Basic Search [?]
Guided Search [?]
Dicroglossinae Anderson, 1871
Dicroglossidae Anderson, 1871, J. Asiat. Soc. Bengal, 40: 38. Type genus: Dicroglossus Günther, 1860.
Paini Dubois, 1992, Bull. Mens. Soc. Linn. Lyon, 61: 317. Type genus: Paa Dubois, 1975. Synonymy by Roelants, Jiang, and Bossuyt, 2004, Mol. Phylogenet. Evol., 31: 734-735.
Limnonectini Dubois, 1992, Bull. Mens. Soc. Linn. Lyon, 61: 315. Type genus: Limnonectes Fitzinger, 1843.
Limnonectinae — Chen, Murphy, Lathrop, Ngo, Orlov, Ho, and Somorjai, 2005, Herpetol. J., 15: 239.
Rana agricola Jerdon, 1853, J. Asiat. Soc. Bengal, 22: 532. Types: In ZSIC, but unavailable for study according to Dubois, 1984, Alytes, 3: 152; reported as lost by Jerdon, 1870, Proc. Asiat. Soc. Bengal, 1870: 67. Type locality: "inundated paddy-fields and meadows", in South India by implication. Considered a junior synonym of Rana vittigera by Theobald, 1868, J. Asiat. Soc. Bengal, 37: 80. Considered a junior synonym of Rana limnocharis by Boulenger, 1890, Fauna Brit. India, Rept. Batr.: 450. Dubois, 1984, Alytes, 3: 152, noted that this species might be based on a juvenile Rana tigerina (now in Hoplobatrachus), but inasmuch as workers are not allowed access to the material the status of the species remains in doubt. Dubois, 1987 "1986", Alytes, 5: 60, considered this to be incertae sedis within Hoplobatrachus or Fejervarya; without discussion.
Northwestern and subsaharan Africa, southern Arabian Peninsula, Pakistan and India to Afghanistan, Nepal, Malaya, and Sri Lanka; east through Nepal and Myanmar to western and southern China, Indochina, and islands of the Sunda Shelf; Philippines; Japan; reported in Papua New Guinea; introduced into Guam.
Dubois, 2005, Alytes, 23: 16, recognized 4 tribes (Dicroglossini, Limnonectini, Occidozygini, and Paini), of which Paini was rejected as nonmonophyletic, and Occidozygini was treated as a subfamily, the sister taxon of Dicroglossinae, by 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: 241. See comments under Dicroglossidae. Ohler and Dubois, 2006, Zoosystema, 28: 769-784, presented a phylogenetic analysis of Paini based on morphology and did not address Frost et al. (2005), which had also addressed this group. On this basis of analysis of morphological Annandia was placed by Ohler and Dubois (2006) in a putatively monophyletic group with Euphlyctis and Limnonectes. Allopaa hazarensis they suggested was the sister taxon of all other Paini. See comments under Chrysopaa and Nanorana for further discussion. Che, Hu, Zhou, Murphy, Papenfuss, Chen, Rao, Li, and Zhang, 2009, Mol. Phylogenet. Evol., 50: 59-73, reported on molecular phylogenetics of the Paini and proposed a monophyletic taxonomy. Che, Zhou, Hu, Papenfuss, Wake, and Zhang, 2010, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 107: 13765-13770 (and Che, Zhou, Hu, Papenfuss, Wake, and Zhang, 2010, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, Suppl. Inform., doi:10.1073/pnas.1008415107/-/DCSupplemental: 1-5) reported on molecular phylogenetics of Paini (although lacking material of Allopaa and Chrysopaa) and suggested in their supplemental information a subgeneric taxonomy to complement the existing genera Nanorana and Quasipaa. Pyron and Wiens, 2011, Mol. Phylogenet. Evol., 61: 543-583, in their study of Genbank sequences confirmed the monophyly of this taxon and provided an estimate of relationship among the constituent taxa.
Contained taxa (162 sp.):
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.