Elachistocleis surinamensis ( Daudin, 1802 )

Novaes-E-Fagundes, Gabriel, Lyra, Mariana L., Loredam, Vinicius S. A., Carvalho, Thiago R., Haddad, Célio F. B., Rodrigues, Miguel T., Baldo, Diego, Barrasso, Diego A., Loebmann, Daniel, Ávila, Robson W., Brusquetti, Francisco, Prudente, Ana L. C., Wheeler, Ward C., Orrico, Victor Goyannes Dill & Peloso, Pedro, 2023, A tale of two bellies: systematics of the oval frogs (Anura: Microhylidae: Elachistocleis), Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 197, pp. 545-568 : 558

Elachistocleis surumu Caramaschi, 2010 as a junior subjective synonym of

Elachistocleis surinamensis ( Daudin, 1802)

Although we do not have samples from the type locality of E. surumu (Vila Surumu, Municipality of Pacaraima, State of Roraima, Brazil), we sampled many specimens from nearby localities surrounding the type locality ( Fig. 3 ) and all of them are recovered in a single lineage that is widespread in the eastern portion of the Guiana Shield ( Figs 1 , 3 ). The proposed morphological differences between E. surumu and E. surinamensis are subtle. Caramaschi (2010) differentiated E. surumu from E. surinamensis based on the alleged presence of a light vertebral stripe in E. surinamensis (absent in E. surumu ) and minor details in the ventral colour patterns. However, neither the original description of E. surinamensis ( Daudin, 1802) nor the recent species redescription and neotype designation ( Jowers et al., 2021) stated that E. surinamensis has any kind of dorsal stripe or line. Caramaschi (2010) did not list any voucher specimens of E. surinamensis in his list of examined material. Ventral colour patterns of E. surumu are contained in the variation found herein for specimens of E. surinamensis (see also: Jowers et al., 2021). Therefore, we consider Elachistocleis surumu Caramaschi, 2010 as a junior subjective synonym of Elachistocleis surinamensis ( Daudin, 1802) .

Figures

Figure 1. Species delimitation in Elachistocleis. The tree shown is from the maximum likelihood (ML) analysis with only 16S + COI from only Elachistocleis samples (tree rooted in E. araios). Numbers on branches are SH-aLRT/UFBoot support values. Asterisks represent support above 80/95. The terminals of the tree are named as: original labelling of

Figure 3. Geographic location of sampled specimens (symbols) and type-localities of the nominal species (numbers). 1, Elachistocleis araios; 2, E. bicolor (here illustrated as the city of Buenos Aires; see Discussion); 3, E. bumbameuboi; 4, E. carƲalhoi; 5, E. cesarii; 6, E. corumbaensis; 7, E. erythrogaster; 8, E. haroi; 9, E. helianneae; 10, E. magna; 11, E. matogrosso; 12, E. muiraquitan; 13, E. nigrogularis; 14, E. panamensis; 15, E. pearsei; 16, E. piauiensis; 17, E. sikuani; 18, E. skotogaster; 19, E. surinamensis; 20, E. surumu; 21, E. tinigua.