Pyxicephalus rufescens Jerdon, 1854 "1853", J. Asiat. Soc. Bengal, 22: 534. Type(s): Not stated but presumably originally in the ZSIC; reported as lost by Jerdon, 1870, Proc. Asiat. Soc. Bengal, 1870: 67; apparently lost from ZSIC according to Dubois, 1984, Alytes, 3: 15, who designated MNHNP 1984.2348 neotype. Type locality: "Malabar Coast", South India; neotype is from Gundia, Kemphole Forest, west of Sakleshpur, Karnataka, India.
Rana rufescens — Boulenger, 1882, Cat. Batr. Sal. Coll. Brit. Mus., Ed. 2: 29.
Rana (Tomopterna) rufescens — Boulenger, 1920, Rec. Indian Mus., 20: 102. Dubois, 1983, Alytes, 2: 164.
Rana (Fejervarya) rufescens — Dubois, 1984, Alytes, 3: 149.
Limnonectes (Fejervarya) rufescens — Dubois, 1987 "1986", Alytes, 5: 61.
Tomopterna rufescens — Das and Dutta, 1998, Hamadryad, 23: 66.
Fejervarya rufescens — Iskandar, 1998, Amph. Java Bali: 71. by implication; Dubois, 1999, J. South Asian Nat. Hist., 4: 6; Dubois and Ohler, 2000, Alytes, 18: 35; Fei, Ye, Jiang, and Xie, 2002, Herpetol. Sinica, 9: 92.
Zakerana rufescens — Howlader, 2011, Bangladesh Wildl. Bull., 5: 2.
Malabar Wart Frog (Frank and Ramus, 1995, Compl. Guide Scient. Common Names Amph. Rept. World: 100).
Reddish Burrowing Frog (Das and Dutta, 1998, Hamadryad, 23: 66; Daniels, 2005, Amph. Peninsular India: 248; Dinesh, Radhakrishnan, Gururaja, and Bhatta, 2009, Rec. Zool. Surv. India, Occas. Pap., 302: 22).
Rufescent Burrowing Frog (Daniels, 2005, Amph. Peninsular India: 248).
Southern India in the Western Ghats of Maharashtra, Karnataka, Goa, and Kerala.
See account by Boulenger, 1920, Rec. Indian Mus., 20: 102. Chanda, 2002, Handb. Indian Amph.: 145, 214-215, provided a brief account (as Tomopterna rufescens). Dutta, 1997, Amph. India Sri Lanka: 171-172, provided a range, systematic comments, and partial taxonomic bibliography (as Tomopterna rufescens). Daniels, 2005, Amph. Peninsular India: 248-249, provided an account (as Tomopterna rufescens). Considered a member of Tomopterna by Matsui, Toda, and Ota, 2008 "2007", Curr. Herpetol., 26: 73, but without discussing evidence. Kuramoto, Joshy, Kurabayashi, and Sumida, 2008 "2007", Curr. Herpetol., 26: 81-105, discussed the species and considered it to be phylogenetically within Fejervarya and noted that the Karnataka and Kerala populations were significantly genetically divergent. Kotaki, Kurabayashi, Matsui, Khonsue, Djong, Tandon, and Sumida, 2008, Zool. Sci., Tokyo, 25: 381-390, considered this species to be in their Fejervarya syhadrensis group.
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.