Amphibian Species of the World 5.6, an Online Reference

Bufo arenarum Hensel, 1867, Arch. Naturgesch., 33: 143. Syntypes: 7 specimens noted although location of deposit not designated. Kwet, Di-Bernardo, and Maneyro, 2006, Iheringia, Zool., 96: 484, located 3 of 7 syntypes in the ZMB and designated ZMB 6779 as lectotype. Type locality: "bei der Stadt Rio-Grande do Sul" (= near the city of Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil); stated as "Rio Grande, Rio Grande do Sul", Brazil, by Bokermann, 1966, Lista Anot. Local. Tipo Anf. Brasil.: 18.

Bufo mendocinus Philippi, 1869, Arch. Naturgesch., 35: 44. Holotype: MNHNC by original designation. Type locality: "Provinz Mendoza . . . bei Vistaflor", Argentina. Synonymy by Boulenger, 1884, Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., Ser. 5, 14: 389; Boulenger, 1886, Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., Ser. 5, 18: 442; Nieden, 1923, Das Tierreich, 46: 142.

Bufo marinus var. platensis Jiménez de la Espada, 1875, Vert. Viaje Pacif. Verif. 1862-1865: 202. Syntypes: 34 specimens, in MCNM; given as MNCN 3101-3113, 3135-3143, 3145-50 (Rio-Grande-do-Sul, Brasil); 3131-3134 (no data); 3144 (La Plata, Arentina); 15982 (La Plata, Buenos Aires, Argentina), by González-Fernández, García-Díez, and San Segundo, 2009, Spixiana, München, 32: 268, with discussion of ambiguities. Type locality: "Montevideo . . . Rio Grande do Sul . . . Córdoba, Tucumán y Campo San Roque". Synonymy (with Bufo arenarum) by Boulenger, 1882, Cat. Batr. Sal. Coll. Brit. Mus., Ed. 2: 314. Considered a synonym of Bufo marinus by Savage, 1978, in Espada's Vert. Viaje Pacif.: vii-xvii (in error?), without discussion.

Phryniscus connectens Philippi, 1902, Supl. Batr. Chil. Descr. Hist. Fis. Polit. Chile: 24. Type(s): MNHNC but number of specimens not noted in the original publication. Type locality: "Montevideo", Uruguay. Synonymy (with Bufo spinulosus) by Cei, 1958, Invest. Zool. Chilen., 4: 267. Synonymy (with Bufo arenarum) by Klappenbach, 1968, Invest. Zool. Chilen., 23: 148.

Bufo arenarius — Lutz, 1934, Mem. Oswaldo Cruz, Rio de Janeiro, 28: 120, 144. Incorrect subsequent spelling.

Bufo arenarum — Gallardo, 1964, Neotropica, 10: 24. Gallardo, 1965, Pap. Avulsos Zool., São Paulo, 17: 65.

Bufo arenarum mendocinus — Gallardo, 1964, Neotropica, 10: 24. Gallardo, 1965, Pap. Avulsos Zool., São Paulo, 17: 70; Laurent, 1969, Acta Zool. Lilloana, 25: 81.

Bufo arenarum platensis — Gallardo, 1964, Neotropica, 10: 24. Gallardo, 1965, Pap. Avulsos Zool., São Paulo, 17: 70. Status as subspecies rejected by Laurent, 1969, Acta Zool. Lilloana, 25: 70.

Bufo arenarum chaguar Gallardo, 1965, Neotropica, 11: 84. Holotype: MACN 18922, by original designation. Type locality: "Argentina, Salta, Pocitos". Status rejected by Laurent, 1969, Acta Zool. Lilloana, 25: 70, 75.

Chaunus arenarum — 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: 364. Savage and Bolaños, 2009, Zootaxa, 2005: 4. By implication.

Rhinella arenarum — Chaparro, Pramuk, and Gluesenkamp, 2007, Herpetologica, 63: 211. by implication; Pramuk, Robertson, Sites, and Noonan, 2008, Global Ecol. Biogeograph., 17: 76.

English Names

Argentine Toad (Ananjeva, Borkin, Darevsky, and Orlov, 1988, Dict. Amph. Rept. Five Languages: 37).

Common Toad (Frank and Ramus, 1995, Compl. Guide Scient. Common Names Amph. Rept. World: 40).

Distribution

Central Bolivia east of the Andes (departments of Cochabamba, Chuquisaca, Santa Cruz, and Tarija) south to Chubut Province, Argentina; and allopatric population along the coastal plain of Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil, to the eastern and southern Uruguay; likely to be found in Paraguay.

Comment

In the Bufo marinus group according to Martin, 1972, in Blair (ed.), Evol. Genus Bufo: 57. Laurent, 1969, Acta Zool. Lilloana, 25: 67-80, demonstrated that most subspecies could not be maintained; this was further supported by Cei, 1972 "1971", Acta Zool. Lilloana, 28: 91-105, and followed by Cei, 1980, Monit. Zool. Ital., N.S., Monogr., 2: 173-178 (although he implied that some subspecies might be distinct species), but Braun, 1978, Iheringia, Zool., 52: 77, still recognized four subspecies. See also account (under Bufo arenarum arenarum) by Klappenbach and Langone, 1992, An. Mus. Nac. Hist. Nat. Montevideo, Ser. 2, 8: 171-172. Olmos and Maneyro, 1998, Cuad. Herpetol., 12: 50, discussed the range in northeastern Uruguay (now Rhinella achavalii). De la Riva, Köhler, Lötters, and Reichle, 2000, Rev. Esp. Herpetol., 14: 26, noted literature confusion with Rhinella poeppigii (as Bufo). Lavilla and Cei, 2001, Monogr. Mus. Reg. Sci. Nat. Torino, 28: 21-23, discussed recent literature regarding this species. See brief account by Köhler, 2000, Bonn. Zool. Monogr., 48: 82. Kwet, Di-Bernardo, and Maneyro, 2006, Iheringia, Zool., 96: 479-485, provided a key to distinguish this species from other members of the Rhinella marina group. Brusquetti and Lavilla, 2006, Cuad. Herpetol., 20: 24, briefly discussed the absence of any vouchers of this species from Paraguay, although its presence in the country is likely. Maneyro and Kwet, 2008, Stuttgart. Beit. Naturkd., Ser. A, Neue Ser., 1: 95-121, provided discussion of taxonomic, geographical, and conservation status as well as natural history. Céspedez, 1996, Herpetol. Rev., 27: 148, provided a record for Chaco Province, Argentina, and commented on the range in that country. Vallinoto, Sequeira, Sodré, Bernardi, Sampaio, and Schneider, 2010, Zool. Scripta, 39: 128-140, and Maciel, Garcia, Colli, and Schwartz, 2010, Mol. Phylogenet. Evol., 57: 787-797, reported on the molecular phylogenetics of the Rhinella marina group, including this species.

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
• For access to informatoin on fossils see Lisanfos