Anaxyrus nelsoni (Stejneger, 1893)
Bufo boreas nelsoni Stejneger, 1893, N. Am. Fauna, 7: 220. Holotype: USNM 18742, by original designation. Type locality: "Oasis Valley, [Nye County,] Nevada", USA.
Bufo nelsoni — Savage, 1959, Am. Philos. Soc. Yr. Bk., 1959: 252. Blair, 1972, Evol. Genus Bufo: 350; Stebbins, 1985, Field Guide W. Rept. Amph., Ed. 2: 70; Altig, McDiarmid, Nichols, and Ustach, 1998, Contemp. Herpetol. Inform. Serv., 1998: 7.
Bufo halophilus nelsoni — Frank and Ramus, 1995, Compl. Guide Scient. Common Names Amph. Rept. World: 40. Unsubstantiated arrangement.
Anaxyrus nelsoni — 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: 363.
English Names
Amargosa Toad (Schmidt, 1953, Check List N. Am. Amph. Rept., Ed. 6: 62; Conant, Cagle, Goin, Lowe, Neill, Netting, Schmidt, Shaw, Stebbins, and Bogert, 1956, Copeia, 1956: 176; Stebbins, 1966, Field Guide W. North Am. Rept. Amph.: 60; Collins, Huheey, Knight, and Smith, 1978, Herpetol. Circ., 7: 10; Frank and Ramus, 1995, Compl. Guide Scient. Common Names Amph. Rept. World: 40; Collins, 1997, Herpetol. Circ., 25: 11; Crother, Boundy, Campbell, de Queiroz, Frost, Highton, Iverson, Meylan, Reeder, Seidel, Sites, Taggart, Tilley, and Wake, 2001 "2000", Herpetol. Circ., 29: 7; Stebbins, 2003, Field Guide W. Rept. Amph., Ed. 3: 209; Frost, McDiarmid, and Mendelson, 2008, in Crother (ed.), Herpetol. Circ., 37: 4; Collins and Taggart, 2009, Standard Common Curr. Sci. Names N. Am. Amph. Turtles Rept. Crocodil., ed. 6: 6; Frost, McDiarmid, Mendelson, and Green, 2012, in Crother (ed.), Herpetol. Circ., 39: 13).
Distribution
Amargosa River Valley, Nye County, Nevada, USA.
Comment
In the Bufo boreas group of Blair, 1972, Evol. Genus Bufo: 350. Considered by some to be an allopatric subspecies of Anaxyrus boreas. Stebbins, 1985, Field Guide W. Rept. Amph., Ed. 2: 70, recognized this allopatric and morphologically distinct population as a distinct species without discussion. Subsequently Altig, McDiarmid, Nichols, and Ustach, 1998, Contemp. Herpetol. Inform. Serv., 1998: 7, also considered it a distinct species, and although no formal discussion of this change was provided, they did note its allopatry as well as fixed differences between larvae and larval habitats. Morphological distinctiveness of the two forms is not controversial. Stebbins, 2003, Field Guide W. Rept. Amph., Ed. 3: 209-210, provided a brief account, figure, and map. Goebel, 2005, in Lannoo (ed.), Amph. Declines: 210-211, discussed the geographic variation, recognized nelsoni as a species and noted other populations of nominal boreas that might be distinct species. See photograph, map, description of geographic range and habitat, and conservation status (as Bufo nelsoni) in Stuart, Hoffmann, Chanson, Cox, Berridge, Ramani, and Young, 2008, Threatened Amph. World: 188. Goebel, Ranker, Corn, and Olmstead, 2009, Mol. Phylogenet. Evol., 50: 209-225, suggested on the basis of a discussion of mtDNA phylogeography of the Anaxyrus boreas group that Anaxyrus canorus is in a group composed southern California Anaxyrus boreas halophilus.
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
