Basic Search [?]

Guided Search [?]

Cycloramphidae Bonaparte, 1850

Class: Amphibia > Order: Anura > Family: Cycloramphidae
36 species

Cyclorhamphina Bonaparte, 1850, Conspect. Syst. Herpetol. Amph.: 1 p. Type genus: Cycloramphus Tschudi, 1838. Incorrect original spelling.

Grypiscina Mivart, 1869, Proc. Zool. Soc. London, 1869: 295. Type genus: Grypiscus Cope, 1867 "1866". Synonymy with Cycloramphina by Laurent, 1986, in Grassé and Delsol (eds.), Traite de Zool., 14: 691-693, although employing the name Grypiscinae; Frost, 2002, Amph. Spec. World, vers. 2.21:, corrected the usage.

Cacotina Mivart, 1869, Proc. Zool. Soc. London, 1869: 290. Type genus: Cacotus Günther, 1869 "1868". Synonymy by implication of Frost, Grant, Faivovich, Bain, Haas, Haddad, de Sá, Channing, Wilkinson, Donnellan, Raxworthy, Campbell, Blotto, Moler, Drewes, Nussbaum, Lynch, and Green, 2006, Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., 297: 210.

CyclorhamphiinaeLutz, 1954, Mem. Oswaldo Cruz, Rio de Janeiro, 52: 157.

CyclorhamphinaeLutz, 1954, Mem. Oswaldo Cruz, Rio de Janeiro, 52: 157.

CycloramphiinaeGallardo, 1965, Pap. Avulsos Zool., São Paulo, 17: 84.

GrypisciniLynch, 1969, Final PhD Exam, Program: 3; Lynch, 1971, Misc. Publ. Mus. Nat. Hist. Univ. Kansas, 53: 135.

CycloramphinaeArdila-Robayo, 1979, Caldasia, 12: 455.

GrypiscinaeArdila-Robayo, 1979, Caldasia, 12: 455; Laurent, 1980 "1979", Bull. Soc. Zool. France, 104: 418.

CyclorhamphiniDubois, 1983, Bull. Mens. Soc. Linn. Lyon, 52: 273.

CycloramphiniDubois, 1985, Alytes, 4: 66.

Thoropidae Frost, Grant, Faivovich, Bain, Haas, Haddad, de Sá, Channing, Wilkinson, Donnellan, Raxworthy, Campbell, Blotto, Moler, Drewes, Nussbaum, Lynch, and Green, 2006, Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., 297: 211. Type genus: Thoropa Cope, 1865. Synonymy by with Cycloramphidae by Grant, Frost, Caldwell, Gagliardo, Haddad, Kok, Means, Noonan, Schargel, and Wheeler, 2006, Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., 299: 154.

English Names

None noted.

Distribution

Southeastern Brazil. 

Comment

Frost, Grant, Faivovich, Bain, Haas, Haddad, de Sá, Channing, Wilkinson, Donnellan, Raxworthy, Campbell, Blotto, Moler, Drewes, Nussbaum, Lynch, and Green, 2006, Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., 297, presented a phyloenetic analysis of anurans and formulated Cycloramphidae as a family with two subfamilies, Hylodinae (Crossodactylus, Hylodes, and Megaelosia) and Cycloramphinae. Cycloramphinae was composed of two tribes, Cycloramphini (Cycloramphus, Crossdactylodes, Rhinoderma, and Zachaenus) and Alsodini (Alsodes, Eupsophus, Hylorina, Limnomedusa, Macrogenioglottus, and Proceratophrys). Grant, Frost, Caldwell, Gagliardo, Haddad, Kok, Means, Noonan, Schargel, and Wheeler, 2006, Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., 299: 153, placed Thoropidae into Cycloramphinae and showed that Hylodinae is the sister taxon of Dendrobatidae. On this basis they considered Hylodidae to be a distinct family, and Thoropidae to be a synonym of Alsodinae, and the former tribes of Cycloramphinae to be subfamilies, Cycloramphinae and Alsodinae. See Savage, 1986, Proc. Biol. Soc. Washington, 99: 42-45, for discussion of family-group nomenclature. In earlier literature Hylodinae was frequently referred to as Elosiinae. Laurent, 1986, in Grassé and Delsol (eds.), Traite de Zool., 14: 691-693, included the genera Craspedoglossa [now = Cycloramphus], Cycloramphus, Paratelmatobius, Scythrophrys, Thoropa, and Zachaenus, with the genera considered to be in the Hylodinae by Lynch, 1971, to be in the subfamily Grypiscinae Mivart, 1869 (= Cycloramphinae Bonaparte, 1850). Maxson, Heyer, and Maxson, 1981, Experientia, 37: 144-145, reported on the albumin relations of Craspedoglossa, Cycloramphus, and Zachaenus. Haas, 2003, Cladistics, 19: 23-89, provided evidence from larval morphology that suggests strongly that this group is paraphyletic with respect to Dendrobatidae, with Hylodes, in particular, being the sister taxon of Dendrobatidae. Lynch, 1973, in Vial (ed.), Evol. Biol. Anurans: 131-182, suggested that Rhinoderma is the sister-taxon of Bufonidae, but presented no evidence for this conjecture. Formas, Pugin, and Jorquera, 1975, Physis, Buenos Aires, 34: 147-157, reviewed the literature and taxonomic status of the species. Formas, 1976, Experientia, 32: 1000-1002, discussed karyology and the enigmatic relationships of this group. Cei, 1987, Monit. Zool. Ital., N.S., Suppl., 21: 218-220, summarized differences between the two species. Barrio and Rinaldi de Chieri, 1971, Physis, Buenos Aires, 30: 673-685, and Lavilla and Cei, 2001, Monogr. Mus. Reg. Sci. Nat. Torino, 28: 121, suggested that Rhinoderma is imbedded within Telmatobiinae (sensu viejo) of Leptodactylidae. Grant, Frost, Caldwell, Gagliardo, Haddad, Kok, Means, Noonan, Schargel, and Wheeler, 2006, Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., 299: 154, suggested that subfamily recognition is premature, although their results are consistent with recognition of Alsodinae (including Thoropa) and Cycloramphinae. Roelants, Gower, Wilkinson, Loader, Biju, Guillaume, Moriau, and Bossuyt, 2007, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 104: 887-892, on the basis of less inclusive sampling, a moderately different molecular dataset, and a different analytical method than Frost et al. (2006) found Cycloramphidae to be polyphyletic, with Rhinoderma (their exemplar of Cyloramphinae) and Odontophrynus (their examplar of Alsodinae) to be far from each other phylogenetically. Bossuyt and Roelants, 2009, in Hedges and Kumar (eds.), Timetree of Life: 357-364, recognized Rhinodermatidae rather than Cycloramphidae for the clade containing Rhinoderma and did not address the position of AlsodesBossuyt and Roelants, 2009, in Hedges and Kumar (eds.), Timetree of Life: 357-364, suggested on the basis of the polyphyly posited in 2007 that Rhinodermatidae by recognized for Rhinoderma, although this raised additional questions as to the assignment of other members of the Cycloramphinae. Heinicke, Duellman, Trueb, Means, MacCulloch, and Hedges, 2009, Zootaxa, 2211: 1-35, suggested on the basis of considerable molecular evidence, but narrower taxon sampling than Frost et al. (2006) that Cycloramphidae is not monophyletic, with Odontophrynus and Proceratophrys (both nominally in Alsodinae) being relatively close to Bufonidae, a group composed of Cycloramphus and Rhinoderma (both nominally in Cycloramphinae) being of varying positions depending on analytical assumption set, and Thoropa consistently being found to be close to Hylodes (Hylodidae). Pyron and Wiens, 2011, Mol. Phylogenet. Evol., 61: 543-583, subsequently, in their study of Genbank sequences, suggested that neither Cycloramphidae (sensu lato) nor Ceratophryidae (sensu lato) was monophyletic, and partitioned both groups, rendering Cycloramphidae as substantially the same as Cycloramphinae of previous authors. Blackburn and Wake, 2011, In Zhang (ed.), Zootaxa, 3148: 39-55, briefly reviewed the nomenclatural history of this family-group taxon. Fouquet, Blotto, Maronna, Verdade, Juncá, de Sá, and Rodrigues, 2013, Mol. Phylogenet. Evol., in press: 445-457, transferred Crossodactylodes out of this family and into Paratelmatobiinae of Leptodactylidae. Vitt and Caldwell, 2013, Herpetology, 4th Ed., provided a summary of life history, diagnosis, and taxonomy.

Contained taxa (36 sp.):

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.