- What is Amphibian Species of the World?
- How to cite
- How to use
- Structure of the taxonomic records
- Running log of additions and corrections, 2024
- Logs of changes and additions, 2014–2023
- What is the right name?
- Curator's blog
- Amphibian Species of the World on social media
- History of the project, 1980 to 2024
- Comments on amphibian taxonomy relating to versions 3.0 to 6.2 (2004 to 2024)
- Scientific Nomenclature and its Discontents: Comments by Frost on Rules and Philosophy of Taxonomy, Ranks, and Their Applications
- Contributors, online editions
- Contributors and reviewers for Amphibian Species of the World: A Taxonomic and Geographic Reference (1985)
- 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
Pelobates vespertinus (Pallas, 1771)
Rana vespertina Pallas, 1771, Reise Vers. Prov. Russ. Reich, 1: 458. Type(s): Not designated. Type locality: Not designated; given as "Sibiria" by Schneider, 1799, Hist. Amph. Nat.: 225; given as Sarbai River in the area of Ilmen Village, Samara (Kuibyschew), Russia by Kuzmin, 1999, Amph. Former Soviet Union: 212.
Bufo vespertinus — Schneider, 1799, Hist. Amph. Nat.: 225.
Pelobates fuscus var. orientalis Severtsov, 1855, Periodicheskie Yavleniya v Zhizni Zhivotnykh Voronezhskoi Gubernii: 385–386. Types: Not designated although presumably originally ZMM. Type locality: Voronezh Province, Russia. Synonymy by implication of Suryadnaya, 2014, Vestn. Zool., Kiev, 48: 511, and formally by Dufresnes, Strachinis, Tzoras, Litvinchuk, and Denoël, 2019, ZooKeys, 859: 141.
Pelobates campestris Severtsov, 1855, Periodicheskie Yavleniya v Zhizni Zhivotnykh Voronezhskoi Gubernii: 385–386. Substitute name for Pelobates fuscus var. orientalis Severtsov, 1913. Synonymy with Pelobates fuscus by Nikolskii, 1918, Fauna Rossii, Zemnovodnye: 154, with Pelobates vespertinus by implication of Suryadnaya, 2014, Vestn. Zool., Kiev, 48: 511, and formally by Dufresnes, Strachinis, Tzoras, Litvinchuk, and Denoël, 2019, ZooKeys, 859: 141.
Pelobates borkini Zagorodniuk, 2003, Visnyk of L'viv Univ., Biol. Ser., 33: 80–90. Nomen nudum. Synonymy by Dufresnes, Strachinis, Tzoras, Litvinchuk, and Denoël, 2019, ZooKeys, 859: 141.
Pelobates fuscus vespertinus — Crochet and Dubois, 2004, In Gasc et al. (eds)., Atlas Amph. Rept. Europe, Ed. 2: 498; Crottini, Andreone, Kosuch, Borkin, Litvinchuk, Eggert, and Veith, 2007, Mol. Ecol., 16: 2750.
Pelobates vespertinus — Suryadnaya, 2014, Vestn. Zool., Kiev, 48: 511.
Common Names
Pallas' Spadefoot Toad (Speybroeck, Beukema, Bok, and Van Der Voort, 2016, Field Guide Amph. Rept. Brit. Eur.: 139).
Distribution
Extreme western European Russia, southern and eastern Ukraine and the Crimea east and north and west to extreme southwestern Western Siberia and northwestern Kazakhstan. See comment
Geographic Occurrence
Natural Resident: Kazakhstan, Russia, Ukraine
Comment
Removed from the synonymy of Pelobates fuscus by Suryadnaya, 2014, Vestn. Zool., Kiev, 48: 511, where it had been placed by Fatio, 1872, Fauna Vert. Suisse, 3: 376; Schreiber, 1875, Herpetol. Eur.: 90; Kuzmin, 1996, Adv. Amph. Res. Former Soviet Union, 1: 54. Still considered a subspecies of Pelobates fuscus by some authors; there is a hybrid zone in northeastern Ukraine and the Russian province of Kursk. Most literature dealing with this species is covered in the comment under Pelobates fuscus, which in the strict sense is found west of Pelobates vespertinus. See that account for pre-2019 literature. See accounts by Kuzmin, 1999, Amph. Former Soviet Union: 212-221. Borkin, Litvinchuk, Milto, Rosanov, and Khalturin, 2001, Dokl. Biol. Sci., 376: 86-88, Borkin, Litvinchuk, Rosanov, and Milto, 2002 "2001", Amphibia-Reptilia, 22: 387-396, and Khalturin, Litvinchuk, Borkin, Rozanov, and Milto, 2003, Tsitologiia, Novosibirsk, 45: 308–323, presented evidence suggested that two species are covered under the name Pelobates fuscus fuscus, with the boundary between the two in eastern Ukraine and European Russia, and noting that the oldest name for the eastern form would be Pelobates vespertinus (Pallas, 1771), should the two populations prove to be different species which they turned out to be. Borkin, Litvinchuk, Rosanov, Khalturin, Lada, Borissovsky, Faizulin, Kotserzhinskaya, Novitsky, and Ruchin, 2003, Russ. J. Herpetol., 10: 111-118, refined the geographic distribution of the two populations. Mazanaeva and Askenderov, 2007, Russ. J. Herpetol., 14: 161-166, discussed the range in Dagestan, Russia. Cogǎlniceanu, Székely, Samoilă, Iosif, Tudor, Plăiaşu, Stănescu, and Rozylowicz, 2013, ZooKeys, 296: 35-57, provided a dot map for Romania. Litvinchuk, Crottini, Federici, de Pous, Donaire-Barroso, Andreone, Kalezić, Džukić, Lada, Borkin, and Rosanov, 2013, Organisms Divers. Evol., 13: 433–451, reported on the biogeography and narrow contact zone of two historical lineages, which they termed Pelobates fuscus fuscus and Pelobates fuscus vespertinus. Suryadnaya, 2014, Vestn. Zool., Kiev, 48: 511–520, noted karyological differences between the two nominal races (Pelobates fuscus fuscus and Pelobates fuscus vespertinus) and considered the two taxa as species with a narrow hybrid zone. Speybroeck, Beukema, Bok, and Van Der Voort, 2016, Field Guide Amph. Rept. Brit. Eur.: 139–140, provided a brief account. Dufresnes, Strachinis, Tzoras, Litvinchuk, and Denoël, 2019, ZooKeys, 859: 131–158, reported on the range and relationships with other species of Pelobates. Dufresnes, Strachinis, Suriadna, Mykytynets, Cogǎlniceanu, Székely, Vukov, Arntzen, Wielstra, Lymberakis, Geffen, Gafny, Kumlutaş, Ilgaz, Candan, Mizsei, Szabolcs, Kolenda, Smirnov, Géniez, Lukanov, Crochet, Dubey, Perrin, Litvinchuk, and Denoël, 2019, Mol. Ecol., 28: 3257–3270, reported on the hybrid zone with Pelobates fuscus. See Dufresnes, 2019, Amph. Eur., N. Afr., & Middle East: 57, for brief summary of identifying morphology and biology, a range map (in error the map for Pelobates syriacus), as well as a photograph. Bulakhova, Alfimov, and Berman, 2020, Herpetozoa, Wien, 33: 171–175, reported on the determinants of the range and provided a range map.
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 access to general information see Wikipedia
- For additional sources of general information from other websites search Google
- For access to relevant technical literature search Google Scholar
- 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 information on distribution, habitat, and conservation see the Map of Life
- For related information on conservation and images as well as observations see iNaturalist
- For access to available specimen data for this species, from over 350 scientific collections, go to Vertnet.