Feihyla Frost, Grant, Faivovich, Bain, Haas, Haddad, de Sá, Channing, Wilkinson, Donnellan, Raxworthy, Campbell, Blotto, Moler, Drewes, Nussbaum, Lynch, Green, and Wheeler, 2006

Class: Amphibia > Order: Anura > Family: Rhacophoridae > Subfamily: Rhacophorinae > Genus: Feihyla
15 species

Feihyla Frost, 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: 246. Type species Philautus palpebalis Smith, 1924, by original designation.

Rohanixalus Biju, Garg, Gokulakrishnan, Sivaperuman, Thammachoti, Ren, Gopika, Bisht, Hamidy, and Shouche, 2020, Zootaxa, 4878: 27. Type species: Ixalus vittatus Boulenger, 1887. Zoobank publication registration: 34C96340-F0F5-440F-AEEB-6AC50F175950. Synonymy by Dubois, Ohler, and Pyron, 2021, Megataxa, 5: 489. 

Common Names

Jelly-nest Tree Frogs (Biju, Garg, Gokulakrishnan, Sivaperuman, Thammachoti, Ren, Gopika, Bisht, Hamidy, and Shouche, 2020, Zootaxa, 4878: 18). 

Rohan's Tree Frogs (Rohanixalus [no longer recognized]: Biju, Garg, Gokulakrishnan, Sivaperuman, Thammachoti, Ren, Gopika, Bisht, Hamidy, and Shouche, 2020, Zootaxa, 4878: 27). 

Bubble-nest Frogs (Rohanixalus [no longer recognized]:Dinesh, Radhakrishnan, Deepak, and Kulkarni, 2023, Fauna India Checklist, vers. 5.0 : 15). 

Distribution

Southern China (Guangxi, Guizhou, and Yunnan) to northern and central Vietnam (Tam Dao and likely Lao Cai province as well as Lam Dong); Borneo and Java; northeastern Indian states (Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Manipur, Nagaland, Mizoram, and Tripura) and the Andaman Islands; Bangladesh (Sylhet Division); Myanmar; Thailand; Laos; Cambodia; China (Yunnan, Guangxi, Hainan, and Tibet); Vietnam; Malaysia; and Sumatra in Indonesia

Comment

 Grosjean, Delorme, Dubois, and Ohler, 2008, J. Zool. Syst. Evol. Res., 46: 169–176, found Feihyla (sensu lato) to be the sister taxon of Chiromantis and for that reason retained it in Chiromantis pending further resolution. Li, Che, Bain, Zhao, and Zhang, 2008, Mol. Phylogenet. Evol., 48: 302–312, found Feihyla, on the basis of somewhat denser taxonomic sampling and a larger dataset, to be more closely related to Rhacophorus, and therefore retained the genus. Yu, Rao, Yang, and Zhang, 2008, Zool. J. Linn. Soc., 153: 733–749, suggested that Feihyla (as Philautus palpebralis) is the sister taxon of their Chirixalus vittatus (which they placed far from other Chiromantis/Chirixalus). Li, Rao, Murphy, and Zhang, 2011, Asian Herpetol. Res., Ser. 3, 2 (1): 1–11, noted a behavioral synapomorphy and suggested that Feihyla is monophyletic with the transfer of former Chiromantis vittatus into the genus by Fei, Ye, and Jiang, 2010, Acta Zootaxon. Sinica, 35: 413–417. Pyron and Wiens, 2011, Mol. Phylogenet. Evol., 61: 543–583, confirmed the monophyly of Chiromantis and placed Feihyla as the sister taxon of Taruga (which they did not recognize separate from Polypedates), Polypedates, and Rhacophorus. Li, Li, Klaus, Rao, Hillis, and Zhang, 2013, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 110: 3441–3446, found Feihyla to form the sister taxon of Ghatixalus + Taruga + Polypedates.  Hertwig, Schweizer, Das, and Haas, 2013, Mol. Phylogenet. Evol., 68: 567–581, found Feihyla to be monophyletic and the sister taxon of Polypedates (sensu lato) on the basis of a maximum-likelihood analysis. Meegaskumbura, Senevirathne, Biju, Garg, Meegaskumbura, Pethiyagoda, Hanken, and Schneider, 2015, Zool. Scripta, 44: 509–522, suggested that Feihyla vittata is the sister taxon of Chiromantis, while the remainder of Feihyla is the sister taxon of a group composed of Ghatixalus, Rhacophorus, Taruga, and Polypedates. Biju, Garg, Gokulakrishnan, Sivaperuman, Thammachoti, Ren, Gopika, Bisht, Hamidy, and Shouche, 2020, Zootaxa, 4878: 1–55, reviewed and revised this taxon, including substantial accounts, recognizing the Feihyla palpebralis group (Feihyla fuhua and Feihyla palpebralis), the Feihyla vittiger group (Feihyla inexpectata, Feihyla kajau, Feihyla samkosensis, and Feihyla vittiger), and excluding for reasons of polyphyly the new genus Rohanixalus (Rohanixalus vittatus, Rohanixalus baladika, Rohanixalus hansenae, Rohanixalus marginis, Rohanixalus nauli, Rohanixalus punctatus, Rohanixalus senapatiensis, and Rohanixalus shyamrupus). Dubois, Ohler, and Pyron, 2021, Megataxa, 5: 489, found Rohanixalus to be phylogenetically imbedded within Feihyla and synonymized the genera. Liu, Huang, Stuart, Ai, Bernstein, Suwannapoom, Chomdej, Che, and Yuan, 2023, Zool. Res., Kunming, 44: 1146–1151, revised Rohanixalus with the addition of a new species. See Mahony, Kamei, Brown, and Chan, 2024, Vert. Zool., Senckenberg, 74: 253–255, for discussion of why Rohanixalus should be included within Feihyla. 

Contained taxa (15 sp.):

Feihyla baladika (Riyanto and Kurniati, 2014)
Feihyla fuhua Fei, Ye, and Jiang, 2010
Feihyla hansenae (Cochran, 1927)
Feihyla inexpectata (Matsui, Shimada, and Sudin, 2014)
Feihyla kajau (Dring, 1983)
Feihyla marginis (Chan, Grismer, Anuar, Quah, Grismer, Wood, Muin, and Ahmad, 2011)
Feihyla nauli (Riyanto and Kurniati, 2014)
Feihyla palpebralis (Smith, 1924)
Feihyla punctata (Wilkinson, Win, Thin, Lwin, Shein, and Tun, 2003)
Feihyla samkosensis (Grismer, Neang, Chav, and Holden, 2007)
Feihyla senapatiensis (Mathew and Sen, 2009)
Feihyla shyamrupus (Chanda and Ghosh, 1989)
Feihyla vittata (Boulenger, 1887)
Feihyla vittiger (Boulenger, 1897)
Feihyla wuguanfui (Liu, Huang, Stuart, Ai, Bernstein, Suwannapoom, Chomdej, Che, and Yuan, 2023)

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.