Proceratophrys Miranda-Ribeiro, 1920

English Names

Smooth Horned Frogs (Frank and Ramus, 1995, Compl. Guide Scient. Common Names Amph. Rept. World: 84).

Distribution

Eastern and southern Brazil; northeastern Argentina and Paraguay; possibly extending into Bolivia adjacent to the Brazilian border.

Comment

Mercadal de Barrio and Barrio, 1993, Amphibia-Reptilia, 14: 13-18, compared the species and noted that the genus needs revision. Izecksohn, Cruz, and Peixoto, 1999 "1998", Rev. Univ. Rural, Ser. Cienc. Vida, 20: 37-54, discussed those species having rostral and eyelid appendages (the Proceratophrys bigibbosa group) as did Kwet and Faivovich, 2001, Copeia, 2001: 203-215 (who provided an identification key to the Proceratophrys bigibbosa group). Lavilla and Cei, 2001, Monogr. Mus. Reg. Sci. Nat. Torino, 28: 111, suggested that this genus is not monophyletic, but did not mention with respect to what taxon, although Macrogenioglottis is a candidate (DRF). Izecksohn, Carvalho-e-Silva, and Deiss, 2005, Rev. Brasil. Zool., 22: 225-229, compared osteologically Proceratophrys boiei, Proceratophrys appendicula, Proceratophrys melanopogon, and Proceratophrys laticeps and considered the first three to form a natural group. Prado and Pombal, 2008, Arq. Zool., São Paulo, 39: 1-85, reviewed and revised the species exhibiting eyelid appendages. Pyron and Wiens, 2011, Mol. Phylogenet. Evol., 61: 543-583, in their study of Genbank sequences, provided a tree of exemplar species and suggested that Proceratophrys is the sister taxon of Macrogenioglottus + Odontophrynus. Teixeira, Amaro, Recoder, Vechio, and Rodrigues, 2012, Zootaxa, 3551: 25-42, provided range maps of the species. Godinho, Moura, Lacerda, and Feio, 2013, Salamandra, 49: 70, summarized the literature to that point of advertisement calls within Proceratophrys. Dias, Amaro, Carvalho-e-Silva, and Rodrigues, 2013, Zootaxa, 3682: 277–304, provided a Bayesian tree of molecular data primary focused on the species in this genus and discussed the species groups, noting, in particular, that none of the similarity-groups of earlier literature were recovered with exception of the Proceratophrys bigibbosa group. See discussion of the nominal Proceratophrys cristiceps group by Brandão, Caramaschi, Vaz-Silva, and Campos, 2013, Zootaxa, 3750: 321–347, and comments on the same grouping by Martins and Giaretta, 2013, Zootaxa, 3750: 301-320. Dias, 2018, Copeia, 106: 86–93, reported on the larval morphology of Proceratophrys bigibbosa, noting synapomorphies of the Proceratophrys bigibbosa group (including Proceratophrys avelinoi, Proceratophrys bigibbosa, Proceratophrys brauni, and Proceratophrys palustris), as did Dias, Araujo-Vieira, Santos, and Both, 2019, Copeia, 107: 417–429. Silva, Santos, Gazoni, Cholak, Haddad, and Parise-Maltempi, 2021, An. Acad. Brasil. Cienc., 93 (4: e20201650): 1–11, reported on karyological data and evolution. Vieira, Oliveira, Vieira, and Alves, 2022, PeerJ, 10(e12879): 1–30, reported on morphometric and chromatic variation within nominal Proceratophrys cristiceps and suggested that the number of species within the Proceratophrys cristiceps group is over-estimated. 

Contained taxa (43 sp.):

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 related information on conservation and images as well as observation see iNaturalist; for a quick link to their maps see iNaturalist KML