Lithobates sevosus (Goin and Netting, 1940)

Class: Amphibia > Order: Anura > Family: Ranidae > Genus: Lithobates > Species: Lithobates sevosus

Rana sevosa Goin and Netting, 1940, Ann. Carnegie Mus., 28: 137. Holotype: CM 16809, by original designation. Type locality: "Slidell, Saint Tammany Parish, Louisiana", USA.

Rana capito sevosaWright and Wright, 1942, Handb. Frogs Toads U.S. Canada, Ed. 2: 186; Schmidt, 1953, Check List N. Am. Amph. Rept., Ed. 6: 79.

Rana areolata sevosaViosca, 1949, Pop. Sci. Bull., Louisiana Acad. Sci., 1: 10; Neill, 1957, Herpetologica, 13: 47-52.

Rana sevosaYoung and Crother, 2001, Copeia, 2001: 382–388.

Rana (Novirana, Sierrana, Pantherana, Nenirana) sevosaHillis and Wilcox, 2005, Mol. Phylogenet. Evol., 34: 305. See Dubois, 2006, Mol. Phylogenet. Evol., 42: 317-330, Hillis, 2007, Mol. Phylogenet. Evol., 42: 331-338, and Dubois, 2007, Cladistics, 23: 390-402, for relevant discussion of nomenclature. Invalid name formulation under the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature (1999) as discussed by Dubois, 2007, Cladistics, 23: 395.

Rana (Novirana) sevosa — Hillis and Wilcox, 2005, Mol. Phylogenet. Evol., 34: 305. Interpretation by Fouquette and Dubois, 2014, Checklist N.A. Amph. Rept.: 424, of the nomenclatural act of Hillis and Wilcox, 2005. 

Lithobates sevosusFrost, Grant, Faivovich, Bain, Haas, Haddad, de Sá, Channing, Wilkinson, Donnellan, Raxworthy, Campbell, Blotto, Moler, Drewes, Nussbaum, Lynch, Green, and Wheeler, 2006, Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., 297: 369; Che, Pang, Zhao, Wu, Zhao, and Zhang, 2007, Mol. Phylogenet. Evol., 43: 1-13; by implication.

Lithobates (Lithobates) sevosusDubois, 2006, C. R. Biol., Paris, 329: 829; Dubois, 2006, Mol. Phylogenet. Evol., 42: 325.

Rana (Nenirana) sevosaHillis, 2007, Mol. Phylogenet. Evol., 42: 335–336, by implication.

Rana (Lithobates) sevosa — Fouquette and Dubois, 2014, Checklist N.A. Amph. Rept.: 415. 

Rana (Pantherana) sevosa — Yuan, Zhou, Chen, Poyarkov, Chen, Jang-Liaw, Chou, Matzke, Iizuka, Min, Kuzmin, Zhang, Cannatella, Hillis, and Che, 2016, Syst. Biol., 65: 835.

English Names

St. Tammany Gopher Frog (Viosca, 1949, Pop. Sci. Bull., Louisiana Acad. Sci., 1: 10).

Dark Gopher Frog (Schmidt, 1953, Check List N. Am. Amph. Rept., Ed. 6: 79),

Dusky Gopher Frog (Conant, Cagle, Goin, Lowe, Neill, Netting, Schmidt, Shaw, Stebbins, and Bogert, 1956, Copeia, 1956: 177; Conant, 1975, Field Guide Rept. Amph. E. Cent. N. Am., Ed. 2: 349; Collins, Huheey, Knight, and Smith, 1978, Herpetol. Circ., 7: 12; Frank and Ramus, 1995, Compl. Guide Scient. Common Names Amph. Rept. World: 106; Collins, 1997, Herpetol. Circ., 25: 13; Crother, Boundy, Campbell, de Queiroz, Frost, Highton, Iverson, Meylan, Reeder, Seidel, Sites, Taggart, Tilley, and Wake, 2001 "2000", Herpetol. Circ., 29: 14; Frost, McDiarmid, and Mendelson, 2008, in Crother (ed.), Herpetol. Circ., 37: 8; Collins and Taggart, 2009, Standard Common Curr. Sci. Names N. Am. Amph. Turtles Rept. Crocodil., ed. 6: 8; Frost, McDiarmid, Mendelson, and Green, 2012, in Crother (ed.), Herpetol. Circ., 39: 18; Frost, Lemmon, McDiarmid, and Mendelson, 2017, in Crother (ed.), Herpetol. Circ., 43: 15).


Now widely extirpated, but originally in southeastern Louisiana, through southern Mississippi, into southwestern Alabama (west of the Mobile River).

Geographic Occurrence

Natural Resident: United States of America, United States of America - Alabama, United States of America - Louisiana, United States of America - Mississippi

Endemic: United States of America


Reviewed (as Rana areolata sevosa) by Altig and Lohoefener, 1983, Cat. Am. Amph. Rept., 324:1–4. Removed from the synonymy of Rana areolata by Young and Crother, 2001, Copeia, 2001: 382, where it had been placed by Viosca, 1949, Pop. Sci. Bull., Louisiana Acad. Sci., 1: 3–12, and Neill, 1957, Herpetologica, 13: 47–52. See photograph, map, description of geographic range and habitat, and conservation status (as Rana sevosa) in Stuart, Hoffmann, Chanson, Cox, Berridge, Ramani, and Young, 2008, Threatened Amph. World: 511. Richter, Crother, and Broughton, 2009, Copeia, 2009: 799–806, reported on the genetic consequences of population frgamentation and reduction in this species. Richter and Jensen, 2005, in Lannoo (ed.), Amph. Declines: 584–586, and Dodd, 2013, Frogs U.S. and Canada, 2 : 617–621, provided accounts that summarized relevant literature on biology, range, and conservation. Altig and McDiarmid, 2015, Handb. Larval Amph. US and Canada: 222–223, provided an account of larval morphology and biology. Lannoo, Stiles, Saenz, and Hibbitts, 2018, Copeia, 2018: 575–579, reported on comparative call characteristics within the subgenus NeniranaGuyer and Bailey, 2023, Frogs and Toads of Alabama: 116–83, provided a detailed account for Alabama, USA.  

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.