Cystignathus melanonotus Hallowell, 1861 "1860", Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia, 12: 485. Holotype: USNM 6264 according to Kellogg, 1932, Bull. U.S. Natl. Mus., 160: 88, apparently lost, according to Heyer, 1970, Contrib. Sci. Nat. Hist. Mus. Los Angeles Co., 191: 9; KU 84848 designated neotype by Heyer, 1970, Contrib. Sci. Nat. Hist. Mus. Los Angeles Co., 191: 11. Type locality: "Nicaragua"; restricted to "Recero, Nicaragua", by Smith and Taylor, 1950, Univ. Kansas Sci. Bull., 33: 320; this restriction vigorously disputed by Dunn and Stuart, 1951, Copeia, 1951: 58. Neotype from "Nicaragua, Zelaya, Bonanza".
Cystignathus echinatus Brocchi, 1877, Bull. Soc. Philomath., Paris, Ser. 7, 1: 181. Syntypes: MNHNP 6322-23, according to Guibé, 1950 "1948", Cat. Types Amph. Mus. Natl. Hist. Nat.: 30. Type locality: "Rio Madre Nieja [Vieja?] (Guatemala occidental)". Synonymy by Heyer, 1970, Contrib. Sci. Nat. Hist. Mus. Los Angeles Co., 191: 9.
Cystignathus microtis Cope, 1879, Proc. Am. Philos. Soc., 18: 265. Syntypes: USNM 9906,9908, and 9909, according to Heyer, 1970, Contrib. Sci. Nat. Hist. Mus. Los Angeles Co., 191: 9. However, Kellogg, 1932, Bull. U.S. Natl. Mus., 160: 88, considered USNM 9906 the "type", and Cochran, 1961, Bull. U.S. Natl. Mus., 220: 40, considered USNM 9906 to be the "holotype", a lectotype designation by implication. Type locality: "Guanajuato", Mexico (presumed to be in error by Heyer, 1970, Contrib. Sci. Nat. Hist. Mus. Los Angeles Co., 191: 12). Restricted to "Apatzingán (de la Constitución)", Michoacán, Mexico, by Smith and Taylor, 1950, Univ. Kansas Sci. Bull., 33: 335. Synonymy by Cochran, 1961, Bull. U.S. Natl. Mus., 220: 40; Heyer, 1970, Contrib. Sci. Nat. Hist. Mus. Los Angeles Co., 191: 9.
Cystignathus perlaevis Cope, 1879, Am. Nat., 13: 269. Holotype: USNM 10041 by original designation and according to Kellogg, 1932, Bull. U.S. Natl. Mus., 160: 89. Type locality: "near a well near Japana", Oaxaca, Mexico, = Tapanatepec according to Smith and Taylor, 1948, Bull. U.S. Natl. Mus., 194: 57; = Tapana, Tehuantepec, Oaxaca, Mexico, according to Cochran, 1961, Bull. U.S. Natl. Mus., 220: 40. Synonymy by Kellogg, 1932, Bull. U.S. Natl. Mus., 160: 89; Cochran, 1961, Bull. U.S. Natl. Mus., 220: 40; Heyer, 1970, Contrib. Sci. Nat. Hist. Mus. Los Angeles Co., 191: 12.
Leptodactylus echinatus — Brocchi, 1881, Miss. Scient. Mex. Amer. Centr., Rech. Zool., 3(2, livr. 1): 20.
Leptodactylus melanonotus — Brocchi, 1881, Miss. Scient. Mex. Amer. Centr., Rech. Zool., 3(2, livr. 1): 20.
Leptodactylus microtis — Boulenger, 1882, Cat. Batr. Sal. Coll. Brit. Mus., Ed. 2: 244.
Leptodactylus perlaevis — Boulenger, 1882, Cat. Batr. Sal. Coll. Brit. Mus., Ed. 2: 215.
Leptodactylus occidentalis Taylor, 1937 "1936", Trans. Kansas Acad. Sci., 39: 349. Holotype: EHT 3322, by original designation; now FMNH 100015 according to Marx, 1976, Fieldiana, Zool., 69: 57. Type locality: "Tepic, Nayarit, Mexico". Synonymy by Heyer, 1970, Contrib. Sci. Nat. Hist. Mus. Los Angeles Co., 191: 9.
Sabinal Frog (Liner, 1994, Herpetol. Circ., 23: 25; Frank and Ramus, 1995, Compl. Guide Scient. Common Names Amph. Rept. World: 82; Lee, 2000, Field Guide Amph. Rept. Maya World: 78; Liner and Casas-Andreu, 2008, Herpetol. Circ., 38: 15).
Mexican River Frog (Ananjeva, Borkin, Darevsky, and Orlov, 1988, Dict. Amph. Rept. Five Languages: 89).
Black-backed Frog (Lee, 1996, Amph. Rept. Yucatan Peninsula: 71).
Fringe-toed Foamfrog (Campbell, 1998, Amph. Rept. N. Guatemala Yucatan Belize: 62).
Sonora and Tamaulipas, Mexico, through dry tropical to humid premontane Central America to central Ecuador.
In the Leptodactylus melanonotus group of Heyer, 1970, Contrib. Sci. Nat. Hist. Mus. Los Angeles Co., 191: 9-14, Lee, 1996, Amph. Rept. Yucatan Peninsula: 71-73, Campbell, 1998, Amph. Rept. N. Guatemala Yucatan Belize: 62-63, Lee, 2000, Field Guide Amph. Rept. Maya World: 78-80, Savage, 2002, Amph. Rept. Costa Rica: 215-217, and McCranie and Wilson, 2002, Amph. Honduras: 446-451. Köhler, Vesely, and Greenbaum, 2005 "2006", Amph. Rept. El Salvador: 58-60, provided an account (for El Salvador) and a color photograph. McCranie, 2007, Herpetol. Rev., 38: 38, summarized the departmental distribution in Honduras. See comments by Sunyer, Páiz, Dehling, and Köhler, 2009, Herpetol. Notes, 2: 189-202, regarding Nicaraguan populations.
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.