Basic Search [?]
Guided Search [?]
Xenopus fraseri Boulenger, 1905
Xenopus fraseri Boulenger, 1905, Proc. Zool. Soc. London, 1905: 250. Syntypes: 2 specimens in the BMNH, by original designation; BMNH 19220.127.116.11-79 (formerly 1818.104.22.168-24) recorded as syntypes by museum records; BMNH 1922.214.171.124 designated lectotype by Evans, Carter, Greenbaum, Gvoždík, Kelley, McLaughlin, Pauwels, Portik, Stanley, Tinsley, Tobias, and Blackburn, 2015, PLoS One, 10(12): e0142823: 34. Type locality: "West Africa . . . therefore probably from Nigeria or Fernando Po [= Bioko, Equatorial Guinea]". See Evans, Carter, Greenbaum, Gvoždík, Kelley, McLaughlin, Pauwels, Portik, Stanley, Tinsley, Tobias, and Blackburn, 2015, PLoS One, 10(12): e0142823: 35, for discussion of type localities and resolution that the specimens most likely came from Benin or southwestern Nigeria, and not from Bioko I, Ecuatorial Guinea.
Xenopus (Xenopus) fraseri — Kobel, Barandun, and Thiebaud, 1998, Herpetol. J., 8: 13.
Fraser's Clawed Frog (Frank and Ramus, 1995, Compl. Guide Scient. Common Names Amph. Rept. World: 97).
Fraser's Platanna (Channing, 2001, Amph. Cent. S. Afr.: 237-249).
Known only from the imprecise region of southwestern Nigeria and Benin, as well as from northern Ghana. See comment below and in synonymy.
Evans, Carter, Greenbaum, Gvoždík, Kelley, McLaughlin, Pauwels, Portik, Stanley, Tinsley, Tobias, and Blackburn, 2015, PLoS One, 10(12): e0142823: 34, provided an account and restricted the name to the type series from an imprecise type locality and another population in northern Ghana. All previous literature is therefore reasonably assumed to apply to other species in the Xenopus amieti group. The ploidy level of this species is not know, previous reports having been conflated with the tetraploid Xenopus parafraseri (B. Evans, personal commun.). The reports from Equatorial Guinea by De la Riva, 1994, Rev. Esp. Herpetol., 8: 131-132, and Lasso, Rial, Castroviejo, and De la Riva, 2002, Graellsia, 58: 21-34 (who provided notes on ecological distribution), presumably apply to the newly named Xenopus parafaseri or Xenopus allofraseri. The record from Gabon by Frétey and Blanc, 2001, Bull. Soc. Zool. France, 126: 379, preseumably applies to the newly named Xenopus parafraseri. Channing, Rödel, and Channing, 2012, Tadpoles of Africa: 295–296, provided information on comparative larval morphology, under this name, but the identification likely corresponds to either Xenopus allofraseri or Xenopus parafaseri, recently named. Ernst, Schmitz, Wagner, Branquima, and Hölting, 2015, Salamandra, 51: 147–155, discussed the range of nominal Xenopus fraseri (at the time, now partitioned into a number of species), previous records that are questionable due to the great morphological similarity to Xenopus andrei.
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.