Pithecopus rohdei (Mertens, 1926)

Class: Amphibia > Order: Anura > Family: Hylidae > Subfamily: Phyllomedusinae > Genus: Pithecopus > Species: Pithecopus rohdei

Phyllomedusa rohdei Mertens, 1926, Senckenb. Biol., 8: 140. Holotype: SMF 2061 (formerly 1430. 2a), according to Duellman, 1977, Das Tierreich, 95: 163. Type locality: "Rio de Janeiro, Brasilien".

Bradymedusa moschata Miranda-Ribeiro, 1926, Arq. Mus. Nac., Rio de Janeiro, 27: 104. Syntypes: MNRJ 258 (2 specimens), according to Miranda-Ribeiro, 1955, Arq. Mus. Nac., Rio de Janeiro, 42: 410, who designated 258A lectotype. Type locality: "Therezopolis [= Teresópolis], E. do Rio [de Janeiro]", Brazil. Synonymy by Mertens, 1929, Bl. Aquar. Terrarienkd., Stuttgart, 40: 287.

Pithecopus rohdeiDuellman, Marion, and Hedges, 2016, Zootaxa, 4104: 32. 

English Names

Rohde's Frog (Cochran, 1961, Living Amph. World: 139; Ananjeva, Borkin, Darevsky, and Orlov, 1988, Dict. Amph. Rept. Five Languages: 67).

Rohde's Leaf Frog (Cochran, 1961, Living Amph. World: 144; Ananjeva, Borkin, Darevsky, and Orlov, 1988, Dict. Amph. Rept. Five Languages: 67).

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


Lowlands of southern Brazil (Rio de Janeiro, São Paulo, Minas Gerais, Espírito Santo, and Bahia).

Geographic Occurrence

Natural Resident: Brazil

Endemic: Brazil


In the Phyllomedusa hypochondrialis group of Faivovich, Haddad, Garcia, Frost, Campbell, and Wheeler, 2005, Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., 294: 117, and Caramaschi, 2006, Arq. Mus. Nac., Rio de Janeiro, 64: 159-179, and Faivovich, Haddad, Baêta, Jungfer, Álvares, Brandão, Sheil, Barrientos, Barrio-Amorós, Cruz, and Wheeler, 2010, Cladistics, 26: 259 (who suggested that this nominal taxon is a composite of cryptic species). Wogel, Abrunhosa, and Pombal, 2004, Herpetol. Rev., 35: 239–243, reported on vocalization. Izecksohn and Carvalho-e-Silva, 2001, Anf. Municipio Rio de Janeiro: 68, provided a brief account and photo. Vrcibradic, Teixeira, and Ferreira, 2006, Herpetol. Rev., 37: 101, provided a record for Espírito Santo, Brazil, and summarized the range known at that time. Araújo, Loebmann, Zina, and Toledo, 2007, Herpetol. Rev., 38: 98, provided the record for Bahia. Barth, Solé, and Costa, 2009, J. Herpetol., 43: 676-679, reported on karyotypic variation. Paiva, Nascimento, Silva, Bernarde, and Ananias, 2010, Ital. J. Zool., 77: 116-121, also reported on karyology. Ramos, Magalhães, Marques, Baêta, Garcia, and Santos, 2019, Mol. Phylogenet. Evol., 132: 105–116, suggested on the basis of DNA and morphology that this species is a complex of five cryptic species. Ferreira, Mônico, Silva, Lirio, Zocca, Mageski, Tonini, Beard, Duca, and Silva-Soares, 2019, ZooKeys, 857: 152, noted an unnamed species, "Pithecopus aff. rohdei" in the region of Santa Teresa, Espírito Santo, Brazil. 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. Pezzuti, Leite, Rossa-Feres, and Garcia, 2021, S. Am. J. Herpetol., 22 (Special Issue): 1–109, described Pithecopus aff. rohdei larval morphology and natural history.

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.