Amphibian Species of the World 5.6, an Online Reference

Hyla bufoides Meuschen, 1781, in Gronovius, Zoophyl. Gronoviani: XXX. Type(s): Not known to exist. Type locality: XXX. Invalid name by reason of work being suppressed by Anonymous, 1954, Bull. Zool. Nomencl., 5: 265-279; Anonymous, 1954, Bull. Zool. Nomencl., 5: 281-296).

Rana leucophyllata Beireis, 1783, Schr. Ges. Naturforsch. Freunde Berlin, 4: 182. Type(s): NHRM 157 (now lost) was regarded as the holotype by Duellman, 1977, Das Tierreich, 95: 69 (which constitutes a lectotype designation by implication); this was disputed by Böhme, 1981, Bonn. Zool. Beitr., 32: 283-295, who suggested that NHRM 157 is a surviving syntype of Rana boans Linnaeus, 1758, and that the holotype of Rana leucophyllata is lost. Type locality: Unknown, but believed by Beireis to be from Surinam.

Hyla leucophylla — Gmelin, 1789, Syst. Nat., Ed. 13, 1(3): 1055. Incorrect subsequent spelling.

Rana variegata Bonnaterre, 1789, Tab. Encyclop. Method. Trois Reg. Nat., Erp.: 8. Types: Not known to exist; based on description of species 67 in Gronovius, 1763, Zoophyl. Gronov.: page 15, no. 67, according to Dubois, 1995, Dumerilia, 2: 57. Type locality: Unknown. Synonymy by Daudin, 1800, Hist. Nat. Quad. Ovip., Livr. 1: 5, although Dubois, 1995, Dumerilia, 2: 57, noted that the description would fit many other species. Primary homonym of Rana variegata Linnaeus, 1758 (= Bombina variegata).

Calamita leucophyllata — Schneider, 1799, Hist. Amph. Nat.: 168.

Hyla frontalis Daudin, 1800, Hist. Nat. Quad. Ovip., Livr. 1: 5, pl. 3. Holotype: Levaillant collection by original designation; MNHNP 4868, according to Guibé, 1950 "1948", Cat. Types Amph. Mus. Natl. Hist. Nat.: 20. Type locality: "Surinam". Named as a junior synonym of Rana leucophyllata Beireis. Synonymy by Daudin, 1802 "An. XI", Hist. Nat. Rain. Gren. Crap., Quarto: 4; Daudin, 1803 "An. XI", Hist. Nat. Gen. Part. Rept., 8: 45; Gravenhorst, 1807, Vergleich. Uebersicht Linn. Neuern Zool. Syst.: 432; Tschudi, 1838, Classif. Batr.: 72; Duméril and Bibron, 1841, Erp. Gen., 8: 607; Günther, 1859 "1858", Cat. Batr. Sal. Coll. Brit. Mus.: 112; Boulenger, 1882, Cat. Batr. Sal. Coll. Brit. Mus., Ed. 2: 387.

Calamita leucophyllatus — Merrem, 1820, Tent. Syst. Amph.: 173.

Hypsiboas leucophyllatus — Tschudi, 1838, Classif. Batr.: 72.

Dendropsophus frontalis — Fitzinger, 1843, Syst. Rept.: 31.

Hyla (Hyla) leucophyllata — Burmeister, 1856, Erläut. Fauna Brasil.: 104.

Hyla favosa Cope, 1885, Proc. Am. Philos. Soc., 23: 95. Holotype: ANSP 11483, according to Malnate, 1971, Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia, 123: 350. Type locality: "Pebas, Upper Amazon" Department of Loreto, Peru. Synonymy by Titus, Hillis, and Duellman, 1989, Herpetologica, 45: 17-23.

Dendropsophus leucophyllatus — Faivovich, Haddad, Garcia, Frost, Campbell, and Wheeler, 2005, Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., 294: 91.

English Names

White-leaf Frog (Shaw, 1802, Gen. Zool., 3(1): 127).

Beireis' Treefrog (Frank and Ramus, 1995, Compl. Guide Scient. Common Names Amph. Rept. World: 56).

Distribution

The Amazon Basin (Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia, and Brazil) and the Guianas; expected but not yet collected in Venezuela.

Comment

For discussion of geographic variation and synonyms, see Duellman, 1974, Occas. Pap. Mus. Nat. Hist. Univ. Kansas, 27: 17-18. See comment under Hyla elegans. Lescure and Marty, 2000, Collect. Patrimoines Nat., Paris, 45: 138-139, provided a brief account and photo. In the Dendropsophus leucophyllatus group of Faivovich, Haddad, Garcia, Frost, Campbell, and Wheeler, 2005, Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., 294: 91. Lougheed, Austin, Bogart, Boag, and Chek, 2006, BMC Evol. Biol., 6 (23): 1-16, reported on geographic variation of both morphology and molecular characters and provided evidence that nominal Dendropsophus leucophyllatus is paraphyletic with respect to Dendropsophus triangulum. See account for Surinam population by Ouboter and Jairam, 2012, Amph. Suriname: 116-118.

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 additional sources of information from other sites search Google
• For images search Arkive, CalPhoto Images and Google Images
• To search the NIH genetic sequence database, see GenBank
• For information aggregation from other sites and some original accounts see AmphibiaWeb report
• For further information on conservation status and distribution see the IUCN Redlist
• For related information on conservation and images as well as observation see iNaturalist;
• for a quick link to their maps see iNaturalist KML