- Amphibian Species of the World on Twitter
- What is the right name?
- Curator's blog
- Running log of additions and changes, 2023
- Logs of changes and additions, 2014–2022
- How to cite
- How to use
- History of the project, 1980 to 2023
- Comments on amphibian taxonomy relating to versions 3.0 to 6.1 (2004 to 2023)
- Scientific Nomenclature and Its Discontents
- Structure of the taxonomic records
- Contributors and reviewers for Amphibian Species of the World: A Taxonomic and Geographic Reference (1985)
- Contributors, online editions
- Versions
- Museum abbreviations
- Links to useful amphibian systematic, conservation, collection management, informational, and/or regional sites
- Links to useful FREE library sites
- Copyright and terms of use
Nasikabatrachus sahyadrensis Biju and Bossuyt, 2003
Nasikabatrachus sahyadrensis Biju and Bossuyt, 2003, Nature, 425: 711. Holotype: BNHM 4202, by original designation. Type locality: "Disturbed secondary forest near a cardamom plantation at Kattappana (09° 45′ N, 77° 05′ E), altitude approximately 900 m), Idukki district, Kerala, Western Ghats, India".
English Names
Purple Frog (original publication).
Pig-nosed Frog (Sivaprasad, 2013, Common Amph. Kerala: 107).
Doughnut Frog (Sivaprasad, 2013, Common Amph. Kerala: 107).
Distribution
Western Ghats of Kerala and Tamil Nadu, India.
Comment
Das, 2007, Herpetol. Rev., 38: 291-292, noted several publications dealing with this species long prior to its naming. Radhakrishnan, Gopi, and Palot, 2007, Curr. Sci., Bangalore, 92: 213-216, provided range extensions in Tamil Nadu and Kerala in the Western Ghats and discussed specific localities. See photograph, map, description of geographic range and habitat, and conservation status in Stuart, Hoffmann, Chanson, Cox, Berridge, Ramani, and Young, 2008, Threatened Amph. World: 467, who suggested that this name covers unnamed species. Das and Dutta, 2007, Hamadryad, 31: 154–181, noted several larval descriptions in the literature. Zachariah, Abraham, Das, Jayan, and Altig, 2012, Zootaxa, 3510: 53-64, reported on life history and larval development. Raj, Vasudevan, Deepak, Sharma, Singh, Aggarwal, and Dutta, 2012, Zootaxa, 3510: 65-76, reported on larval morphology and ontogeny. A very brief characterization, photograph, and dot map provided by Subramanian, Dinesh, and Radhakrishnan, 2013, Atlas of Endemic Amph. W. Ghats: 76. Sivaprasad, 2013, Common Amph. Kerala: 106–107, provided a brief account, photograph, and dot map for Kerala, India. Jobin, Deepak, and Nameer, 2012, Frog Leg, 18: 3–9, provided a range map and commented on larval morphology. Thomas, Suyesh, Biju, and Bee, 2014, PLoS One, 9 (2: e84809): 1–12, reported on vocal behavior. Senevirathne, Thomas, Kerney, Hanken, Biju, and Meegaskumbura, 2016, PLoS One, 11(3: e0151114): 1–23, described larval ontogeny. Janani, Vasudevan, Prendini, Dutta, and Aggarwal, 2017, Alytes, 34: 1–19, compared this species to Nasikabatrachus bhupathi in morphology, advertisement call, and molecular markers.
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.
- For additional sources of information from other sites search Google
- For images search CalPhoto Images and Google Images
- To search the NIH genetic sequence database, see GenBank
- For additional information see AmphibiaWeb report
- For information on conservation status and distribution see the IUCN Redlist
- For related information on conservation and images as well as observation see iNaturalist
- For access to available specimen data for this species, from over 350 scientific collections, go to Vertnet.