Hoplobatrachus rugulosus (Wiegmann, 1834)

Class: Amphibia > Order: Anura > Family: Dicroglossidae > Subfamily: Dicroglossinae > Genus: Hoplobatrachus > Species: Hoplobatrachus rugulosus

Rana chinensis Osbeck, 1765, Reise Ostindien China: 244. Types: Not stated or known to exist. Neotype designated by Fei and Ye IN Fei, Hu, Ye, and Huang, 2009, Fauna Sinica, Amph. 3: 1320, as CIB 980505. Type locality: Not stated; presumably the vicinity of Canton, China, as Osbeck’s ship was moored at "Huampu" or "Wam-pu . . . in the river Canton . . . . about four Swedish miles from the mouth of the river, or Bocca-tyger" (English translation of John Forster, 1771, Osbeck’s Voyage, 1: 183). Neotype from "near Guangzhou City, Guangdong, China". Considered by Werner, 1903, Abh. Math. Physik. Cl. Bayer. Akad. Wiss., 22: 358, and Boulenger, 1918, Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., Ser. 9, 2: 241-257, to be synonymous with Rana nigromaculata. Stejneger, 1907, Bull. U.S. Natl. Mus., 58: 94, considered chinensis to be only questionably an older name for Rana nigromaculata and more likely applied to Limnonectes tigerinus. Bolkay, 1911, Proc. Washington Acad. Sci., 13: 67-84, considered it an older name for Rana nigromaculata. Liu, 1950, Fieldiana, Zool. Mem., 2: 309, discussed this taxon in passing, noting that some authors thought it might be an older name for Rana nigromaculata, although he thought it unidentifiable, even to genus. Subsequently he (Liu and Hu, 1961, Tailless Amph. China: 114) treated it as a senior synonym of Rana nigromaculata. Dubois and Ohler, 1996 "1994", Zool. Polon., 39: 164, and Kosuch, Vences, Dubois, Ohler, and Böhme, 2001, Mol. Phylogenet. Evol., 21: 405, suggested that it was likely a senior synonym of Hoplobatrachus rugulosus and that Ohler and Dubois intended to publish evidence for this conclusion in the future, a future that has not yet arrive. The neotype designation of Fei and Ye In Fei, Hu, Ye, and Huang, 2009, Fauna Sinica, Amph. 3: 1320, may violate the "exceptional need" requirement of the ICZN (Art. 75.1) as well as decisive evidence that Rana chinesnsis Osbeck, is, in fact the same biological taxon as Rana rugulosa Wiegmann has so far not been produced, which violates Art. 753.5. For these reasons I retain the name Hoplobatrachus rugulosus for this taxon pending further discussion (DRF).

Rana rugulosa Wiegmann, 1834, in Meyen (ed.), Reise in die Erde K. Preuss. Seehandl., 3(Zool.): 508. Subsequently published by Wiegmann, 1834, Nova Acta Phys. Med. Acad. Caesar Leopold Carol., Halle, 17: 258. Holotype: ZMB 3721, according to Peters, 1863, Monatsber. Preuss. Akad. Wiss. Berlin, 1863: 78. Type locality: "Cap Syng-more" (= Kap Shui Mun, Lantau I., Hongkong, China).

Rana tigrina var. pantherina Steindachner, 1867, Reise Österreichischen Fregatte Novara, Zool., Amph.: pl. 1, figs. 14-17. Types: Not stated, presumably NHMW, and clearly including animals figured in figs. 14-17 of pl. 1 of the original publication. Type locality: "Hongkong", China. Synonymy by Stejneger, 1925, Proc. U.S. Natl. Mus., 66: 29.

Hydrostentor pantherinus Steindachner, 1867, Reise Österreichischen Fregatte Novara, Zool., Amph.: 18. Fitzinger, 1861 "1860", Sitzungsber. Akad. Wiss. Wien, Phys. Math. Naturwiss. Kl., 42: 414. Alternative label name for Rana tigrina var. pantherina attributed to Fitznger

Rana esculenta chinensisWolterstorff, 1906, Abh. Ber. Mus. Nat. Heimatkd. Magdeburg, 1: 135-143.

Rana burkilli Annandale, 1910, Rec. Indian Mus., 5: 79. Syntypes: ZSIC 16569-70, according to XXX. Chanda, Das, and Dubois, 2001 "2000", Hamadryad, 25: 108, suggested additional specimens (from "Mandalay" as syntypes, although Annandale clearly regarded only the two specimens as primary types. Type locality: "Tavoy" upper Myanmar. Synonymy with Rana rugulosa by Annandale, 1917, Mem. Asiat. Soc. Bengal, 6: 126. Synonymy with Hoplobatrachus tigerina by Boulenger, 1918, Rec. Indian Mus., 15: 58.

Rana tigerina var. burkilliBoulenger, 1918, Rec. Indian Mus., 15: 58.

Rana rugulosaAnnandale, 1918, Rec. Indian Mus., 15: 60; Okada, 1927, Copeia, 158: 165.

Rana (Rana) tigerina var. pantherina Boulenger, 1920, Rec. Indian Mus., 20: 6-17.

Rana tigrina rugulosaSmith, 1930, Bull. Raffles Mus., 3: 93; Fang and Chang, 1931, Contrib. Biol. Lab. Sci. Soc., China, Zool. Ser., 7: 107.

Rana tigerina rugulosaFang and Chang, 1931, Contrib. Biol. Lab. Sci. Soc., China, Zool. Ser., 7: 65-114.

Rana tigerina pantherinaTaylor and Elbel, 1958, Univ. Kansas Sci. Bull., 38: 1050.

Rana (Euphlyctis) rugulosaDubois, 1981, Monit. Zool. Ital., N.S., Suppl., 15: 240, by implication.

Euphlyctis tigerina rugulosaPoynton and Broadley, 1985, Ann. Natal Mus., 27: 124, by implication.

Limnonectes (Hoplobatrachus) rugulosusDubois, 1987 "1986", Alytes, 5: 60.

Tigrina rugulosaFei, Ye, and Huang, 1990, Key to Chinese Amph.: 145.

Hoplobatrachus rugulosusDubois, 1992, Bull. Mens. Soc. Linn. Lyon, 61: 315.

Hoplobatrachus chinensisOhler, Swan, and Daltry, 2002, Raffles Bull. Zool., 50: 467; Fei, Ye, and Jiang, 2010, Herpetol. Sinica, 12: 28. See comment under Dicroglossidae.

English Names

Asian Peters Frog (Frank and Ramus, 1995, Compl. Guide Scient. Common Names Amph. Rept. World: 99).

Chinese Bullfrog (Karsen, Lau, and Bogadek, 1986, Hong Kong Amph. Rept.: 21).

Chinese Tiger Frog (Fei, 1999, Atlas Amph. China: 184).

Chinese Bull Frog (Fei, 1999, Atlas Amph. China: 184).

I-san Field Frog (Nutphund, 2001, Amph. Thailand: 111).

Rugosed Frog (Nutphund, 2001, Amph. Thailand: 111).

Rugose Frog (Chan-ard, 2003, Photograph. Guide Amph. Thailand: 112).

Common Lowland Frog (Nguyen, Ho, and Nguyen, 2005, Checklist Amph. Rept. Vietnam: 20).

Taiwanense Frog (Nguyen, Ho, and Nguyen, 2005, Checklist Amph. Rept. Vietnam: 20).

East Asian Bullfrog (Vassilieva, Galoyan, Poyarkov, and Geissler, 2016, Photograph. Field Guide Amph. Rept. Lowland S. Vietnam: 89). 

Distribution

Myanmar and southern China (north to eastern Sichuan, southern Shaanxi, southern Hebei, and Jiangsu, and including Taiwan and Hainan) to Thailand and peninsular Malaysia; introduced in Borneo (Sabah, Malaysia) and the Philippines. (See comment regarding cryptic species.)

Comment

In the Hoplobatrachus tigerinus group of Dubois, 1992, Bull. Mens. Soc. Linn. Lyon, 61: 315 (following Dubois, 1987 "1986", Alytes, 5: 60). See accounts by Okada, 1931, Tailless Batr. Japan. Empire: 147-149; Pope, 1931, Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., 61: 487-491; and (as Rana tigerina rugulosa) by Liu, 1950, Fieldiana, Zool. Mem., 2: 321-322; and Bourret, 1942, Batr. Indochine: 242-245. Taylor, 1962, Univ. Kansas Sci. Bull., 43: 368-373, provided accounts as Rana tigrina pantherina and Rana rugulosa. See Matsui, 1979, Contrib. Biol. Lab. Kyoto Univ., 25: 334-336, for discussion of Bornean population. Fei, 1999, Atlas Amph. China: 184-185, provided a brief account of the Chinese population, map, and figure. Karsen, Lau, and Bogadek, 1986, Hong Kong Amph. Rept.: 21, provided a very brief account (as Rana tigrina rugulosa). See comment under Hoplobatrachus tigerinus which has been widely confused with this species. See discussion of type locality by Zhao and Adler, 1993, Herpetol. China: 148. See accounts by Yang, 1991, Amph. Fauna of Yunnan: 155-157, and Ye, Fei, and Hu, 1993, Rare and Economic Amph. China: 254. The name Rana rugulosa was published twice: first in 1834 (Wiegmann, 1834, in Meyen (ed.), Reise in die Erde K. Preuss. Seehandl., 3(Zool.)), and then in early 1835 (Wiegmann, 1834, Nova Acta Phys. Med. Acad. Caesar Leopold Carol., Halle, 17: 185-268). For additional discussion see Lavilla, 1997, Cuad. Herpetol., 11: 75-80, Anonymous, 1910, Cat. Books Mss Maps Brit. Mus., Vol. 3, and Bauer and Adler, 2001, Arch. Nat. Hist., London, 28: 313-326. Fei and Ye, 2001, Color Handbook Amph. Sichuan: 180, provided a brief account and illustration. Taiwan population (as Rana tigrina) reviewed by Okada, 1931, Tailless Batr. Japan. Empire: 149-151. See brief account and photo (as Hoplobatrachus tigerinus) by Manthey and Grossmann, 1997, Amph. Rept. Südostasiens: 90-91. Huang, 1990, Fauna Zhejiang, Amph. Rept.: 75-77, provided an account (as Rana tigrina rugulosa) for Zhejiang populations. Zhang and Wen, 2000, Amph. Guangxi: 97, provided an account for Guangxi. See also brief account (as Rana rugulosa) by Zhao and Yang, 1997, Amph. Rept. Hengduan Mountains Region: 97-98. Schmalz and Zug, 2003 "2002", Hamadryad, 27: 90-98, discussed geographic variation among populations. Song, Jang, Zou, and Shi, 2002, Herpetol. Sinica, 9: 69-79, reported the species from Hainan I. Reported (as Hoplobatrachus chinensis) for southwestern Cambodia by Ohler, Swan, and Daltry, 2002, Raffles Bull. Zool., 50: 465-481. Stuart, 1999, in Duckworth et al. (eds.), Wildlife in Lao PDR: 45, reported the species in Laos. Chan-ard, 2003, Photograph. Guide Amph. Thailand: 112-113, provided a very brief account (as Hoplobatrachus rugulosus), map for Thailand, and photograph. Nguyen, Ho, and Nguyen, 2005, Checklist Amph. Rept. Vietnam: 148, provided a photograph. Stuart, 2005, Herpetol. Rev., 36: 477, provided specific localities for Laos. Lue, Tu, and Hsiang, 1999, Atlas Taiwan Amph. Rept.: 82-83, provided a brief account for Taiwan (as Rana tigerana rugulosa). Yang, 2008, in Yang and Rao (ed.), Amph. Rept. Yunnan: 72-73, provided a brief account (as Rana rugulosa) for Yunnan, China. Fei, Hu, Ye, and Huang, 2009, Fauna Sinica, Amph. 3: 1320-1328, provided an account (as Hoplobatrachus chinensis) for China, figures, and map. Fei, Ye, and Jiang, 2010, Colored Atlas of Chinese Amph.: 352, provided a brief account for China (as Hoplobatrachus chinensis) including photographs. Shi, 2011, Amph. Rept. Fauna Hainan: 106-107, provided an account for Hainan as Rana rugulosa. Gaulke, 2011, Herpetofauna Panay Island: 81-82, provided a brief account for Panay Island, Philippines, where it is introduced. Pansook, Khonsue, Piyapattanakorn, and Pariyanonth, 2012, Zool. Sci., Tokyo, 29: 54-59, provided molecular evidence for the existence of two species existing under this one name in Thailand alone, with the Isthmus of Kra being the dividing line. Given the large range and the taxic diversity in just this one part of the distribution workers should expect several new species to be named out of this complex in the next few years (DRF). Fei, Ye, and Jiang, 2012, Colored Atlas Chinese Amph. Distr.: 440-441, provided an account (as Hoplobatrachus chinensis), photographs, and a range map. Yu, Zhang, and Zheng, 2012, Mitochondrial DNA, 23: 336–337, reported on the complete mtDNA genome. Peralta, Pagente, Balaba, Buenavista, and Sy, 2016, Herpetol. Rev., 47: 247, provided a record for Bukidnon Province, Mindanao, Philippines, and noted the known range of this introduced species on that island. See account, photograph, and map for Vietnam in Vassilieva, Galoyan, Poyarkov, and Geissler, 2016, Photograph. Field Guide Amph. Rept. Lowland S. Vietnam: 89–90. Yu, Zhang, Li, Zheng, and Shao, 2015, PLoS One, 10(4: e0124825): 1–22, reported on mtDNA and suggested on this basis that the species is composed of at least two cryptic species, both widely distributed from Zhejiang China to Thailand; other regions not investigated. Pham, An, Herbst, Bonkowski, Ziegler, and Nguyen, 2017, Bonn Zool. Bull., 66: 37–53, provided records for Cao Bang Province, Vietnam, along with observatons on morphology and natural history.  

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.