Pseudacris illinoensis Smith, 1951

Class: Amphibia > Order: Anura > Family: Hylidae > Subfamily: Acridinae > Genus: Pseudacris > Species: Pseudacris illinoensis

Pseudacris triseriata illinoensis Smith, 1951, Bull. Chicago Acad. Sci., 9: 190. Holotype: INHS 5982, by original designation. Type locality: "three miles north of Meredosia, Morgan County, Illinois", USA.

Pseudacris triseriata illinoisensisSchmidt, 1953, Check List N. Am. Amph. Rept., Ed. 6: 76. Incorrect subsequent spelling of Pseudacris triseriata illinoensis Smith, 1951.

Pseudacris streckeri illinoensisDuellman, 1977, Das Tierreich, 95: 171.

Hyla (Pseudacris) streckeri illinoensisDubois, 1984, Alytes, 3: 86.

Pseudacris illinoensisCollins, 1991, Herpetol. Rev., 22: 42-43; Collins, 1997, Herpetol. Circ., 25: 12; Powell, Collins, and Hooper, 1998, Key Amph. Rept. Continent. U.S. Canada: 38.

Pseudacris (Pycnacris) streckeri illinoensis — Fouquette and Dubois, 2014, Checklist N.A. Amph. Rept.: 364.

English Names

Illinois Chorus Frog (Schmidt, 1953, Check List N. Am. Amph. Rept., Ed. 6: 76; Conant, Cagle, Goin, Lowe, Neill, Netting, Schmidt, Shaw, Stebbins, and Bogert, 1956, Copeia, 1956: 176; Collins, Huheey, Knight, and Smith, 1978, Herpetol. Circ., 7: 12; Frank and Ramus, 1995, Compl. Guide Scient. Common Names Amph. Rept. World: 63; Collins, 1997, Herpetol. Circ., 25: 12; Crother, Boundy, Campbell, de Queiroz, Frost, Highton, Iverson, Meylan, Reeder, Seidel, Sites, Taggart, Tilley, and Wake, 2001 "2000", Herpetol. Circ., 29: 13; Frost, McDiarmid, and Mendelson, 2008, in Crother (ed.), Herpetol. Circ., 37: 10; Frost, McDiarmid, Mendelson, and Green, 2012, in Crother (ed.), Herpetol. Circ., 39: 19; Frost, Lemmon, McDiarmid, and Mendelson, 2017, in Crother (ed.), Herpetol. Circ., 43: 17).


West-central Illinois south in disjunct populations to southeastern Missouri and northeastern Arkansas, USA.


In the Pseudacris nigrita group of Faivovich, Haddad, Garcia, Frost, Campbell, and Wheeler, 2005, Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., 294: 106 (though this species was not recognized by them, without comment). Reviewed (as Pseudacris streckeri illinoensis) by Smith, 1966, Cat. Am. Amph. Rept., 27: 1-2. Recognized by Collins, 1997, Herpetol. Circ., 25, on the basis of its diagnosability from Pseudacris streckeri and its allopatry. Moriarty and Cannatella, 2004, Mol. Phylogenet. Evol., 30: 409-420, discussed the arguable status of this taxon with respect to Pseudacris streckeri. Trauth, Johnson, and Trauth, 2007, Zootaxa, 1589: 23–32, rejected consideration of this taxon as a species, but suggested to recognize the Arkansas component as a "distinct population segment". Dodd, 2013, Frogs U.S. and Canada, 1: 363–367, provided an account that summarized the relevant literature. Although Fouquette and Dubois, 2014, Checklist N.A. Amph. Rept.: 365, characterized the discussion of Pseudacris illinoensis by Moriarty and Cannatella, 2004, Mol. Phylogenet. Evol., 30: 417-417, as supporting a subspecies relation between Pseudacris illinoensis and Pseudacris streckeri, the latter authors noted that only mtDNA suggested paraphyly of Pseudacris streckeri populations with respect to Pseudacris illinoensis and they retained the binominal pending resolution of the problem with nuDNA.  Fouquette and Dubois, 2014, Checklist N.A. Amph. Rept.: 365, also mischaracterized the recognition of species (and, not unexpectedly, conflate species concepts) by  Collins, 1991, Herpetol. Rev., 22: 42-43 as "without justification". Collins imposed the Phylogenetic Species concept, and the fact of the allopatric and diagnosability of streckeri versus illinoensis required that they be considered species, at least under the evidence then available. Fouquette and Dubois (2014) seem to impose, at least with respect to this example, the reproductive species concept, something that leaves them in rather sparse company.  Barrow, Ralicki, Emme, and Lemmon, 2014, Mol. Phylogenet. Evol., 75: 78–90, reported on species tree estimation, reported on significant mtDNA and nuDNA discordance due to inter-species introgression and discussed the taxonomic difficulties associated with the relationship of nominal Pseudacris streckeri and Pseudacris illinoensisAltig and McDiarmid, 2015, Handb. Larval Amph. US and Canada: 209–210, provided an account of larval morphology and biology.  

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.