Babina Thompson, 1912

Class: Amphibia > Order: Anura > Family: Ranidae > Genus: Babina
10 species

Babina Thompson, 1912, Herpetol. Notices, 1: 1 (June 15). Type species: Rana holsti Boulenger, 1892, by original designation. Considered synonymous with Hylarana by Dubois, 1981, Monit. Zool. Ital., N.S., Suppl., 15: 225-284, but considered a distinct genus by Okada, 1966, Fauna Japon., Anura: 138-143; considered a subgenus of Rana by Nakamura and Ueno, 1963, Japan. Rept. Amph. Color: 54. Equivalent to the Rana holstii group of Boulenger, 1920, Rec. Indian Mus., 20: 1-226. Resurrected as a subgenus by Dubois, 1992, Bull. Mens. Soc. Linn. Lyon, 61: 523. Equivalent to the Rana (Hylorana) holsti group of Boulenger, 1920, Rec. Indian Mus., 20: 129-130. Barbour, 1917, Occas. Pap. Mus. Zool. Univ. Michigan, 44: 6 (footnote) says that he has no evidence to doubt the printed dates of publication but he did note that he received all three of Thomson's papers at the same time and implied on the basis of no clear evidentiary basis that they may be erroneous (DRF). 

Babina Van Denburgh, 1912, Adv. Diagn. New Rept. Amph. Loo Choo Is. Formosa: 3. (July 29, 1912.) Type species: Rana holsti Boulenger, 1892, by original designation. Objective synonym and preoccupied by Babina Van Denburgh, 1912, according to Barbour, 1917, Occas. Pap. Mus. Zool. Univ. Michigan, 44: 1-9. Synonymy with Hylarana by Boulenger, 1917, C. R. Hebd. Séances Acad. Sci., Paris, 165: 989; Boulenger, 1918, Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., Ser. 9, 1: 238.

Nidirana Dubois, 1992, Bull. Mens. Soc. Linn. Lyon, 61: 324. Type species: Rana psaltes Kuramoto, 1985, by original designation. Originally proposed as a subgenus of Rana. Recognition as a genus by Chen, Murphy, Lathrop, Ngo, Orlov, Ho, and Somorjai, 2005, Herpetol. J., 15: 237. Synonymy with Babina by 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: 248.

Dianrana Fei, Ye, and Jiang, 2010, Herpetol. Sinica, 12: 21. Type species: Rana pleuraden Boulenger, 1904. See comment under Ranidae record.

English Names

None noted.

Distribution

Japan, Southern China, northern Thailand, northern Vietnam, and intervening Laos.

Comment

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: 139, suggested that Babina is the sister taxon of their Huia. Chou, 1999, Herpetologica, 55: 389-400, provided a key to the species of the former subgenus Nidirana. Che, Pang, Zhao, Wu, Zhao, and Zhang, 2007, Mol. Phylogenet. Evol., 43: 1-13, also recognized Babina as the sister taxon of their Odorrana (a subset of Huia sensu Frost et al., 2006). Several authors (e.g., Fei, Hu, Ye, and Huang, 2009, Fauna Sinica, Amph. 3:) have retained Nidirana within Hylarana without having addressed the phylogenetic placement of Nidirana with respect to Babina. Kurabayashi, Yoshikawa, Sato, Hayashi, Oumi, Fujii, and Sumida, 2010, Mol. Phylogenet. Evol., 56: 543-553, provided the first molecular study that inluded the type species, Babina holsti, and found Babina (sensu lato) to be monophyletic and possibly the sister taxon of Odorrana. Without having established its monophyly, Chuaynkern, Ohler, Inthara, Duengkae, Makchai, and Salangsingha, 2010, Raffles Bull. Zool., 58: 291-310. recognized Nidirana as a separate taxon from Babina, regarded both as subgenera of Rana and without addressing the effect of this on larger issues of ranid taxonomy, and recognized three species groups within their Nidirana. Pyron and Wiens, 2011, Mol. Phylogenet. Evol., 61: 543-583, in their study of Genbank sequences confirmed the placement of Babina as the sister taxon of Odorrana, but this result was obscured by employing a nonmonophyletic and antiquated taxonomy.

Contained taxa (10 sp.):

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.