Leptodactylus melanonotus (Hallowell, 1861)

Class: Amphibia > Order: Anura > Family: Leptodactylidae > Subfamily: Leptodactylinae > Genus: Leptodactylus > Species: Leptodactylus melanonotus

Cystignathus melanonotus Hallowell, 1861 "1860", Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia, 12: 485. Holotype: USNM 6264 according to Kellogg, 1932, Bull. U.S. Natl. Mus., 160: 88, apparently lost, according to Heyer, 1970, Contrib. Sci. Nat. Hist. Mus. Los Angeles Co., 191: 9; KU 84848 designated neotype by Heyer, 1970, Contrib. Sci. Nat. Hist. Mus. Los Angeles Co., 191: 11. Type locality: "Nicaragua"; restricted to "Recero, Nicaragua", by Smith and Taylor, 1950, Univ. Kansas Sci. Bull., 33: 320; this restriction vigorously disputed by Dunn and Stuart, 1951, Copeia, 1951: 58. Neotype from "Nicaragua, Zelaya, Bonanza".

Cystignathus echinatus Brocchi, 1877, Bull. Soc. Philomath., Paris, Ser. 7, 1: 181. Syntypes: MNHNP 6322-23, according to Guibé, 1950 "1948", Cat. Types Amph. Mus. Natl. Hist. Nat.: 30. Type locality: "Rio Madre Nieja [Vieja?] (Guatemala occidental)". Synonymy by Heyer, 1970, Contrib. Sci. Nat. Hist. Mus. Los Angeles Co., 191: 9.

Cystignathus microtis Cope, 1879, Proc. Am. Philos. Soc., 18: 265. Syntypes: USNM 9906,9908, and 9909, according to  Heyer, 1970, Contrib. Sci. Nat. Hist. Mus. Los Angeles Co., 191: 9. However, Kellogg, 1932, Bull. U.S. Natl. Mus., 160: 88, considered USNM 9906 the "type", and Cochran, 1961, Bull. U.S. Natl. Mus., 220: 40, considered, in error, USNM 9906 to be the "holotype". Type locality: "Guanajuato", Mexico (presumed to be in error by  Heyer, 1970, Contrib. Sci. Nat. Hist. Mus. Los Angeles Co., 191: 12). Restricted to "Apatzingán (de la Constitución)", Michoacán, Mexico, by Smith and Taylor, 1950, Univ. Kansas Sci. Bull., 33: 335. Synonymy by Cochran, 1961, Bull. U.S. Natl. Mus., 220: 40;  Heyer, 1970, Contrib. Sci. Nat. Hist. Mus. Los Angeles Co., 191: 9.

Cystignathus perlaevis Cope, 1879, Am. Nat., 13: 269. Holotype: USNM 10041 by original designation and according to Kellogg, 1932, Bull. U.S. Natl. Mus., 160: 89. Type locality: "near a well near Japana", Oaxaca, Mexico, = Tapanatepec according to Smith and Taylor, 1948, Bull. U.S. Natl. Mus., 194: 57; = Tapana, Tehuantepec, Oaxaca, Mexico, according to Heyer, 1970, Contrib. Sci. Nat. Hist. Mus. Los Angeles Co., 191: 40. Synonymy by Kellogg, 1932, Bull. U.S. Natl. Mus., 160: 89; Heyer, 1970, Contrib. Sci. Nat. Hist. Mus. Los Angeles Co., 191: 40;  Heyer, 1970, Contrib. Sci. Nat. Hist. Mus. Los Angeles Co., 191: 12.

Leptodactylus echinatus — Brocchi, 1881, Miss. Scient. Mex. Amer. Centr., Rech. Zool., 3(2, livr. 1): 20.

Leptodactylus melanonotus — Brocchi, 1881, Miss. Scient. Mex. Amer. Centr., Rech. Zool., 3(2, livr. 1): 20.

Leptodactylus microtis — Boulenger, 1882, Cat. Batr. Sal. Coll. Brit. Mus., Ed. 2: 244.

Leptodactylus perlaevis — Boulenger, 1882, Cat. Batr. Sal. Coll. Brit. Mus., Ed. 2: 215.

Leptodactylus occidentalis Taylor, 1937 "1936", Trans. Kansas Acad. Sci., 39: 349. Holotype: EHT 3322, by original designation; now FMNH 100015 according to Marx, 1976, Fieldiana, Zool., 69: 57. Type locality: "Tepic, Nayarit, Mexico". Synonymy by  Heyer, 1970, Contrib. Sci. Nat. Hist. Mus. Los Angeles Co., 191: 9.

Common Names

Black-backed Thin-toed Frog (Coloma and Duellman, 2025, Amph. Ecuador. Vol. 4: xxxi). 

Rana Dedilarga Dorsinegra (Spanish: Coloma and Duellman, 2025, Amph. Ecuador. Vol. 4: xxxi).

Sabinal Frog (Liner, 1994, Herpetol. Circ., 23: 25; Frank and Ramus, 1995, Compl. Guide Scient. Common Names Amph. Rept. World: 82; Lee, 2000, Field Guide Amph. Rept. Maya World: 78; Liner and Casas-Andreu, 2008, Herpetol. Circ., 38: 15).

Mexican River Frog (Ananjeva, Borkin, Darevsky, and Orlov, 1988, Dict. Amph. Rept. Five Languages: 89).

Black-backed Frog (Lee, 1996, Amph. Rept. Yucatan Peninsula: 71).

Fringe-toed Foamfrog (Campbell, 1998, Amph. Rept. N. Guatemala Yucatan Belize: 62).

Black Jungle-Frog (Arteaga-Navarro, Bustamante, and Guayasamin, 2013, Amph. Rept. Mindo: 115).

Reddish-brown White-lipped Frog (Hedges, Powell, Henderson, Hanson, and Murphy, 2019, Caribb. Herpetol., 67: 14). 

Distribution

Central Sonora and southern Tamaulipas, Mexico, south through dry tropical and humid premontane habitats through Central America to southwestern Ecuador.

Geographic Occurrence

Natural Resident: Belize, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama

Comment

In the Leptodactylus melanonotus group of Heyer, 1970, Contrib. Sci. Nat. Hist. Mus. Los Angeles Co., 191: 9–14, Lee, 1996, Amph. Rept. Yucatan Peninsula: 71–73, Campbell, 1998, Amph. Rept. N. Guatemala Yucatan Belize: 62–63, Lee, 2000, Field Guide Amph. Rept. Maya World: 78–80, Savage, 2002, Amph. Rept. Costa Rica: 215–217, and McCranie and Wilson, 2002, Amph. Honduras: 446–451. Lips and Savage, 1996, Proc. Biol. Soc. Washington, 109: 17–26, included this species n a key to the tadpoles found in Costa Rica. Köhler, Veselý, and Greenbaum, 2005 "2006", Amph. Rept. El Salvador: 58–60, provided an account (for El Salvador) and a color photograph. McCranie, 2007, Herpetol. Rev., 38: 38, summarized the departmental distribution in Honduras. See comments by Sunyer, Páiz, Dehling, and Köhler, 2009, Herpetol. Notes, 2: 189–202, regarding Nicaraguan populations. Lemos-Espinal and Dixon, 2013, Amphibians and Reptiles of San Luis Potosí: 63–64, provided an account for San Luis Potosí, Mexico.. Farr, Lazcano, and Lavín-Murcio, 2013, Herpetol. Rev., 44: 634, discussed the range in Tamaulipas, Mexico, and corrected several literature records. Arteaga-Navarro, Bustamante, and Guayasamin, 2013, Amph. Rept. Mindo: 115–117, provided an account and dot map for Ecuador. Köhler, 2011, Amph. Cent. Am.: 276–281, provided a brief summary of natural history and identification key for the species of Leptodactylus in Central America and provided a range map and photograph for this species. In the Leptodactylus melanonotus species group of de Sá, Grant, Camargo, Heyer, Ponssa, and Stanley, 2014, S. Am. J. Herpetol., 9(Spec. Issue 1): 1–123, and who provided a summary of relevant literature (adult and larval morphology, identification, advertisement call, and range) on pp. 77–78. Lemos-Espinal and Smith, 2015, Check List, 11(1642): 1–11, noted the occurrence of the species in Hidalgo, Mexico, without providing a specific locality. Rorabaugh and Lemos-Espinal, 2016, Field Guide Amph. Rept. Sonora: 171–173, provided a detailed account of natural history, morphology, distribution, and conservation status in Sonora, Mexico. Lemos-Espinal and Dixon, 2016, Amph. Rept. Hidalgo: 386–387, provided a brief account and map for Hidalgo, Mexico. Armijos-Ojeda, Székely, Székely, Cogǎlniceanu, Cisneros-Heredia, Ordóñez-Delgado, Escudero, and Espinosa, 2021, ZooKeys, 1063: 38, provided a dot map for the seemingly isolated population in western lowland Ecuador. Carvalho, Fouquet, Lyra, Giaretta, Costa-Campos, Rodrigues, Haddad, and Ron, 2022, Syst. Biodiversity, 20 (1: 2089269): 1–31, reported on the systematics, phylogenetics, ane advertisement call. Martínez-Fonseca, Holmes, Sunyer, Westeen, Grundler, Cerda, Fernández-Mena, Loza-Molina, Monagan, Nondorf, Pandelis, and Rabosky, 2024, Check List, 20: 73–74, provided and discussed records from Las Brisas del Mogotón, Departamento Nueva Segovia, and Asososca Lake–Momotombo, Department of León, western Nicaragua. Loc-Barragán, Smith, Woolrich-Piña, and Lemos-Espinal, 2024, Herpetozoa, Wien, 37: 30, reported on the distributional and conservation status in the state of Nayarit, Mexico. Coloma and Duellman, 2025, Amph. Ecuador. Vol. 4: 80–81, provided an account, with photographs, which summarized identification, adult and larval morphology, systematics, natural history, distribution (including a dot map for Ecuador), and conservation.   

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.