Ameerega hahneli (Boulenger, 1884)
Dendrobates hahneli Boulenger, 1884 "1883", Proc. Zool. Soc. London, 1883: 636. Syntypes: BMNH ("several specimens"); BMNH 1918.104.22.168 designated lectotype by Silverstone, 1976, Sci. Bull. Nat. Hist. Mus. Los Angeles Co., 27: 42. Type locality: "Yurimaguas, Huallaga River, [Loreto,] Northern Peru".
Dendrobates pictus hahneli — Lutz, 1952, Mem. Oswaldo Cruz, Rio de Janeiro, 50: 601.
Epipedobates hahneli hahneli — Schulte, 1999, Pfeilgiftfrösche: 233.
Ameerega hahneli — 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: 130, by implication; Grant, Frost, Caldwell, Gagliardo, Haddad, Kok, Means, Noonan, Schargel, and Wheeler, 2006, Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., 299: 164.
Amazonian lowlands of Amazonian Peru, Ecuador, Colombia, Bolivia, Brazil, the extreme south of Venezuela, southeastern Guyana, southwestern Surinam, and French Guiana.
See account by Haddad and Martins, 1994, Herpetologica, 50: 282-295, who noted that a similar, apparently unnamed, species occurs in the Amazonian lowlands of Peru, and that the review of Phyllobates pictus by Lescure, 1976, Bull. Mus. Natl. Hist. Nat. Paris, Ser. 3, Zool., 377: 487-488, is likely based on this species. See Silverstone, 1976, Sci. Bull. Nat. Hist. Mus. Los Angeles Co., 27: 42, who regarded this species as a pattern class of Ameerega picta (as Phyllobates). See De la Riva, Márquez, and Bosch, 1996, J. Nat. Hist., London, 30: 1413-1420, for Bolivian record and discussion of taxonomic uncertainty regarding this and related species. Köhler and Lötters, 1999, Bonn. Zool. Beitr., 48: 259-273, also note a Bolivian record. Lescure and Marty, 2000, Collect. Patrimoines Nat., Paris, 45: 96-97, provided a brief account and photo. Schulte, 1999, Pfeilgiftfrösche: 227-235, provided an account. Roberts, Brown, von May, Arizabal, Schulte, and Summers, 2006, Mol. Phylogenet. Evol., 41: 149-164, provided DNA sequence data that suggest that nominal Ameerega hahneli is polyphyletic. Lötters, Jungfer, Henkel, and Schmidt, 2007, Poison Frogs: 336-342, provided an account and placed this species in their Ameerega picta group. Twomey and Brown, 2008, Zootaxa, 1757: 1-17, discussed the Ameerega hahneli complex and noted that populations on the eastern versant of Peru represented a distinct species, Ameerega altamazonica; they also noted other unnamed, but likely distinct species in the complex. See account for Surinam population by Ouboter and Jairam, 2012, Amph. Suriname: 88-90.See Cole, Townsend, Reynolds, MacCulloch, and Lathrop, 2013, Proc. Biol. Soc. Washington, 125: 390-391, for brief account and records for Guyana.
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.