Phyllomedusa bicolor (Boddaert, 1772)

Class: Amphibia > Order: Anura > Family: Hylidae > Subfamily: Phyllomedusinae > Genus: Phyllomedusa > Species: Phyllomedusa bicolor

Rana bicolor Boddaert, 1772, Epist. Rana bicolore: 15. Type(s): Not known to exist (originally in collection of Johann Albert Schlosser). Type locality: "Guinea" or "Surinamo"; restricted to "Surinam" by Funkhouser, 1957, Occas. Pap. Nat. Hist. Mus. Stanford Univ., 5: 38.

Calamita bicolorSchneider, 1799, Hist. Amph. Nat.: 156.

Hyla bicolorDaudin, 1800, Hist. Nat. Quad. Ovip., Livr. 1: 3, pl. 1, 2; Latreille in Sonnini de Manoncourt and Latreille, 1801 "An. X", Hist. Nat. Rept., 2: 174; Daudin, 1802 "An. XI", Hist. Nat. Rain. Gren. Crap., Quarto: 22; Oken, 1816, Lehrb. Naturgesch., 3(2): 223, a subsequent usage, given that the type localities and measurements given are identical to those provided by Boddaert, 172; Gistel nGistel and Bromme, 1850, Handb. Naturgesch.: 331.

Phyllomedusa bicolorWagler, 1830, Nat. Syst. Amph.: 201; Boulenger, 1882, Cat. Batr. Sal. Coll. Brit. Mus., Ed. 2: 427.

Rana (Phyllomedusa) bicolorGuérin-Méneville, 1838, Icon. Regne Animal, 3: 16.

Phyllomedusa boiei Fitzinger, 1861 "1860", Sitzungsber. Akad. Wiss. Wien, Phys. Math. Naturwiss. Kl., 42: 412. Synonymy by Steindachner, 1867, Reise Österreichischen Fregatte Novara, Zool., Amph.: 67. 

Pithecopus scleroderma Cope, 1868, Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia, 20: 112. Holotype: ANSP 2173, according to Malnate, 1971, Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia, 123: 352. Type locality: "Surinam". Synonymy by Boulenger, 1882, Cat. Batr. Sal. Coll. Brit. Mus., Ed. 2: 427.

Phyllomedusa (Phyllomedusa) bicolorLutz, 1950, Mem. Oswaldo Cruz, Rio de Janeiro, 48: 619.

English Names

Blue-and-Yellow Frog (Shaw, 1802, Gen. Zool., 3(1): 126; Ananjeva, Borkin, Darevsky, and Orlov, 1988, Dict. Amph. Rept. Five Languages: 67).

Bicoloured Tree-frog (Wood, 1863, Illust. Nat. Hist., 3: 173).

Giant Monkey Frog (Frank and Ramus, 1995, Compl. Guide Scient. Common Names Amph. Rept. World: 62).


Amazon Basin in Brazil, Colombia, Bolivia, Peru, and Venezuela; the Guianan regions of Venezuela and the Guianas; possibly to be found in eastern Ecuador.

Geographic Occurrence

Natural Resident: Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, French Guiana, Guyana, Peru, Suriname, Venezuela


See accounts by Duellman, 1974, Herpetologica, 30: 105–112, and Lescure, Marty, Marty, Starace, Thomay, and Letellier, 1995, Rev. Fr. Aquar. Herpetol., 22: 35–50. Zimmerman, 1983, Herpetologica, 39: 235–246, and Zimmerman and Bogart, 1984, Acta Amazonica, 14: 473–520, reported on vocalization. Rodríguez and Duellman, 1994, Univ. Kansas Mus. Nat. Hist. Spec. Publ., 22: 44–45, provided a brief account for the Iquitos region of northeastern Peru. Lescure and Marty, 2000, Collect. Patrimoines Nat., Paris, 45: 100–101, provided a brief account and photo. Not assigned to species group by Faivovich, Haddad, Garcia, Frost, Campbell, and Wheeler, 2005, Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., 294: 117–118. Kok and Kalamandeen, 2008, Intr. Taxon. Amph. Kaieteur Natl. Park: 192–193, provided an account. 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: 204–207. Barrio-Amorós, 2009, Mem. Fund. La Salle Cienc. Nat., 171: 19–46, discussed the biology and range in Venezuela. 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. Pinto, Py-Daniel, and Menin, 2013, S. Am. J. Herpetol., 8: 67–72, reported on larval morphology. See Barrio-Amorós, Rojas-Runjaic, and Señaris, 2019, Amph. Rept. Conserv., 13 (1: e180): 107, for comments on range and literature. For identification of larvae in central Amazonia, Brazil, see Hero, 1990, Amazoniana, 11: 201–262. 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. Mota, Kaefer, Nunes, Lima, and Farias, 2020, Amphibia-Reptilia, 41: 349–359, provided molecular evidence for this nominal species to be composed of at least two, but possibly more, cryptic species. Schiesari, Rossa-Feres, Menin, and Hödl, 2022, Zootaxa, 5223: 103–104, 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: 174–175, provided a brief account, photograph, 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.