- What is Amphibian Species of the World?
- How to cite
- How to use
- Structure of the taxonomic records
- Running log of additions and changes, 2025
- Logs of changes and additions, 2014–2024
- What is the right name?
- Curator's blog
- 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
Dermophis Peters, 1880
Dermophis Peters, 1880 "1879", Monatsber. Preuss. Akad. Wiss. Berlin, 1879: 937. Type species: Siphonops mexicanus Duméril and Bibron, 1841, by subsequent designation of Noble, 1924, Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., 49: 305.
Common Names
Mexican Caecilians (Frank and Ramus, 1995, Compl. Guide Scient. Common Names Amph. Rept. World: 23).
Neotropical Caecilians (Liner and Casas-Andreu, 2008, Herpetol. Circ., 38: 6).
Distribution
Southern Mexico to northwestern Colombia.
Comment
Savage and Wake, 1972, Copeia, 1972: 680-695, revised this genus and considered its distribution. Wake, 1980, Herpetologica, 36: 244-256, discussed variation in taxonomic characters. Savage, 2002, Amph. Rept. Costa Rica: 116-120, provided accounts for the species of Costa Rica. Wilkinson and Nussbaum, 2006, In Exbrayat (ed.), Reprod. Biol. Phylog. Gymnophiona: 49, 63, diagnosed the taxon and suggested that Dermophis and Gymnopis are closest relatives on the basis of morphological and reproductive similarity, but that the monophyly of either taxon remains undocumented. Pyron and Wiens, 2011, Mol. Phylogenet. Evol., 61: 543-583 (see comment in Amphibia record) on the basis of molecular evidence consistent with the monophyly of Gymopis + Dermophis. Köhler, 2011, Amph. Cent. Am.: 30–32, provided a key to the species of Central America. Köhler, 2011, Amph. Cent. Am.: 30–32, provided a brief summary of natural history, a key to the species of Central America, and range maps and photographs of the species. San Mauro, Gower, Müller, Loader, Zardoya, Nussbaum, and Wilkinson, 2014, Mol. Phylogenet. Evol., 73: 183, recovered Gymnophis as paraphyletic with respect to Dermophis mexicanus (exemplars being Gymnopis two MVZ specimens of nominal "Gymnopis multiplicata" of which the vouchers were not available for identification verification). So, the authors left it as an open question. Undaunted by this Dubois, Ohler, and Pyron, 2021, Megataxa, 5: 270, placed Dermophis into the synonymy of Gymnopis without further investigation into the identification of terminals. As science is thin soup and is not followed here.
Contained taxa (7 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 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 related information on conservation and images as well as observations see iNaturalist