Pseudopaludicola boliviana Parker, 1927

Class: Amphibia > Order: Anura > Family: Leptodactylidae > Subfamily: Leiuperinae > Genus: Pseudopaludicola > Species: Pseudopaludicola boliviana

Pseudopaludicola boliviana Parker, 1927, Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., Ser. 9, 20: 455. Holotype: BMNH 1927.8.1.1, by original designation; renumbered BM 1947.2.18.3 according to museum records. Type locality: "Sta. Cruz, Bolivia".

Pseudopaludicola mirandae Mercadal de Barrio and Barrio, 1994, Rev. Mus. Argent. Cienc. Nat. Bernardino Rivadavia, Cienc. Zool., 16: 72. Holotype: MACN (formerly CENAI 6043), acccording to Cardozo and Lobo, 2009, J. Herpetol., 43: 685-687. Type locality: "Itá-Ibaté, Corrientes, República Argentina". Synonymy by Cardozo and Lobo, 2009, J. Herpetol., 43: 685-687.

English Names

Bolivian Swamp Frog (Frank and Ramus, 1995, Compl. Guide Scient. Common Names Amph. Rept. World: 84).

Distribution

Disjunct regions of eastern Colombia, northern Brazil (Roraima, Amapá, and Pará), and Amazonian Venezuela through southern Guyana to southwestern Surinam; western non-Andean Bolivia, Paraguay, and into northern Argentina. Presumably to be found in southeastern Peru. 

Comment

In the Pseudopaludicola pusilla group of Lynch, 1989, Copeia, 1989: 577-588. De la Riva, Köhler, Lötters, and Reichle, 2000, Rev. Esp. Herpetol., 14: 45, noted that the two populations, separated by the Amazon Basin, might well represent distinct species and Myers and Donnelly, 2001, Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., 261: 45, suggested that two species existed under this name in Venezuela and discussed the relevant specimens. Lobo, 1990, Herpetol. Rev., 21: 38, provided the first record for Argentina (Chaco Province). Lobo, 1994, Cuad. Herpetol., 8: 231, provided records for Paraguay and Brazil, and Alcalde and Williams, 2004, Cuad. Herpetol., 18: 75-76. provided records in Argentina (Corrientes Province). Barrio-Amorós, 1999 "1998", Acta Biol. Venezuelica, 18: 50, noted previous confusion with Physalaemus pusilla in Venezuela. Brusquetti and Lavilla, 2006, Cuad. Herpetol., 20: 18, briefly discussed the range in Paraguay. Cardozo and Lobo, 2009, J. Herpetol., 43: 685-687, discussed morphological variation. Jansen, Bloch, Schulze, and Pfenninger, 2011, Zool. Scripta, 40: 567-583, suggested on the basis of molecular data the existence of an unnamed cryptic species in Bolivia (now apparently named Pseudopaludicola motorzinho). Alcalde and Barrasso, 2013, Amphibia-Reptilia, 34: 129-135, compared the internal larval anatomy of Pseudopaludicola boliviana and Pseudopaludicola falcipes.  Brusquetti and Lavilla, 2006, Cuad. Herpetol., 20: 18, briefly discussed the range in Paraguay of nominal Pseudopaludicola falcipes, but subsequently, Langone, Lavilla, de Sá, and Cardozo, 2015, Zootaxa, 4058: 145–150, regarded these to be Pseudopaludicola boliviana. Records in Mato Grosso and Mato Grosso do Sul, Brazil, and Santa Cruz, Bolivia, are likely referrable to the newly named Pseudopaludicola motorzinho. Pansonato, Veiga-Menoncello, Mudrek, Jansen, Recco-Pimentel, Martins, and Strüssmann, 2016, Herpetologica, 72: 246, provided a range map. Costa-Campos, Carvalho, and Freire, 2016, Check List, 12(6: Art. 1991): 1–5, provided a record for the state of Amapá, Brazil, and commented on the advertisement call and range. 

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.