Pseudopaludicola ternetzi Miranda-Ribeiro, 1937

Class: Amphibia > Order: Anura > Family: Leptodactylidae > Subfamily: Leiuperinae > Genus: Pseudopaludicola > Species: Pseudopaludicola ternetzi

Pseudopaludicola ternetzi Miranda-Ribeiro, 1937, O Campo, 8: 69. Syntypes: MNRJ 5460–62 (3 specimens); MNRJ 5462 designated lectotype by Lobo, 1996, Acta Zool. Lilloana, 43: 327–346; subsequent, in error, MNRJ 5460 Caramaschi and Pombal, 2011, Zootaxa, 3051: 62–64, was designated lectotyep. Type locality: "Goyaz [= Goiás]", Brazil; restricted to "Passa Três, Goiás", Brazil, by Bokermann, 1966, Lista Anot. Local. Tipo Anf. Brasil.: 88; the type locality was corrected to "Rio Passa Três (14° 30′ 34″ S, 49° 08′ 21″ W, 480 m altitude), Municipality of Uruaçu, State of Goiás, Brazil " by Caramaschi and Pombal, 2011, Zootaxa, 3051: 62–64.

Pseudopaludicola riopiedadensis Mercadal de Barrio and Barrio, 1994, Rev. Mus. Argent. Cienc. Nat. Bernardino Rivadavia, Cienc. Zool., 16: 76. Holotype: CENAI 2599, by original designation; now in MACN. Type locality: "Rio Piedade, São Preto, São Paulo, Brasil". Synonymy by Cardozo and Toledo, 2013, Zootaxa, 3734: 571–582. 

Common Names

Goias Swamp Frog (Frank and Ramus, 1995, Compl. Guide Scient. Common Names Amph. Rept. World: 84).

Distribution

States of São Paulo, Bahia, Goiás, Tocantins, and Minas Gerais, Brazil, and Amambay, Boquerón, Concepción, Misiones, and Presidente Hayes provinces, Paraguay.

Geographic Occurrence

Natural Resident: Brazil, Paraguay

Comment

Considered a junior synonym of Pseudopaludicola ameghini by Bokermann, 1966, Lista Anot. Local. Tipo Anf. Brasil.: 88, without comment. Lobo, 1996, Acta Zool. Lilloana, 43: 327–346, recharacterized the species. Brusquetti and Lavilla, 2006, Cuad. Herpetol., 20: 18, briefly discussed the range in Paraguay. Caramaschi and Pombal, 2011, Zootaxa, 3051: 62–64, discussed the type series. Cardozo and Baldo, 2012, Zootaxa, 3192: 67–68, discussed the issue of multiple lectotypes for the species. Fávero, Veiga-Menoncello, Rossa-Feres, Strüssmann, Giaretta, Andrade, Colombo, and Recco-Pimentel, 2011, Zool. Stud., Taipei, 50: 826–836, reported on karyology. Cardozo and Toledo, 2013, Zootaxa, 3734: 571–582, discussed external morpolology and advertisement call and species diagnosis. Weiler, Núñez, Airaldi, Lavilla, Peris, and Baldo, 2013, Anf. Paraguay: 112, provided a brief account, image, and dot map for Paraguay. Andrade, Haga, Bang, and Giaretta, 2017, Zootaxa, 4319: 391–400, provided diagnostic differences in calls between Pseudopaludicola ternetzi and Pseudopaludicola ameghiniVaz-Silva, Maciel, Nomura, Morais, Guerra Batista, Santos, Andrade, Oliveira, Brandão, and Bastos, 2020, Guia Ident. Anf. Goiás e Dist. Fed. Brasil Central: 152–133, provided an account for Goiás, Brazil. The sole member of the Clade II of Pseudopaludicola according to the molecular tree of Ferraro, Pereyra, Topa, and Faivovich, 2021, Zool. J. Linn. Soc., 193: 388–412.  

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.