Phrynobatrachus hylaios Perret, 1959

Class: Amphibia > Order: Anura > Family: Phrynobatrachidae > Genus: Phrynobatrachus > Species: Phrynobatrachus hylaios

Phrynobatrachus werneri hylaios Perret, 1959, Bull. Soc. Neuchatel. Sci. Nat., 82: 251. Holotype: MHNG 964.100, by original designation and Schätti, Perret, and Mariaux, 2002, Cat. Comm. Types Amph. Rept. Mus. Hist. Nat. Geneve, Vers. 4.0 (Jan. 2002): 17. Type locality: "Foulassi, Sangmelima, alt. 710 m, forêt".

Phrynobatrachus hylaiosPerret, 1966, Zool. Jahrb., Jena, Abt. Syst., 93: 361.

English Names

Foulassi River Frog (Frank and Ramus, 1995, Compl. Guide Scient. Common Names Amph. Rept. World: 103).

Woodland Puddle Frog (Channing and Rödel, 2019, Field Guide Frogs & Other Amph. Afr.: 284).

Distribution

Known with certainty only from the type locality (Foulassis, Sangmelima, 710 m elevation, Cameroon). See comment. 

Geographic Occurrence

Natural Resident: Cameroon

Endemic: Cameroon

Comment

Substantial misidentifications in the literature were noted by Gvoždík, Nečas, Dolinay, Zimkus, Schmitz, and Fokam, 2020, PeerJ, 8 (e8393): 1–52, who restricted the range to the type locality. As examples, they noted that the "Phrynobatrachus cf. hylaios" sequences in GenBank (as of February 2020; Zimkus, Rödel, and Hillers, 2010, Mol. Phylogenet. Evol., 55: 883-900) actually apply to Phrynobatrachus cf. perpalmatus. They also noted that the record by Jackson and Blackburn, 2007, Salamandra, 43: 149-164, for Nouabale-Ndoki National Park, Rep. Congo, are referable to Phrynobatrachus perpalmatus. Similarly, the Phrynobatrachus cf. hyliaos of Deichmann, Mulcahy, Vanthomme, Tobi, Wynn, Zimkus, and McDiarmid, 2017, PLoS One, 12 (11: e0187283): 20–21, refers to Phrynobatrachus perpalmatus. In the Phrynobatrachus natalensis group of Goutte, Reyes-Velasco, and Boissinot, 2019, ZooKeys, 824: 53–70. Gvoždík, Nečas, Dolinay, Zimkus, Schmitz, and Fokam, 2020, PeerJ, 8 (e8393): 1–52, also suggested that this species is a member of the Phrynobatrachus ruthbeatae species group and suggested a great deal of confusion in identifications in the literature, noting that at least some of the records from the Rep. Congo are best attributed to Phrynobatrachus horstiSánchez-Vialas, Calvo-Revuelta, Castroviejo-Fisher, and De la Riva, 2020, Proc. California Acad. Sci., Ser. 4, 66: 144, suggested that no specimens for Equatorial Guinea have been documented and presence in that political unit requires conformation. 

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.