Leptodactylus mystaceus (Spix, 1824)

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

Rana mystacea Spix, 1824, Animal. Nova Spec. Nov. Test. Ran. Brasil.: 27. Syntypes: Not specifically stated, but including animals figured on pl. 3, figs. 1 and 3 in the original publication; ZSM 2504/0 and 2505/0 (lost after 1955 according to Hoogmoed and Gruber, 1983, Spixiana, München, Suppl., 9: 357); specimen figured in pl. 3, fig. 1 invalidly designated lectotype by implication of Peters, 1872, Monatsber. Preuss. Akad. Wiss. Berlin, 1872: 196–227; Méhely, 1904, Ann. Hist. Nat. Mus. Natl. Hungarici, 2: 219, designated ZSM 2504/0 lectotype. Type locality: "ad Bahiam [now Salvador, Bahia] in aqua fluviatili; differt ab illa prope flumen Solimoens", Brazil; restricted to Solimões [Brazil] by lectotype designation of Méhely, 1904, Ann. Hist. Nat. Mus. Natl. Hungarici, 2: 219; restricted in error to "Salvador, Bahia", Brazil, by Bokermann, 1966, Lista Anot. Local. Tipo Anf. Brasil.: 90.

Leptodactylus mystaceus — Fitzinger, 1826, Neue Class. Rept.: 64; Méhely, 1904, Ann. Hist. Nat. Mus. Natl. Hungarici, 2: 219.

Cystignathus mystaceus — Wagler, 1830, Nat. Syst. Amph.: 203; Hensel, 1867, Arch. Naturgesch., 33: 125.

Leptodactylus (Cavicola) mystaceus — Lutz, 1930, Mem. Oswaldo Cruz, Rio de Janeiro, 23: 22.

Leptodactylus amazonicus Heyer, 1978, Sci. Bull. Nat. Hist. Mus. Los Angeles Co., 29: 38. Holotype: LACM 92111, by original designation. Type locality: "Ecuador; Napo Province, Limoncocha, 0°24′S, 76°37′W, elevation 260 m". Synonymy by Heyer, 1983, Proc. Biol. Soc. Washington, 96: 270.

Common Names

Basin White-lipped Frog (Frank and Ramus, 1995, Compl. Guide Scient. Common Names Amph. Rept. World: 82).

Amazonian White-lipped Frog (Kok and Kalamandeen, 2008, Intr. Taxon. Amph. Kaieteur Natl. Park: 222).

Distribution

Amazon basin from its southern limit in Brazil to Bolivia, Peru, Ecuador, Colombia, Venezuela, and the Guianas. Isolated records from northeastern Brazil (Amapá, northern Pauí and Alagoas) and south to northern Paraná. 

Geographic Occurrence

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

Comment

In the Leptodactylus fuscus group of Heyer, 1978, Sci. Bull. Nat. Hist. Mus. Los Angeles Co., 29: 1–85. Duellman, 1978, Misc. Publ. Mus. Nat. Hist. Univ. Kansas, 65: 107–108, provided a brief account and characterization of the call and tadpole. Heyer, 1983, Proc. Biol. Soc. Washington, 96: 270, placed Leptodactylus amazonicus Heyer, 1978, in synonymy. Hoogmoed and Gruber, 1983, Spixiana, München, Suppl., 9: 357, discussed the history of the types and provided a synonymy, noting that the Peters lectotype (figure) and the Mehely lectotype (ZSM 2504/0) represent different species, the true figured lectotype probably not corresponding to the species that bears its name but to Leptodactylus spixi. See comments under Leptodactylus didymus and Rana elenae. 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: 67–68, provided a brief account for the Iquitos region of northeastern Peru. Márquez, De la Riva, and Bosch, 1995, J. Zool., London, 237: 313–336, reported on vocalization in Bolivia. Lescure and Marty, 2000, Collect. Patrimoines Nat., Paris, 45: 238–239, provided a photo and brief account for French Guiana. Heyer, García-Lopez, and Cardoso, 1996, Amphibia-Reptilia, 17: 7–31, detailed the advertisement call. Gorzula and Señaris, 1999 "1998", Scient. Guaianae, 8: 63, commented on distribution in Venezuela. Toledo, Castanho, and Haddad, 2005, Biota Neotrop., 5: 57–62, provided a record for the state of São Paulo, Brazil, and detailed the advertisement call, external morphology, and natural history. Brusquetti and Lavilla, 2006, Cuad. Herpetol., 20: 23, suggested that Paraguayan records of this species are referable to Leptodactylus elenae. Kok and Kalamandeen, 2008, Intr. Taxon. Amph. Kaieteur Natl. Park: 222–223, provided an account. Bernarde, Machado, and Turci, 2011, Biota Neotrop., 11: 117–144, reported specimens from Reserva Extrativista Riozinho da Liberdade, Acre, Brazil. Affonso, Delariva, and Navarro, 2011, Check List, 7: 198–199, provided a range extension to Paraná state, Brazil, and mapped the species range. Jansen, Bloch, Schulze, and Pfenninger, 2011, Zool. Scripta, 40: 567–583, suggested on the basis of molecular evidence a cryptic unnamed species in Bolivia. See account for Suriname population by Ouboter and Jairam, 2012, Amph. Suriname: 248–249. See Cole, Townsend, Reynolds, MacCulloch, and Lathrop, 2013, Proc. Biol. Soc. Washington, 125: 425, for brief account and records for Guyana. In the Leptodactylus fuscus species group, Leptodactylus mystaceus complex, of de Sá, Grant, Camargo, Heyer, Ponssa, and Stanley, 2014, S. Am. J. Herpetol., 9(Spec. Issue 1): 1–123, who provided a summary of the relevant literature (adult and larval morphology, identification, advertisement call, and range) of this species on p. 40–41. Señaris, Lampo, Rojas-Runjaic, and Barrio-Amorós, 2014, Guía Ilust. Anf. Parque Nac. Canaima: 212–213, provided a photograph and a brief account for the Parque Nacional de Canaima, Venezuela. Morais, Márquez, Siqueira, and Bastos, 2014, Herpetol. Notes, 7: 763–765, provided a peripheral record from Silvânia National Forest, Silvânia County, Goiás state, Brazil, and provided a range map. Affonso, Cafofo, Delariva, Karling, and Lourenço-de-Moraes, 2014, Check List, 10: 878–882, provided a record for the state of Paraná, Brazil. Freitas, Abegg, Dias, and Moraes, 2018, Herpetol. Notes, 11: 59–72, provided a record from the Serra da Jibóia, Bahia, Brazil. Neves, Yves, Pereira Silva, Alves, Vasques, Coelho, and Silva, 2019, Herpetozoa, Wien, 32: 113–123, provided habitat information and records for western Minas Gerais, Brazil. See Barrio-Amorós, Rojas-Runjaic, and Señaris, 2019, Amph. Rept. Conserv., 13 (1: e180): 95, for comments on range and literature, noting that populations north of the Orinoco probably represent an unnamed species. For identification of larvae in central Amazonia, Brazil, see Hero, 1990, Amazoniana, 11: 201–262. Silva, Carvalho, Pereira Silva, Fadel, Dantas, Brandão, and Santana, 2020, Biota Neotrop., 20 (1: e20190838): 16, reported an unnamed species that differs in advertisement call in the state of Tocantins, Brazil, as did Silva, Magalhães, Thomassen, Leite, Garda, Brandão, Haddad, Giaretta, and Carvalho, 2020, Zootaxa, 4779: 151–189. Dubeux, Silva, Nascimento, Gonçalves, and Mott, 2019, Rev. Nordestina Zool., 12: 18–52, summarized the literature on larval morphology. See Dubeux, Nascimento, Lima, Magalhães, Silva, Gonçalves, Almeida, Correia, Garda, Mesquita, Rossa-Feres, and Mott, 2020, Biota Neotrop., 20 (2: e20180718): 1–24, for characterization and identification of larvae north of the Rio São Francisco in the Atlantic Forest of northeastern Brazil. Vaz-Silva, Maciel, Nomura, Morais, Guerra Batista, Santos, Andrade, Oliveira, Brandão, and Bastos, 2020, Guia Ident. Anf. Goiás e Dist. Fed. Brasil Central: 117, provided an account. Araújo, Andrade, Brasileiro, Benício, Sena, Silva, Santos, Costa, and Ávila, 2020, Biota Neotrop., 20 (4: e20201061): 1–14, provided a record from northern Pauí, northeastern Brazil. Reported from the Environmental Protection Area of Catolé and Fernão Velho, Alagoas, Brazil, by Dubeux, Nascimento, Gonçalves, and Mott, 2021, Pap. Avulsos Zool., São Paulo, 61 (e20216176): 1–10, who provided a key to the frogs of that region. Palmeira, Gonçalves, Dubeux, Lima, Lambertini, Valencia-Aguilar, Jenkinson, James, Toledo, and Mott, 2022, Cuad. Herpetol., 36: 65–75, reported on habitat in Natural Heritage Reserve Mata Estrela, Baía Formosa, Rio Grande do Norte state, Brazil. Taucce, Costa-Campos, Carvalho, and Michalski, 2022, Eur. J. Taxon., 836: 96–130, reported on distribution, literature, and conservation status for Amapá, Brazil. Schiesari, Rossa-Feres, Menin, and Hödl, 2022, Zootaxa, 5223: 90–91, detailed larval and metamorph morphology and natural history. See discussion of specimens from Moraes, Rainha, Werneck, Oliveira, Gascon, and Carvalho, 2022, Pap. Avulsos Zool., São Paulo, 62(e202262054): 24, discussed specimens as Leptodactylus cf. mystaceus from the Reserva Extrativista do Baixo Juruá, Amazonas, Brazil. 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: 146–147, 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.