Elachistocleis bicolor (Guérin-Méneville, 1838)

Class: Amphibia > Order: Anura > Family: Microhylidae > Subfamily: Gastrophryninae > Genus: Elachistocleis > Species: Elachistocleis bicolor

Oxyrhynchus bicolor Guérin-Méneville, 1838, Icon. Regne Animal, 3: 17, pl. 27, fig. 2. Holotype: Animal figured in pl. 27, no. 2, in original publication (but see Lavilla, Vaira, and Ferrari, 2003, Amphibia-Reptilia, 24: 279); originally in "Cuv. Coll. Mus." (= MNHNP), not recently located. Type locality: "l'Amerique méridionale [= South America]", considered by Lavilla, Vaira, and Ferrari, 2003, Amphibia-Reptilia, 24: 279, to likely be "Buenos Aires, Argentina".

Oxyrhincus bicolor — Duméril and Bibron, 1841, Erp. Gen., 6: 738. Incorrect subsequent spelling of the generic name.

Engystoma ovale var. bicolor — Boulenger, 1885, Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., Ser. 5, 16: 195.

Engystoma ovale concolor Miranda-Ribeiro, 1920, Rev. Mus. Paulista, São Paulo, 12: 284. Holotype: MZUSP 41, by original designation; now MZUSP 2021 according to XXX. Type locality: "Ypiranga", São Paulo, Brazil.

Elachistocleis ovale bicolor — Parker, 1927, Occas. Pap. Mus. Zool. Univ. Michigan, 187: 4.

Elachistocleis ovalis bicolor — Müller and Hellmich, 1936, Wissenschaft. Ergebn. Deutschen Gran Chaco Exped., Amph. Rept.: 92; Freiberg, 1942, Physis, Buenos Aires, 19: 219–240.

Elachistocleis bicolor — Carvalho, 1954, Occas. Pap. Mus. Zool. Univ. Michigan, 555: 1–19.

Elachistocleis matogrosso Caramaschi, 2010, Bol. Mus. Nac., Rio de Janeiro, N.S., Zool., 527: 18. Holotype: MNRJ 4812, by original designation. Type locality: "BRAZIL: MATO GROSSO: Cuiabá (15° 36′ S, 56° 06′ W; 177 m altitude)". Synonymy by Novaes-e-Fagundes, Lyra, Loredam, Carvalho, Haddad, Rodrigues, Baldo, Barrasso, Loebmann, Ávila, Brusquetti, Prudente, Wheeler, Orrico, and Peloso, 2023, Zool. J. Linn. Soc., 197: 558.

Engystoma matogrosso — Dubois, Ohler, and Pyron, 2021, Megataxa, 5: 216. 

Engystoma bicolor — Dubois, Ohler, and Pyron, 2021, Megataxa, 5: 216. 

Common Names

Two-colored Oval Frog (Frank and Ramus, 1995, Compl. Guide Scient. Common Names Amph. Rept. World: 89).

Distribution

Brazil from the Amazonas-Rondônia border south through Amazonian Bolivia and southern Mato Grosso and Paraná (Brazil) to northeastern Argentina, eastern Paraguay, and the state of São Paulo (Brazil) south through Uruguay. 

Geographic Occurrence

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

Comment

Review in Cei, 1980, Monit. Zool. Ital., N.S., Monogr., 2: 155. See comment under Elachistocleis. Williams and Gudynas, 1987, Amphibia-Reptilia, 8: 225–229, reported on larval morphology. Suggested to be a junior synonym of Elachistocleis ovalis by Klappenbach and Langone, 1992, An. Mus. Nac. Hist. Nat. Montevideo, Ser. 2, 8: 203–204. See also comment by De la Riva, Köhler, Lötters, and Reichle, 2000, Rev. Esp. Herpetol., 14: 51. Köhler, 2000, Bonn. Zool. Monogr., 48: 142–143, provided a brief account. Achaval and Olmos, 2003, Anf. Rept. Uruguay, ed. 2: 51, provided a brief account and photograph for the Uruguay population (as Elachistocleis ovale). Vera Candioti, 2007, Zootaxa, 1600: 1–175, reported on detailed larval morphology. López and Pelegrin, 2012, Check List, 8: 798–799, provided a range extension to Córdoba, Argentina, and commented on the range. Pereyra, Akmentins, Laufer, and Vaira, 2013, Zootaxa, 3694: 535, noted that the record for Tarija Province, southeastern Bolivia, is assignable to Elachistocleis haroi. Allen, von May, Villacampa-Ortega, Burdekin, and Whitworth, 2014, Check List, 10: 388–391, suggested that records from southeastern Peru to northwestern Bolivia are referable to Elachistocleis muiraquitan. Rossa-Feres and Nomura, 2006 "2005", Biota Neotrop., São Paulo, 6 (2: bn00706012006): 1–24, characterized larval morphology of this species (provisional identification) and provided a key to the larvae of northwestern São Paulo state, Brazil. Brouard, Manders, and Smith, 2015, Herpetol. Rev., 29: 97–98, provided a record (as Elachistocleis matogrosso), description, and photograph from the Reserva Natural Laguna Blanca, Santa Rosa del Aguaray, Departmento San Pedro, Paraguay. Abreliano, Zaracho, and Sandoval, 2015, Biologia, Bratislava, 70: 958–967, reported on larval ontogeny from specimens collected in Corrientes, Argentina. Advertisement call (as Elachistocleis matogrosso) provided by Pansonato, Mudrek, Nunes, and Strüssmann, 2018, Salamandra, 54: 92–96. See Marinho, Carvalho, Bang, Teixeira, Azarak, Costa-Campos, and Giaretta, 2018, Zootaxa, 4521: 357–375, for discussion (as Elachistocleis matogrosso) of advertisement call, intraspecific variation, and diagnosis. Jowers, Othman, Borzée, Rivas-Fuenmayor, Sánchez-Ramírez, Auguste, Downie, Read, and Murphy, 2021, Organisms Divers. Evol., 21: 189–206, discussed the phylogenetics and biogeography of nominal Elachistocleis matogrosso and Elachistocleis bicolor. In the Elachistocleis bicolor group of Novaes-e-Fagundes, Lyra, Loredam, Carvalho, Haddad, Rodrigues, Baldo, Barrasso, Loebmann, Ávila, Brusquetti, Prudente, Wheeler, Orrico, and Peloso, 2023, Zool. J. Linn. Soc., 197: 545–568. Vicente-Ferreira, Nascimento, Batista, Kardush, Reyes, and Garey, 2024, Biota Neotrop., 24(1: e20231526): 1–17, provided records from the Refúgio Biológico Bela Vista, Paraná, southern Brazil (adjacent to the Paraguay border), as well as providing identification keys to these species based on larval and adult morphology.  

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.