Phyllomedusa burmeisteri Boulenger, 1882

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

Phyllomedusa burmeisteri Boulenger, 1882, Cat. Batr. Sal. Coll. Brit. Mus., Ed. 2: 428. Syntypes: BMNH 1947.2.22.23–25 (formerly 1842.6.26), 1947.2.22.20–21 (formerly 1844.3.7.60–61), 1947.2.22.17 (formerly 1853.3.19.20) 1947.2.22.18 (formerly 1856.4.7.7), 1947.2.22.22 (formerly 1874.5.21.6), 1947.2.22.19 (formerly 1937.7.29.44) according to Condit, 1964, J. Ohio Herpetol. Soc., 4: 97; BMNH 1947.2.22.22 designated lectotype by Funkhouser, 1957, Occas. Pap. Nat. Hist. Mus. Stanford Univ., 5: 56. Type locality: "Rio Janeiro", "Brazil", and "Oran Salta, Buenos Ayres"; restricted to "the city of Rio de Janeiro, specifically the Tijuca", Brazil, by Funkhouser, 1957, Occas. Pap. Nat. Hist. Mus. Stanford Univ., 5: 56.

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

Pithecopus burmeisteri burmeisteriLutz, 1966, Copeia, 1966: 236.

English Names

Burmeister's Frog (Cochran, 1961, Living Amph. World: 121).

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


Eastern Brazil.

Geographic Occurrence

Natural Resident: Brazil

Endemic: Brazil


 Barrio, 1976, Physis, Buenos Aires, 35: 65–74, reported on karyotype and call. See Pombal and Haddad, 1992, Rev. Brasil. Biol., 52: 217–229. Izecksohn and Carvalho-e-Silva, 2001, Anf. Municipio Rio de Janeiro: 67, provided a brief account and photo (as including Phyllomedusa bahiana). In the Phyllomedusa burmeisteri group of Faivovich, Haddad, Garcia, Frost, Campbell, and Wheeler, 2005, Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., 294: 117, and Faivovich, Haddad, Baêta, Jungfer, Álvares, Brandão, Sheil, Barrientos, Barrio-Amorós, Cruz, and Wheeler, 2010, Cladistics, 26: 259. Canelas and Bertoluci, 2007, Iheringia, Zool., 97: 21–26, provided a record for the Serra do Caraça, southern end of the Serra do Espinhaço, Minas Gerais, Brazil. Andrade, Haga, Carvalho, Martins, and Giaretta, 2018, Phyllomedusa, 17: 39–59, could not distinguish this species from Phyllomedusa bahiana on the basis of morphometrics or acoustic parameters but did not suggest a taxonomic change. Abrunhosa and Wogel, 2004, Amphibia-Reptilia, 25: 125–135, reported on the advertisement call. Röhr, Camurugi, Paterno, Gehara, Juncá, Álvares, Brandão, and Garda, 2020, Canad. J. Zool., 98: 495–504, reported on the evolution and causes of variability of advertisement call. Eterovick, Souza, and Sazima, 2020, Anf. Serra do Cipó: 1–292, provided an account, life history information, and an identification scheme for the Serra de Cipó, Minas Gerais, Brazil. Pezzuti, Leite, Rossa-Feres, and Garcia, 2021, S. Am. J. Herpetol., 22 (Special Issue): 1–109, described and discussed larval morphology and natural history. Manzano, Takeno, and Sawaya, 2022, Zootaxa, 5178: 453–472, reported on the advertisement call.  

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.