Basic Search [?]
Guided Search [?]
Neobatrachus Peters, 1863
Neobatrachus Peters, 1863, Monatsber. Preuss. Akad. Wiss. Berlin, 1863: 234. Type species: Neobatrachus pictus Peters, 1863, by monotypy.
Neoruinosus Wells and Wellington, 1985, Aust. J. Herpetol., Suppl. Ser., 1: 3. Type species: Heleioporus sudelli Lamb, 1911, by original designation. Synonymy by Roberts, 2010, Rec. W. Aust. Mus., 25: 455-458. See Tyler, 1985, Herpetol. Rev., 16: 69; Australian Society of Herpetologists, 1987, Bull. Zool. Nomencl., 44: 116-121; Tyler, 1988, Bull. Zool. Nomencl., 45: 152; Holthius, 1988, Bull. Zool. Nomencl., 45 and decision by ICZN (Anonymous, 1991, Bull. Zool. Nomencl., 48: 337-338).
Stubby Frogs (Frank and Ramus, 1995, Compl. Guide Scient. Common Names Amph. Rept. World: 95).
Australia, excluding Tasmania.
Significance of call variation among tetraploid species discussed by Roberts, 1997, Aust. J. Zool., 45: 95-112; see also Roberts, Maxson, and Plummer, 1996, in Hopper et al. (eds.), Gondwana Heritage: 287-291. See Barker, Grigg, and Tyler, 1995, Field Guide Aust. Frogs., Ed. 2, for keys and accounts. Mable and Roberts, 1997, Copeia, 1997: 680-689, and Roberts, 1997, Aust. J. Zool., 45: 791-801, discussed the evidence for the evolution of the tetraploid species, Neobatracus sudelli, Neobatrachus centralis, Neobatrachus aquilonius, and Neobatrachus kunapalari. Burton, 2001, Aust. J. Zool., 49: 539-559, suggested that Neobatrachus is the sister taxon of Heleioporus. 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, placed Neobatrachus as the sister taxon of Notaden + Opisthodon (now Platyplectrum) + Lechriodus. Henle, 2010, Amphibia-Reptilia, 31: 283-286, discussed difficulty in discrimination on the basis of morphology of Neobatrachus centralis, Neobatrachus sudelli, and Neobatrachus pictus. Roberts, 2010, Rec. W. Aust. Mus., 25: 455-458, discussed taxonomic issues and problems in determinations of ranges. Pyron and Wiens, 2011, Mol. Phylogenet. Evol., 61: 543-583, in their study of Genbank sequences, confirmed the monophyly of the group and provided a tree of their molecular exemplars.
Contained taxa (9 sp.):
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.