Ranitomeya Anonymous, 1985, Ripa, Netherlands, April: 2. Type species: Dendrobates reticulatus Boulenger, 1884 "1883", by original designation. Unavailable name by reason of anonymous ("L.B.") publication.
Ranitomeya Bauer, 1986, Ripa, Netherlands, November: 11. Type species: Dendrobates reticulatus Boulenger, 1884 "1883", by original designation.
Ranitomeya Bauer, 1988, Het Paludarium, Netherlands, November: 2. Type species: Dendrobates reticulatus Boulenger, 1884 "1883", by original designation.
Dendrobates rubrocephalus Schulte, 1999, Pfeilgiftfrösche: 138. Holotype: R. Schulte Collection BD 5H, to be deposited in the MUSM, by original designation. Type locality: "Ceja de Selva, Ostandenabhang und vielleicht vorgelagerte Ostkordilleren, Dep. Pasco und Junin, Höhe vermutlich zwischen 600 und 1500 m." * Ranitomeya rubrocephala— Grant, Frost, Caldwell, Gagliardo, Haddad, Kok, Means, Noonan, Schargel, and Wheeler, 2006, Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., 299: 171. Twomey, Brown and Lötters in Brown, Twomey, Amézquita, Souza, Caldwell, Lötters, Von May, Melo-Sampaio, Mejía-Vargas, Perez-Peña, Pepper, Poelman, Sanchez-Rodriguez, and Summers, 2011, Zootaxa, 3083: 90, regarded this poorly diagnosed taxon to be a nomen dubium, not associable with a living population of orgamisms.
None noted.
Panama and slopes of the Andes in Colombia, Ecuador, and Peru; Amazon drainage of Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, and Brazil, possibly into Bolivia, from the foothills of the Andes east to the mouth of the Amazon and north into French Guiana.
Genus redelimited and revised by Grant, Frost, Caldwell, Gagliardo, Haddad, Kok, Means, Noonan, Schargel, and Wheeler, 2006, Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., 299. Brown, Twomey, Pepper, and Sanchez-Rodriguez, 2008, Zootaxa, 1823: 1-24, revised the Ranitomeya fantastica group and provided a cladogram of the species. Santos, Coloma, Summers, Caldwell, Ree, and Cannatella, 2009, PLoS Biol., 7(3)e56: 0001-0014, disputed the separation from Dendrobates, but did not falsify the phylogenetic structure upon which that taxonomy was based. Pyron and Wiens, 2011, Mol. Phylogenet. Evol., 61: 543-583, in their study of Genbank sequences, confirmed the earlier result and adopted the same taxonomy. Brown, Twomey, Amézquita, Souza, Caldwell, Lötters, Von May, Melo-Sampaio, Mejía-Vargas, Perez-Peña, Pepper, Poelman, Sanchez-Rodriguez, and Summers, 2011, Zootaxa, 3083: 1-120, rejected this synonymy and reviewed and revised the genus, which they considered the sister taxon of Andinophryne.
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.