Grypiscus scleromeris Miranda-Ribeiro, 1935

Caramaschi, Ulisses & Pombal Jr, José P., 2023, Type specimens of the species of Cycloramphus Tschudi, 1838 (Anura, Cycloramphidae) in the collections of the Museu Nacional, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, Zootaxa 5339 (5), pp. 465-480 : 477-478

Grypiscus scleromeris Miranda-Ribeiro, 1935

Grypiscus scleromeris Miranda-Ribeiro, 1935: 415 . Nomen novum for Grypiscus umbrinus sensu A. Lutz, 1929 (non Grypiscus umbrinus Cope, 1867 ).

Current name. Cycloramphus fuliginosus Tschudi, 1838 — Bokermann 1951: 81.

Synonymy. Name proposed as a junior synonym (“ nomen novum ”), as a replacement name for Grypiscus umbrinus sensu A. Lutz (1929) (non Grypiscus umbrinus Cope, 1867 ). Synonymized with Cycloramphus fuliginosus Tschudi, 1838 by Bokermann (1951: 81). However, as pointed out by Bokermann (1966: 42), in the work of A. Lutz (1929) there is no specimen associated to Cycloramphus umbrinus , which, by the way, A. Lutz (1929) considered a synonym of C. fuliginosus Tschudi, 1838 .

Types. According to Miranda-Ribeiro (1935: 415), “typo Mus. Inst. Osw. Cruz”, from “S.[Serra] da Bocaina ”. Frost (2023) added “now in MNRJ”. However, we do not find any specimen identified by A. Lutz as C. umbrinus from the “Serra da Bocaina ” in the AL-MN neither in the MNRJ collections. It is possible that the information in Miranda-Ribeiro (1935) was a mistake, which is more likely, or that the specimen was destroyed, which is improbable. Additionally, Heyer (1983: 266) reported that no one additional specimen of Cycloramphus with the characters described by Miranda-Ribeiro (1935: semipalmate feet and tuberculate tibia) have been collected in the Serra da Bocaina , although the area has been extensively surveyed.

Type locality. “S.[Serra] da Bocaina ” ( Miranda-Ribeiro, 1935: 415), probably in error.

Remarks. Heyer (1983: 266) considered Grypiscus scleromeris Miranda-Ribeiro, 1935 a nomen dubium. However, Bokermann (1951: 81) included that name as a synonym of Cycloramphus fuliginosus Tschudi, 1838 without discussion, and Bokermann (1966: 42) presented arguments favorable to this decision. In this way, the synonymy was followed by Frost (2023) and, in the absence of better indication, we accompany.