Chiasmocleis haddadi, Peloso & Sturaro & Forlani & Gaucher & Motta & Wheeler, 2014

Peloso, Pedro L. V., Sturaro, Marcelo José, Forlani, Mauricio C., Gaucher, Philippe, Motta, Ana Paula & Wheeler, Ward C., 2014, Phylogeny, Taxonomic Revision, And Character Evolution Of The Genera Chiasmocleis And Syncope (Anura, Microhylidae) In Amazonia, With Descriptions Of Three New Species, Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History 2014 (386), pp. 1-1 : 63-67

Chiasmocleis haddadi , new species Figures 42–43 , plate 10

HOLOTYPE (fig. 42, pl. 10A–B): MNHNP 2011.0139 (field number PG 403 ), an adult male, collected by P. Gaucher, on February 21, 2005.

TYPE LOCALITY: Montagne Kotika (03 ° 569000N / 54 ° 119050W, 700 m), French Guiana.

PARATYPES: MNHNP 2011.0140, MNHNP 2011.0143–2011.0145, all collected with the holotype. IEPA ( FL 453–455, FL 511–513),

Igarapé Santo Antônio, Floresta Nacional do Amapá (1 ° 069040 N / 51 ° 539360 W), state of Amapá, Brazil, collected by J.D. Lima and A. Ferreira-Sobrinho in February 28 to March 20, 2005. IEPA ( TQ 1036), from Rio Anacuí, Parque Nacional Montanhas do Tumucumaque (1 ° 509410N / 52 ° 449280W), state of Amapá, Brazil, collected by J.D. Lima and J. R.F. Lima from February 22 to March 11, 2006.

DIAGNOSIS: A small sized species for the genus; SVL in males 13.7–18.2 mm (N 5 12); females unknown. Body ovoid, robust; head much narrower than body, snout rounded in dorsal and lateral views. Four distinctive fingers; all but FI slightly fringed, less fringed in females; fingers not webbed; FI reduced with a rounded or slightly pointed tip, subarticular tubercle usually absent, hardly visible if present; finger tips of FII–IV rounded, tips of FII and III swollen, may

512; all from Floresta Nacional do Amapá, Amapá, Brazil. Not to scale .

present discs; adpressed FI does not reach subarticular tubercle of FII; adpressed FIV reaches middle or distal margin of distal tubercle of FIII; thenar tubercle present in most individuals; relative finger lengths I,II,IV,III. Five distinctive toes, first slightly reduced; toes slightly fringed, less distinct in females; toes not webbed; TI with without subarticular tubercle; adpressed TI does not touch subarticular tubercle of TII; adpressed TV does not reach or reaches only the middle of the middle subarticular tubercle of TIV; TII–IV with terminal discs. Some males with few well-developed dermal spines on chin.

COMPARISONS Chiasmocleis haddadi differs from C. antenori in having four externally evident fingers (FI not evident externally in C. antenori ), five externally evident toes (TI not evident), toe tips rounded (toe tips pointed), and in having a reticulated venter (dark with scattered light spots). It differ from C. albopunctata in having a reduced first finger (well-developed finger in C. albopunctata ) and by its smaller size, its snout and dorsum lacking large white spots (snout and dorsum with large white spots in C. albopunctata ), its reduced FI (well-developed in C. albopunctata ), and its advertisement call. Chiasmocleis haddadi differs from C. anatipes by the absence or much-reduced webbing between toes in males (extensive webbing in males C. anatipes ) and its having a reduced first finger (well-developed finger in C. anatipes ) and a reticulated venter (light colored venter with large brown spots or blotches in C. anatipes ). The new species is distinguished from C. avilapiresae by: its smaller size, the absence of a subarticular tubercle on TI (present in C. avilapiresae ), the absence of or much-reduced webbing between toes in males (extensively webbed in C. avilapiresae ), its mottled venter (usually blotched in C. avilapiresae ), the lack of a femoral line (present in C. avilapiresae ), and its advertisement call. The new species differs from C. bassleri in body shape (more robust in C. bassleri ), in having a mottled venter (usually large dark spots over a light venter in C. bassleri ), by the absence of an inguinal blotch (present in C. bassleri ), and by the advertisement call (table 2). The new species differs from C. carvalhoi in having four externally evident fingers (FI not evident externally in C. carvalhoi ) and five externally evident toes (TI not evident). Chiasmocleis haddadi differs from C. hudsoni by: its dark brown dorsum (usually light brown or cream dorsum in C. hudsoni ), dark brown vermiculations on the throat (sometimes largely brown with small white spots), and its advertisement call (table 2). The new species differs from C. magnova in having finger IV fully developed, although reduced when compared to most other species (finger VI much reduced in C. magnova ), and by the dark brown reticulation on throat, chest, and undersurfaces of limbs (belly and undersurfaces of thighs beige with small light spots in C. magnova ). From C. royi the new species differs by having a reduced FI (fully developed in C. royi ), by the absence of a femoral line (present in C. royi ) and an externally protruding black vocal sac in males (protruding in C. royi ), and by its advertisement call (table 2). The new taxon differs from C. papachibe , sp. nov., by its smaller size, and in having a reduced first finger (fully developed with a distinct subarticular tubercle in C. papachibe ). Chiasmocleis haddadi is distinguished from C. shudikarensis by the absence of or much-reduced webbing between toes in males (males with extensive webbing in C. shudikarensis ), by the lack of spines on fingers of males (many spines in males of C. shudikarensis ), a femoral line (well-defined white line in C. shudikarensis ), and an inguinal blotch (present in C. shudikarensis ), and by its advertisement call (see text). From C. supercilialba , the new taxon differs by having a mottled venter (large dark spots or stains over a light venter in C. supercilialba ), by the absence of an inguinal blotch (present in C. supercilialba ), and by its advertisement call (see text). Finally, it differs from C. tridactyla in having four externally evident fingers (FI not evident externally in C. tridactyla ), five externally evident toes (TI not evident), rounded toe tips (toe tips pointed), and a reticulated venter (dark with scattered light spots).

DESCRIPTION OF THE HOLOTYPE (fig. 42, pl. 10A–B): Body ovoid, relatively robust. Head short, wider than long (HW 1.25 × HL); head much narrower than body trunk; snout rounded in dorsal and lateral views; nostrils not protuberant, positioned anterolaterally, directed laterally. IOD 2.2 ×IND. Canthus rostralis indistinct, round in cross section. Eyes are small. Occipital or supratympanic folds absent; tympanum not visible. Upper jaw projecting beyond lower; lower lip with truncate, trilobed anterior margin; tongue large, elongate, with free lateral and posterior edges, extended beyond the extent of the jaw; vocal slits present, one on each side of the tongue; choanae small, rounded, widely separated, anterior to eye; vomerine teeth absent. Vocal sac not externally evident.

Forelimb slender; FI reduced, FII, FIII, and FIV well developed; tips of FI and FII rounded; discs on tips of FIII and FIV; all fingers nearly round in cross section; no webbing between fingers; relative finger lengths I,II,IV,III; tips rounded, with small discs on FIII and IV. Subarticular tubercles present on all fingers, but inconspicuous on FI; one subarticular tubercle on FII and FIV, two on FIII; all tubercles well developed; no supernumerary tubercles; thenar tubercle present, rounded; palmar tubercle divided, not prominent. No dermal spines visible on arms, hands, or fingers.

Legs short (combined THL, TBL, and FL 1.6 ×the SVL), relatively robust, lacking tubercles, tibial and tarsal ridges, and warts; toes not webbed; TI weakly developed (tip fails to reach subarticular tubercle on TII), without subarticular tubercle; toe tips round- ed with small discs on all except TI. Inner metatarsal tubercle present. Subarticular tubercles present on all toes except TI, large but very weakly developed; no outer metatarsal tubercle. TI barely reaches proximal margin of the tubercle of TII; TV reaches distal margin of proximal subarticular tubercle of TIV; relative toe lengths I,II, V,III,IV; toes without dermal spines.

Skin smooth dorsally and ventrally.

MEASUREMENTS OF THE HOLOTYPE: SVL 14.4 , HL 3.5, HW 4.1, ED 1.7, IOD 3.0, IND 1.3, END 1.2, THL 6.2 , TBL 6.9 , FL 10.1 , 4 TD 0.6.

VARIATION: Dorsum uniform dark brown or mostly dark brown with scattered small white dots. Throat, chest, and ventral surfaces of limbs dark brown with small creamcolored spots; venter varies from dark with white dots to cream colored with intense dark brown vermiculations (fig. 43). In life, ligher portions of venter are blueish (pl. 10B, F) but may show some yellow regions (pl. 10D).

COLOR IN PRESERVATIVE: Dorsum and dorsal surfaces of limbs dark brown with scattered small white spots (usually associat- ed with small warts and more abundant on forelimbs). Throat, chest, and ventral surfaces of limbs dark brown with small cream spots; venter cream colored with intense brown vermiculations.

ETYMOLOGY: The specific epithet is used as a noun in the genitive case and honors Célio F.B. Haddad, friend, amphibian enthusiast, and professor at the Universidade Estadual Paulista, Rio Claro, São Paulo. We honor Célio for his invaluable contribution to South American herpetology, as well as for his continuous help (including on several Chiasmocleis- related matters), incentive, and friendship over the years.

CALL AND TADPOLES: The advertisement call of Chiasmocleis haddadi (fig. 44) consists of a series (164 notes/minute) of multipulsed notes (mean note duration 330 ± 40 ms; mean interval between notes 60 ± 20 ms) with a mean dominant frequency of 4146.5 ± 60.1 kHz.

TABLE 12 Uncorrected pairwise distances between 16S sequences of Chiasmocleis haddadi

REMARKS: An individual from Mont Bakra, French Guiana, previously labeled as C. hudsoni ( Fouquet et al., 2007) , included in the phylogeny (voucher specimen not examined) is sister to four samples of C. haddadi from Mont Kotika, French Guiana (all paratypes) (fig. 6), and is included in this taxon. Genetic distances between all specimens of Chiasmocleis haddadi included in the phylogenetic analysis are given in table 12.

DISTRIBUTION (fig. 31): Known from the type locality and from Mont Bakra in French Guiana, and from two localities in the state of Amapá, Brazil.

Figures

Fig. 42. Holotype of Chiasmocleis haddadi, sp. nov. (MNHNP 2011.0139), in (A) dorsal and (B) ventral views. SVL 5 14.4 mm.

Fig. 43. Variation of ventral color pattern in Chiasmocleis haddadi. (A) FL 454; (B) FL 513; (C) FL