Leptodactylidae Werner, 1896 (1838)

Class: Amphibia > Order: Anura > Family: Leptodactylidae
238 species

Cystignathi Tschudi, 1838, Classif. Batr.: 26, 78. Type genus: Cystignathus Wagler, 1830.

Leiuperina Bonaparte, 1850, Conspect. Syst. Herpetol. Amph.: 1 p. Type genus: Leiuperus Duméril and Bibron, 1841.

CystignathidaeGünther, 1858, Proc. Zool. Soc. London, 1858: 346.

Plectromantidae Mivart, 1869, Proc. Zool. Soc. London, 1869: 291. Type genus: Plectromantis Peters, 1862. Synonymy by implication by Nieden, 1923, Das Tierreich, 46: 479; Lynch, 1971, Misc. Publ. Mus. Nat. Hist. Univ. Kansas, 53: 169.

Paludicolina Mivart, 1869, Proc. Zool. Soc. London, 1869: 290. Type genus: Paludicola Wagler, 1830.

CystignathinaMivart, 1869, Proc. Zool. Soc. London, 1869: 293.

Adenomeridae Hoffmann, 1878, in Bronn (ed.), Die Klassen und Ordnungen des Thier-Reichs, 6(2): 613. Type genus: Adenomera Steindachner, 1867. Synonymy by implication of synonymy of Adenomera with Leptodactylus by Parker, 1932, Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., Ser. 10, 10: 342.

Leptodactylidae Werner, 1896, Verh. Zool. Bot. Ges. Wien, 46: 357. Type genus: Leptodactylus Fitzinger, 1826.

CystignathinaeGadow, 1901, Amphibia and Reptiles: 139.

LeptodactylinaeMetcalf, 1923, Bull. U.S. Natl. Mus., 120: 272; Noble, 1931, Biol. Amph.: 504; Laurent, 1980 "1979", Bull. Soc. Zool. France, 104: 418. : 5.

PaludicolidaeMiranda-Ribeiro, 1924, Bol. Mus. Nac., Rio de Janeiro, 1: 143.

PaludicolinaeLutz, 1929, Mem. Oswaldo Cruz, Rio de Janeiro, 22: 5.

LeptodactylydaeLutz, 1954, Mem. Oswaldo Cruz, Rio de Janeiro, 52: 172.

Pseudopaludicolinae Gallardo, 1965, Pap. Avulsos Zool., São Paulo, 17: 84. Type genus: Pseudopaludicola Miranda-Ribeiro, 1926.

LeptodactyloideaReig, 1972, in Blair (ed.), Evol. Genus Bufo: 29.

LeiuperidaeGrant, Frost, Caldwell, Gagliardo, Haddad, Kok, Means, Noonan, Schargel, and Wheeler, 2006, Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., 299: 154.

LeiuperinaePyron and Wiens, 2011, Mol. Phylogenet. Evol., 61: 543-583.

Leiuperini —  Dubois, Ohler, and Pyron, 2021, Megataxa, 5: 199. Tribe. 

Paludicolini —  Dubois, Ohler, and Pyron, 2021, Megataxa, 5: 199. Tribe. 

Edalorhinina Dubois, Ohler, and Pyron, 2021, Megataxa, 5: 199. Type genus: Edalorhina Jiménez de la Espada,  1870. Tribe. 

Paludicolina — Dubois, Ohler, and Pyron, 2021, Megataxa, 5: 199. Subtribe. 

Adenomerini — Dubois, Ohler, and Pyron, 2021, Megataxa, 5: 199. Tribe. 

Leptodactylini — Dubois, Ohler, and Pyron, 2021, Megataxa, 5: 200. Tribe. 

Nomina inquirenda - Name(s) unassigned to a living or extinct population

Hylodes (Craugastor) hallowelli Cope, 1862, Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia, 14: 153. Holotype: USNM 4343, by original designation; not mentioned in USNM type list of Cochran, 1961, Bull. U.S. Natl. Mus., 220, so presumed lost. Type locality: "Near Carthagena [= Cartagena], New Granada [= Colombia]". * Craugastor hallowelliCope, 1862, Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia, 14: 357. * Cystignathus hallowelliCope, 1868, Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia, 20: 115. * Leptodactylus hallowelliBoulenger, 1882, Cat. Batr. Sal. Coll. Brit. Mus., Ed. 2: 237. ENGLISH NAME(S): Hallowell's Cartagena Frog (Frank and Ramus, 1995, Compl. Guide Scient. Common Names Amph. Rept. World: 81). DISTRIBUTION: Known only from the type locality (near Cartagena, Colombia). COMMENT: Considered a nomen dubium, possibly in Leptodactylus, by Heyer, 1974, Contrib. Sci. Nat. Hist. Mus. Los Angeles Co., 253: 44-45. Rejected as a member of Leptodactylus by de Sá, Grant, Camargo, Heyer, Ponssa, and Stanley, 2014, S. Am. J. Herpetol., 9(Spec. Issue 1): 1–123. 

Plectomantis rhodostima Cope, 1874, Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia, 26: 127. Holotype: Presumably ANSP (most likely) or USNM, not located. Type locality: "Nauta", Departamento Loreto, Peru. * Plectomantis rhodostigma — Boulenger, 1882, Cat. Batr. Sal. Coll. Brit. Mus., Ed. 2: 250. Incorrect subsequent spelling. *Leptodactylus rhodostigma — Nieden, 1923, Das Tierreich, 46: 489. New combination but incorrect spelling. A nomen dubium only known from the type locality  Heyer, 1974, Contrib. Sci. Nat. Hist. Mus. Los Angeles Co., 253: 44, considered this form to possibly belong in Lithodytes. Definitely not a Leptodactylus according to  de Sá, Grant, Camargo, Heyer, Ponssa, and Stanley, 2014, S. Am. J. Herpetol., 9(Spec. Issue 1): 1–123. Heyer, 1974, Contrib. Sci. Nat. Hist. Mus. Los Angeles Co., 253: 44, considered this form to possibly belong in Lithodytes

English Names

None noted.

Distribution

Extreme southern Texas (USA), southern Sonora (Mexico), and northern Antilles, south to Brazil, Argentina, and Chile

Comment

With the discovery that Cystignathus Wagler was a synonym of Leptodactylus Fitzinger, the family-group name Cystignathidae became unavailable according to the rules of nomenclature then in effect. The name Leptodactylidae was proposed as a replacement name by Werner (1896) and has gained nearly universal acceptance subsequently. Leptodactylidae is therefore a conserved name in zoology under the provision of Article 40 of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature (1999) and for purposes of priority takes the date of Cystignathi Tschudi, 1838. Noble, 1931, Biol. Amph.: 504, was the first to recognize the subfamily Leptodactylinae, which is close in content to Leptodactylidae as currently recognized. Prior to 2005, Leptodactylidae was a very large unwieldy Neotropical family. Ruvinsky and Maxson, 1996, Mol. Phylogenet. Evol., 5: 533–547, suggested Leptodactylidae (sensu lato) was polyphyletic and 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, partitioned former Leptodactylidae into several reformulated families: Batrachophrynidae (now Calyptocephalellidae by return of Batrachophrynus to Ceratophryidae), Leptodactylidae, Ceratophryidae, Cycloramphidae, and subsequently Grant, Frost, Caldwell, Gagliardo, Haddad, Kok, Means, Noonan, Schargel, and Wheeler, 2006, Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., 299: 1–268 (151), partitioned Cycloramphidae into Cycloramphidae and Hylodidae, and Leptodactylidae into Leptodactylidae (as here recognized) and Leiuperidae. Pyron and Wiens, 2011, Mol. Phylogenet. Evol., 61: 543-583, in their sutdy of Genbank sequences, provided the taxonomy followed herein, which includes three subfamilies: Leiuperinae, Leptodactylinae, and Paratelmatobiinae. Accounts and keys to most of the genera were supplied by Laurent, 1986, in Grassé and Delsol (eds.), Traite de Zool., 14: 594–797. Blackburn and Wake, 2011, In Zhang (ed.), Zootaxa, 3148: 39-55, discussed briefly the taxonomic history of the group. Cole, Townsend, Reynolds, MacCulloch, and Lathrop, 2013, Proc. Biol. Soc. Washington, 125: 317–578, provided identification keys and accounts for the species in Guyana. Vitt and Caldwell, 2014, Herpetology, 4th Ed., provided a summary of life history, diagnosis, and taxonomy. Grant, Rada, Anganoy-Criollo, Batista, Dias, Jeckel, Machado, and Rueda-Almonacid, 2017, S. Am. J. Herpetol., 12 (Special Issue): 1–90, did not find the subfamilies of Leptodactylidae to form a monophyletic group, Leptodactylinae being basal in their analyzed group of terminals, Paratelmatobiinae sitting above this but otherwise basal, and Leiuperinae as the sister taxon of Bufonidae. Streicher, Miller, Guerrero, Correa-Quezada, Ortiz, Crawford, Pie, and Wiens, 2018, Mol. Phylogenet. Evol., 119: 128–143, reported on a molecular phylogenetic analysis of hyloid frogs, finding Leptodactylidae is a member of a large monophyletic group, termed Commutibirana by them, composed of Brachycephaloidea, Allophrynidae, Centrolenidae, Dendrobatoidea, Leptodactylidae, Odontophrynidae, and Bufonidae. Barcelos and Santos, 2023, Paleodivers. Palaeoenvironm., 103: 341–405, reviewed the fossil localities and the literature of the fossil history of this group in South America.   

Contained taxa (238 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.