Leptodactylus mystacinus (Burmeister, 1861)

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

Cystignathus mystacinus Burmeister, 1861, Reise La Plata-Staaten, 2: 532. Type(s): Not designated; MLU unnumbered, according to Heyer, 1978, Sci. Bull. Nat. Hist. Mus. Los Angeles Co., 29: 68. Type locality: "Rozario", Argentina.

Cystignathus labialis Cope, 1877, Proc. Am. Philos. Soc., 17: 90. Syntypes: USNM 31300-31305 considered syntypes by Kellogg, 1932, Bull. U.S. Natl. Mus., 160: 84. Cochran, 1961, Bull. U.S. Natl. Mus., 220: 40, however considered USNM 31302 the holotype and the other specimens paratypes, apparently in error. Type locality: "at present uncertain. It is probably a part of Sumichrast's Mexican collection" made chiefly in southeastern Mexico, Veracruz, Oaxaca, and Chiapas; restricted in error by Smith and Taylor, 1950, Univ. Kansas Sci. Bull., 33: 350, to "Potrero Viejo", Veracruz; rendered as "probably Tehuantepec, Oaxaca, Mexico" by Cochran, 1961, Bull. U.S. Natl. Mus., 220: 40. Previous guesses and restrictions of type locality in error according to Heyer, 2002, Proc. Biol. Soc. Washington, 115: 321, who made the synonymy, following Heyer, 1978, Sci. Bull. Nat. Hist. Mus. Los Angeles Co., 29: 84.  de Sá, Grant, Camargo, Heyer, Ponssa, and Stanley, 2014, S. Am. J. Herpetol., 9(Spec. Issue 1): 41, suggested on the basis of comments in the original publication of Cope that the syntypes were actually collected in Argentina.

Leptodactylus labialis — Brocchi, 1881, Miss. Scient. Mex. Amer. Centr., Rech. Zool., 3(2, livr. 1): 20; Dubois and Heyer, 1992, Copeia, 1992: 584-585.

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

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

Leptodactylus mystaceus labialis — Shreve, 1957, Bull. Mus. Comp. Zool., 116: 246. Based on specimens of Leptodactylus fragilis.

Common Names

Moustached Frog (Frank and Ramus, 1995, Compl. Guide Scient. Common Names Amph. Rept. World: 82).

White-lipped Frog (Wright and Wright, 1933, Handb. Frogs Toads U.S. Canada: xi [as Leptodactylus albilabris]).

Distribution

Eastern Bolivia and eastern and southern Brazil through Uruguay and most of Paraguay to central Argentina.

Geographic Occurrence

Natural Resident: Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Paraguay, Uruguay

Comment

  Straughan and Heyer, 1976, Pap. Avulsos Zool., São Paulo, 29: 221–245, reported on the advertisement call. In the Leptodactylus fuscus group of Heyer, 1978, Sci. Bull. Nat. Hist. Mus. Los Angeles Co., 29: 1-85. See account by Cei, 1980, Monit. Zool. Ital., N.S., Monogr., 2: 336-338. Klappenbach and Langone, 1992, An. Mus. Nac. Hist. Nat. Montevideo, Ser. 2, 8: 191, suggested that a suspicious amount of geographic variation was present in this species. See comment under Leptodactylus fragilis. Call described by Abrunhosa, Wogel, and Pombal, 2001, Bol. Mus. Nac., Rio de Janeiro, 472: 1–12. See account by Heyer, Heyer, Spear, and de Sá, 2003, Cat. Am. Amph. Rept., 767: 1-11. Achaval and Olmos, 2003, Anf. Rept. Uruguay, ed. 2: 24, provided for the Uruguayan population a brief account and photograph. Sanabria, Quiroga, and Acosta, 2005, Herpetol. Rev., 36: 332-333, briefly discussed range in Argentina. Brusquetti and Lavilla, 2006, Cuad. Herpetol., 20: 14, briefly discussed the range in Paraguay. Jansen, Bloch, Schulze, and Pfenninger, 2011, Zool. Scripta, 40: 567-583, suggested on the basis of molecular evidence a cryptic unnamed species in Bolivia (this presumably being Leptodactylus apepyta: DRF). In the Leptodactylus fuscus 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. 41–42. Salas, Zavattieri, di Tada, Martino, and Bridarolli, 1998, Cuad. Herpetol., 12: 37–48, discussed the call. Oliveira and Giaretta, 2008, Iheringia, Zool., 98: 508-515, reported on the advertisement call. Weiler, Núñez, Airaldi, Lavilla, Peris, and Baldo, 2013, Anf. Paraguay: 98, provided a brief account, image, and dot map for Paraguay. 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 Leptodactylus apepyta, which was confused with this species until its naming. Vaz-Silva, Maciel, Nomura, Morais, Guerra Batista, Santos, Andrade, Oliveira, Brandão, and Bastos, 2020, Guia Ident. Anf. Goiás e Dist. Fed. Brasil Central: 118–119, provided an account. 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. Dubeux, Gonçalves, Palmeira, Vieira, Lobo-Araújo, Mott, and Magalhães, 2023, Herpetol. Notes, 16: 83–86, reported the species from Quebrangulo Municipality in Alagoas, northeastern Brazil, and provided a dot map for the species. Bastos and Zina, 2022, Herpetol. Notes, 15: 365–376, reported the species from Jequié municipality, Bahia, Brazil, and briefly discussed its habitat and conservation status. Rosa, Lingnau, and Garey, 2025, ZooKeys, 1264: 109–128, provided records from Iguaçu Nacional Park, Paraná, Brazil. Verrastro and Borges-Martins, 2025, Anf. Rept. Pampa, 2: 81, provided a brief account, photograph, and dot distribution map for the Pampa biome in Brazil (as well as adjacent areas of Argentina, Uruguay, and Paraguay).    

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.