): 87, for comments on range and literature. Señaris Vasquez and Rojas-Runjaic, 2020, in Rull and Carnaval (eds.), Neotrop. Divers. Patterns Process.: 571–632, commented on range and conservation status in the Venezuelan Guayana. See brief account for the Manu region, Peru, by Villacampa-Ortega, Serrano-Rojas, and Whitworth, 2017, Amph. Manu Learning Cent.: 202–203. Metcalf, Marsh, Torres Pacaya, Graham, and Gunnels, 2020, Herpetol. Notes, 13: 753–767, reported the species from the Santa Cruz Forest Reserve, Loreto, northeastern Peru. Taucce, Costa-Campos, Carvalho, and Michalski, 2022, Eur. J. Taxon., 836: 96–130, reported on distribution, literature, and conservation status for Amapá, Brazil. Schiesari, Rossa-Feres, Menin, and Hödl, 2022, Zootaxa, 5223: 72–73, detailed larval and metamorph morphology and natural history. 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: 124–125, provided a brief account, photograph, dot map, and genetic barcode for Loreto, Peru. In the Scinax nasicus group of Araujo-Vieira, Lourenço, Lacerda, Lyra, Blotto, Ron, Baldo, Pereyra, Suárez-Mayorga, Baêta, Ferreira, Barrio-Amorós, Borteiro, Brandão, Brasileiro, Donnelly, Dubeux, Köhler, Kolenc, Leite, Maciel, Nunes, Orrico, Peloso, Pezzuti, Reichle, Rojas-Runjaic, Silva, Sturaro, Langone, Garcia, Rodrigues, Frost, Wheeler, Grant, Pombal, Haddad, and Faivovich, 2023, S. Am. J. Herpetol., 27 (Special Issue): 119 (see comment under Hylinae).  

    

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
• For additional information specific to Ecuador see FaunaWebEcuador: Anfibios del Ecuador