Pseudoeurycea Taylor, 1944

English Names

False Brook Salamanders (Liner, 1994, Herpetol. Circ., 23: 13; Frank and Ramus, 1995, Compl. Guide Scient. Common Names Amph. Rept. World: 33; Liner and Casas-Andreu, 2008, Herpetol. Circ., 38: 30)

Veracruz Worm Salamanders (Lineatriton [no longer recognized]: Liner, 1994, Herpetol. Circ., 23: 12).

Lined Salamanders (Lineatriton [no longer recognized]: Frank and Ramus, 1995, Compl. Guide Scient. Common Names Amph. Rept. World: 32).

Mexican Slender Salamanders (Lineatriton [no longer recognized]: Tanner and Dundee, 2000, Cat. Am. Amph. Rept., 705: 1–4).

Distribution

Montane Guerrero and Tamaulipas east and south through Mexico to Guatemala. 

Comment

Species groups delimited without discussion by Wake and Lynch, 1976, Sci. Bull. Nat. Hist. Mus. Los Angeles Co., 25: 61. Wake and Elias, 1983, Contrib. Sci. Nat. Hist. Mus. Los Angeles Co., 345: 13, noted that Pseudoeurycea is delimited solely by retention of primitive morphological features. The Pseudoeurycea gadovi, Pseudoeurycea rex, and Pseudoeurycea leprosa groups (of Wake and Lynch, 1976, Sci. Bull. Nat. Hist. Mus. Los Angeles Co., 25: 1–65), appear to be closely related, according to Maxson and Wake, 1981, Herpetologica, 37: 109–117. Lynch, Wake, and Yang, 1983, Copeia, 1983: 884–894, reported on electrophoretic variation in Mexican forms and discussed the problems with delimiting species groups. Parra-Olea, 2002, Mol. Phylogenet. Evol., 22: 234–246, presented molecular evidence for the paraphyly of Pseudoeurycea with respect to Lineatriton (which is polyphyletic on the basis of evidence provided in the same paper) and recommended (but did not execute) a partition of Pseudoeurycea to maintain Lineatriton (polyphyletic) and Ixalotrition. Canseco-Márquez and Parra-Olea, 2003, Herpetol. J., 13: 21–26, recognized the Pseudoeurycea juarezi group and continued the discussion of Pseudoeurycea paraphyly. Lara-Góngora, 2003, Bull. Maryland Herpetol. Soc., 39: 21–57, provided a discussion and an identification matrix for the Pseudoeurycea leprosa group. Parra-Olea and Wake, 2001, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 98: 7888-7891, and Parra-Olea, García-París, Hanken, and Wake, 2004, J. Nat. Hist., London, 38: 2119–2131, confirmed with additional molecular evidence that continued recognition of Lineatriton renders Pseudoeurycea paraphyletic (and Lineatriton polyphyletic), although they took no action to remediate this taxonomic anomaly. Parra-Olea, 2002, Mol. Phylogenet. Evol., 22: 244, regarded the problem of polyphyly of Lineatriton and the attendant paraphyly of Pseudoeurycea "difficult to solve" because of concerns about notions of overall morphological similarity being incongruent with evolutionary history. Brodie, Mendelson, and Campbell, 2002, Herpetologica, 58: 194–204, revised Lineatriton but did not see the earlier paper by Parra-Olea, 2002, Mol. Phylogenet. Evol., 22: 234–246. Canseco-Márquez, Gutiérrez-Mayén, and Salazar-Arenas, 2000, Herpetol. Rev., 31: 259–263, reported an unnamed Pueblan population of former Lineatriton. Canseco-Márquez and Parra-Olea, 2003, Herpetol. J., 13: 21–26, reported that recognition of Lineatriton renders the Pseudoeurycea leprosa group paraphyletic. 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: 178, discussed the paraphyly of Pseudoeurycea and polyphyly of Lineatriton and as a remedy placed Lineatriton and Ixalotriton in the synonymy of Pseudoeurycea, rendering the latter monophyletic and former Lineatriton merely highly apomorphic members of the Pseudoeurycea leprosa group. Wiens, Parra-Olea, García-París, and Wake, 2007, Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. B, Biol. Sci., 274: 918–928, confirmed the paraphyly of Pseudoeurycea with respect to Ixalotriton, Parvimolge, and a polyphyletic Lineatriton, which they continued to recognize even though no evidence so far suggested would support monophyly of Pseudoeurycea excluding Ixalotriton, Parvimolge, and Lineatriton. (See comment under Parvimolge.) In the tribe Bolitoglossini of Vieites, Nieto-Roman, Wake, and Wake, 2011, Mol. Phylogenet. Evol., 59: 633. Pyron and Wiens, 2011, Mol. Phylogenet. Evol., 61: 543–583, confirmed the paraphyly of Pseudoeurycea with respect to Ixalotriton (albeit with a low confidence measure) and Lineatriton, although they explicitly (p. 581) embraced a paraphyletic Pseudoeurycea and recognized both Ixalotriton and (the polyphyletic) Lineatriton as genera. Köhler, 2011, Amph. Cent. Am.: 91–92, provided a brief summary of natural history, a key to the species of Central America, and range maps and photographs of the species. Raffaëlli, 2013, Urodeles du Monde, 2nd ed.: 266–287, provided brief account, photographs, and maps for the species. Rovito, Parra-Olea, Recuero, and Wake, 2015, Zool. J. Linn. Soc., 175: 167–188, partitioned Pseudoeurycea in order to preserve Ixalotriton and Bolitoglossa, recognizing the genus Isthmura for the former Pseudoeurycea bellii species group and Aquiloeurycea for the former Pseudoeurycea cephalica species group. Lemos-Espinal and Dixon, 2016, Amph. Rept. Hidalgo: 337–338, provided a brief account and map for Hidalgo, Mexico.

Contained taxa (41 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