Pithecopus hypochondrialis (Daudin, 1800)

Class: Amphibia > Order: Anura > Family: Hylidae > Subfamily: Phyllomedusinae > Genus: Pithecopus > Species: Pithecopus hypochondrialis

Hyla hypochondrialis Daudin, 1800, Hist. Nat. Quad. Ovip., Livr. 2: 20, pl. 4, fig. 1. Type(s): Levaillant collection, by original designation, although Daudin, 1802 "An. XI", Hist. Nat. Rain. Gren. Crap., Quarto: 50, mentions specimens in the collection of Levaillant, the MNHNP, the collection in Uppsala (= ZIUU), and ZISP. Designated as frog in a manuscript illustration in the central library of the MNHNP by Lescure, Marty, Marty, Starace, Thomay, and Letellier, 1995, Rev. Fr. Aquar. Herpetol., 22: 40. Nevertheless, one presumes that the animal figured on pl. 10, fig. 1, of Daudin, 1802 "An. XI", Hist. Nat. Rain. Gren. Crap., Quarto: 30, is one of the types of this taxon if not the holotype. Type locality: "Surinam".

Hyla hypocondrialis —Latreille In Sonnini de Manoncourt and Latreille, 1801 "An. X", Hist. Nat. Rept., 2: 177. Incorrect subsequent spelling.

Calamita hypochondrialis — Merrem, 1820, Tent. Syst. Amph.: 170.

Phyllomedusa hypochondrialis — Cope, 1862, Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia, 14: 355; Boulenger, 1882, Cat. Batr. Sal. Coll. Brit. Mus., Ed. 2: 430. Incorrect subsequent spelling.

Pithecopus hypochondrialis — Cope, 1866, J. Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia, Ser. 2, 6: 86; Cope, 1868, Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia, 20: 112.

Phrynomedusa hypochondrialis — Miranda-Ribeiro, 1926, Arq. Mus. Nac., Rio de Janeiro, 27: 105.

Bradymedusa hypochondrialis — Miranda-Ribeiro, 1926, Arq. Mus. Nac., Rio de Janeiro, 27: 105.

Phyllomedusa (Pithecopus) hypochondrialis — Lutz, 1950, Mem. Oswaldo Cruz, Rio de Janeiro, 48: 619.

Pithecopus hypochondrialis hypochondrialis — Lutz, 1966, Copeia, 1966: 236.

Pithecopus hypochondrialis — Duellman, Marion, and Hedges, 2016, Zootaxa, 4104: 32. 

English Names

Orange-legged Leaf Frog (Ananjeva, Borkin, Darevsky, and Orlov, 1988, Dict. Amph. Rept. Five Languages: 67; Frank and Ramus, 1995, Compl. Guide Scient. Common Names Amph. Rept. World: 62).

Distribution

Eastern Colombia east through western and eastern Venezuela, through the Guianas and in Brazilian Amazonia in Pará and Amapá and in a broad regions from extreme southeastern Mato Grosso through Goiás, and Tocantins; populations from Amazonian Colombia, Peru, Ecuador, and Bolivia have been reassigned to other species.

Geographic Occurrence

Natural Resident: Brazil, Colombia, French Guiana, Guyana, Suriname, Venezuela

Comment

The advertisement call in central Colombia was described by Pyburn and Glidewell, 1971, J. Herpetol., 5: 49–52. See Cei, 1980, Monit. Zool. Ital., N.S., Monogr., 2: 437–439, and Lescure, Marty, Marty, Starace, Thomay, and Letellier, 1995, Rev. Fr. Aquar. Herpetol., 22: 35–50. Duellman, 1997, Sci. Pap. Nat. Hist. Mus. Univ. Kansas, 2: 20, commented on identifications of a population in southeastern Venezuela. In the Phyllomedusa hypochondrialis group of Faivovich, Haddad, Garcia, Frost, Campbell, and Wheeler, 2005, Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., 294: 117, Caramaschi, 2006, Arq. Mus. Nac., Rio de Janeiro, 64: 159–179, and Faivovich, Haddad, Baêta, Jungfer, Álvares, Brandão, Sheil, Barrientos, Barrio-Amorós, Cruz, and Wheeler, 2010, Cladistics, 26: 259. The incorrect subsequent spelling hypocondrialis has been widely used. Lescure and Marty, 2000, Collect. Patrimoines Nat., Paris, 45: 102≠103, provided a brief account and photo. Gorzula and Señaris, 1999 "1998", Scient. Guaianae, 8: 40, commented on range in Venezuela. See comment under Phyllomedusa azurea. See account for Suriname population by Ouboter and Jairam, 2012, Amph. Suriname: 208–209. Vera Candioti, 2007, Zootaxa, 1600: 1–175, reported on detailed larval morphology. França and Venâncio, 2010, Biotemas, 23: 71–84, provided a record for the municipality of Boca do Acre, Amazonas, with a brief discussion of the range (subsequently modified). Lynch and Suárez-Mayorga, 2011, Caldasia, 33: 235–270, illustrated the tadpole and included the species in a key to the tadpoles of Amazonian Colombia. See Cole, Townsend, Reynolds, MacCulloch, and Lathrop, 2013, Proc. Biol. Soc. Washington, 125: 414, for brief account and records for Guyana. Señaris, Lampo, Rojas-Runjaic, and Barrio-Amorós, 2014, Guía Ilust. Anf. Parque Nac. Canaima: 174–175, provided a photograph and a brief account for the Parque Nacional de Canaima, Venezuela. Barrio-Amorós, 2009, Mem. Fund. La Salle Cienc. Nat., 171: 19–46, discussed the biology and range in Venezuela. Acosta-Galvis, 2017, Biota Colomb., 18: 282–315, reported the species from the Municipality of Yopal, Casanare Department, Colombia. Haga, Andrade, Bruschi, Recco-Pimentel, and Giaretta, 2017, PLoS One, 12(9: e0184631): 1–23, noted that localities from Mato Grosso, Brazil, from all but the extreme southeast are referable to Pithecopus araguaius. See Barrio-Amorós, Rojas-Runjaic, and Señaris, 2019, Amph. Rept. Conserv., 13 (1: e180): 107, for comments on range and literature. Vaz-Silva, Maciel, Nomura, Morais, Guerra Batista, Santos, Andrade, Oliveira, Brandão, and Bastos, 2020, Guia Ident. Anf. Goiás e Dist. Fed. Brasil Central: 175–176, provided an account. Röhr, Camurugi, Paterno, Gehara, Juncá, Álvares, Brandão, and Garda, 2020, Canad. J. Zool., 98: 495–504, reported on the evolution and causes of variability of advertisement call. Taucce, Costa-Campos, Carvalho, and Michalski, 2022, Eur. J. Taxon., 836: 96–130, reported on distribution, literature, and conservation status for Amapá, Brazil.  

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.