Amolops albispinus Sung, Wang and Wang

Sung, Yik-Hei, Hu, Ping, Wang, Jian, Liu, Hai-Jun & Wang, Ying-Yong, 2016, A new species of Amolops (Anura: Ranidae) from southern China, Zootaxa 4170 (3), pp. 525-538 : 530-534

Amolops albispinus Sung, Wang and Wang sp. nov.

( Fig. 3 and 4 )

Holotype: SYS a003454, adult male, collected by Jian Wang, Zu-Yao Liu and Zhi-Tong Lyu on 26 January, 2015 from Mt. Wutong (22°34′54.8″N, 114°12′2.7″E; 260 m a.s.l.), Shenzhen City, Guangdong Province, China.

Paratype: 13 adult specimens, collected Ying-Yong Wang , Jian-Huan Yang , Run-Lin Li , Zu-Yao Liu , Jian Wang , and Zhi-Tong Lyu from Mt. Wutong at elevations between 85 – 500 m. Seven males: SYS a003364 by Ying- Yong Wang on 13 January 2012 , SYS a001509 by Jian-Huan Yang and Run-Lin Li on 5 March 2012, SYS a003271 and 3272 by Zu-Tao Liu, Jian Wang and Zhi-Tong Lyu on 16 September 2014, SYS a003452 by Jian Wang and Run-Lin Li on 26 January 2015, SYS a003473 by Zu-Yao Liu, Jian Wang and Zhi-Tong Lyu on 13 March 2015, and SYS a004511 by Zhi-Tong Lyu and Jian Wang on 22 October 2015; six females: SYS a001508, 1513, 1514, and 1526 by Ying-Yong Wang, Jian-Huan Yang, Run-Lin Li on 8 March 2012, SYS a003270 by Zu-Yao Liu, Jian Wang and Zhi-Tong Lyu on 16 September 2014, SYS a003453 by Jian Wang and Run-Lin Li on 26 January 2015.

Other specimens examined include five juveniles: SYS a001510 collected by Jian-Huan Yang and Run-Lin Li on 5 March 2012, SYS a001532 collected by Jian-Huan Yang and Run-Lin Li on 10 March 2012, and SYS a003474, 3475 and 3481 collected by Jian Wang and Zhi-Tong Lyu on 13 March 2015 from Mt. Wutong .

Diagnosis. The presence of an abdominal sucker in the tadpole is the diagnostic character for the genus Amolops ( Rao & Wilkinson 2007) . However, because the tadpole of the new species remains to be discovered, we assigned the new species to this genus based on the morphological and genetic similarity of the adult specimens to those of A. ricketti and A. wuyiensis .

Amolops albispinus sp. nov. is distinguished from its congeners by a combination of the following morphological characteristics: (1) presence of white conical spines on the upper and lower lips, loreal and temporal regions, excluding the tympanum; (2) relatively small body size, SVL 36.1–42.4 mm in adult males and 43.1–50.9 mm in adult females; (3) dorsal skin of body very rough with numerous raised large warts; (4) dorsal body olivebrown with dark brown blotches; (5) presence of strongly developed vomerine teeth; (6) absence of vocal sacs; (7) absence of tarsal glands; (8) absence of the dorsolateral folds; (9) presence of a circummarginal groove on the disk of the first finger; (10) absence of outer metatarsal tubercles.

Description of Holotype: Head width approximately equal to head length (HDW/HDL 1.0); snout short (SNT/HDL 0.4) and rounded in profile, projecting beyond lower jaw; nostril closer to tip of snout than eye; loreal region concave; top of head flat; eye large and convex (EYE/HDL 0.3); eye diameter shorter than snout length (EYE/SNT 0.9); canthus rostralis distinct; pineal body barely visible; tympanum small, edge faintly distinct; supratympanic fold broad, from back of eye to shoulder; choanae large; vomerine teeth on well-developed ridges, converging posteriorly; tongue cordiform, deeply notched posteriorly; vocal sacs absent.

Forelimbs moderately robust; hands moderately long (ML/SVL 0.3); relative finger lengths I<II<IV<III; finger tips on I–IV dilated to wide oval disks with circummarginal grooves, relative width of finger disks I<II<III=IV; nuptial pad on first finger prominent with strongly developed white conical spines; subarticular tubercles prominent, rounded; inner and outer metacarpal tubercle slightly elongated; no finger webbing or lateral fringes.

Hindlimbs long and robust (TIB/SVL 0.5; PL/SVL 0.5); relative toe lengths I<II<V<III<IV; tips of all toes expanded to well-developed oval discs with circummarginal grooves; subarticular tubercles oval and distinct; inner metatarsal tubercles laterally compressed and pronounced; outer metatarsal tubercles absent; toes fully webbed, webbing formula I1–1II1–2 ¾ III1–3IV3–1 following Savage (1997); lateral fringe present; tibio-tarsal articulation reaching snout, when hindlimb stretched alongside of body.

Skin on dorsal surface of head, trunk, and limbs very rough with numerous tubercles and large raised warts; prominent conical spines on the upper and lower lips, loreal and temporal regions, excluding the tympanum; numerous small tubercles and ridges on the throat and ventral surfaces of trunk and limbs; dorsolateral fold absent; posterior part of upper lip swollen; rictal gland prominent and ellipsoidal, posterior to corner of mouth.

Measurement of holotype (in mm). SVL 36.8; HDL 13.2, HDW 13.4; SNT 5.2; IOD 3.3; EYE 4.6; TMP 1.5; TEY 1.3; TIB 17.3; ML 11.4; PL 19.2; F2D 1.8; F3D 2.2; T4D 1.4.

Color in life. Dorsal surface olive-brown with raised dark brown blotches on the dorsal surface of head and trunk and small dark brown spots on the dorsal surface of fingers, upper arms, tarsi, tibias, thighs and toes; faint dark transverse bars on dorsal surface of fingers, lower arms, tarsi, tibias, thighs and toes; posterior edge of upper lip and rictal gland copper; white conical spines on upper and lower lips, loreal and temporal regions, excluding tympanum; nuptial pad and spines white; dorsal surfaces of discs on fingers copper; copper flecks on the lateral sides of body; ventral surface of the throat, chest, and belly opaque creamy white, some grey flecks on the throat and chest; ventral surface of the hands and feet dark grey; ventral surfaces of the upper arms, lower arms, tarsi, tibias, and thighs pink with copper flecks; rear of thighs copper with dark mottling.

Color in preservative. On dorsum, color fades to dark olive with dark brown blotches, transverse bars, and spots; ventral surface yellow with grey mottling on throat and chest; edge of the ventral surface of the belly with a hint of orange ( Fig. 3 ).

Variation. Measurements of type series are given in Table 3 . All specimens were very similar in morphology and color pattern. However, the main diagnostic character of this species (i.e., white conical spines on upper and lower lips, temporal and loreal regions), are obvious on adult males but subtle on adult females, which indicates that it is a secondary sexual character.

Comparisons. Morphologically, Amolops albispinus sp. nov. differs from A. ricketti , A. wuyiensis , A. daiyunensis , and A. hongkongensis (in parenthesis), to which it is most closely related ( Fig. 2 ), by the presence of white strongly developed conical spines on upper and lower lips and loreal and temporal regions, excluding tympanum (vs. absence; Fig. 3 ), and by the presence of numerous raised large warts on the dorsal skin of the body (vs. dorsal skin without such warts). Further, it differs from A. ricketti by having a relative small body size at SVL 36.7–42.4 mm in adult males (vs. 42.0–60.5), and 43.1–51.9 mm in adult females (vs. 53.5–67.0), and a dorsal color of olive-brown with dark brown blotches (vs. dorsal color olive-brown or brown with light-colored wormlike marks); from A. wuyiensis by the presence of vomerine teeth (vs. absence), absence of vocal sacs (vs. presence), and white nuptial spines (vs. black); from A. daiyunensis by the presence of vomerine teeth (vs. absence), absence of vocal sacs (vs. presence), prominent conical nuptial spines (vs. fine, particle-like), and absence of tarsal gland (vs. presence); and from A. hongkongensis by the presence of vomerine teeth (vs. absence), absence of vocal sacs (vs. presence), and prominent conical nuptial spines (vs. fine, particle-like).

In addition to the presence of white, strongly developed, conical spines on the upper and lower lips and loreal and temporal region, Amolops albispinus sp. nov. differs from the remaining 46 species of Amolops as follows: from A. akhaorum , A. aniqiaoensis , A. archotaphus , A. bellulus , A. chakrataensis , A. chayuensis , A. chunganensis , A. compotrix , A. cremnobatus , A. cucae , A. gerbillus , A. iriodes , A. jaunsari , A. kohimaensis , A. longimanus , A. mengyangensis , A. minutus , A. monticola , A. nyingchiensis , and A. vitrea by the lack of dorsolateral folds (vs. presence); from A. formosus , A. granulosus , A. jinjiangensis , A. kangtingensis , A. liangshanensis , A. lifanensis , A. loloensis , A. mantzorum , A. nidorbellus , A. tuberodepressus , and A. viridimaculatus by the presence of a circummarginal groove on disk of first finger (vs. absence); from A. afghanus , A. assamensis , A. himalayanus , A. indoburmanensis , A. marmoratus , and A. spinapectoralis by the absence of vocal sacs (vs. presence); from A. daorum , A. hainanensis , A panhai , and A. torrentis by the presence of strongly developed vomerine teeth (vs. vomerine teeth weak or absent); from A. caelumnoctis , A. medogensis , and A. splendissimus by a dorsal color of olive-brown with dark brown blotches (vs. dorsal color of green or bright yellow); and from A. larutensis and A. kaulbacki by the absence of outer metatarsal tubercles (vs. presence).

Etymology. The specific name, albispinus , refers to the “white spines” on the upper and lower lips, and loreal and temporal regions, which are the diagnostic features of this new species. As an English common name we suggest “White-spined Cascade Frog”.

Distribution and ecology. Currently, A. albispinus sp. nov. is known from the type locality of Mt. Wutong, and from Mt. Paiya, which is 30 km from Mt. Wutong, in Shenzhen City, Guangdong Province, China. This species is common in Mt. Wutong throughout the year, whereas, it was observed to be rare in Mt. Paiya (only one specimen (SYS a002436) found). It inhabits low to mid-elevation (60–500 m) rocky, fast-flowing streams surrounding by moist subtropical secondary evergreen broadleaved forests.

Figures

FIGURE 2. Bayesian inference tree derived from partial DNA sequences of the mitochondrial 16 S rRNA and COI genes. Numbers above branches are bootstrap support values for ML / BI inferences respectively.

FIGURE 3. Dorsolateral view of adult male holotype SYS a 003454 of Amolops albispinus sp. nov. in life; B: ventral view of the holotype in life; C: hand of the holotype in life; D: foot of the holotype in life; E: Dorsal view of the holotype in preserve; F: ventral view of the holotype in preserve; G: close-up of the head of the holotype in life.

FIGURE 4. Comparisons of morphological characteristics between Amolops albispinus sp. nov. and species in the Amolops ricketti and Amolops daiyunensis species groups. A: Amolops albispinus sp. nov.; B: Amolops ricketti; C: Amolops wuyiensis; D: Amolops daiyunensi; E. Amolops hongkongnesis. 1: dorsolateral view; 2: close-up of the head; 3: ventral view of the hand; 4: ventral view of the leg.

Tables

TABLE 3. Measurements [in mm; mean ± SD (range)] of the type series of Amolops albispinus sp. nov. See Material and methods for abbreviations.

A. albispinus sp. nov.
Males (n=8)	Females (n=6)	Juveniles (n=5)
SVL 40.0±2.2 (36.7–42.4)	48.3±2.8 (43.1–51.9)	25.7±5.2 (21.5–33.5)
HDL 14.3±0.7 (13.2–15.1)	17.4±0.8 (16.2–18.4)	8.2±1.3 (6.9–9.9)
HDW 15.2±1.1 (13.4–16.9)	17.8±1.2 (16.0–19.5)	9.5±2.0 (7.3–12.0)
SNT 6.0±0.7 (5.0–7.0)	6.5±0.9 (5.8–8.1)	4.0±0.6 (3.4–4.6)
IOD 3.5±0.5 (2.8–4.0)	4.0±0.5 (3.2–4.5)	2.4±0.5 (1.6–3.0)
EYE 5.0±0.6 (3.9–5.8)	5.6±0.4 (5.1–6.3)	3.7±0.9 (2.9–5.1)
TMP 2.1±0.3 (1.5–2.5)	2.8±0.5 (2.2–3.3)	1.2±0.4 (0.7–1.8)
TEY 1.4±0.2 (1.3–1.7)	1.8±0.5 (0.8–2.2)	0.7±0.2 (0.5–0.9)
TIB 19.4±1.9 (17.2–22.4)	22.9±2.1 (21.0–26.4)	12.9±2.7 (10.0–17.1)
ML 11.2±0.9 (9.7–12.3)	13.1±0.6 (12.1–13.8)	7.9±1.5 (6.5–9.8)
PL 20.1±1.4 (18.2–22.4)	22.7±1.5 (20.2–24.1)	12.5±2.3 (10.7–16.1)
F2D 2.1±0.2 (1.8–2.4)	2.4±0.4 (1.8–2.9)	1.3±0.4 (1.0–1.8)
F3D 2.5±0.2 (2.2–2.7)	2.8±0.3 (2.2–3.2)	1.5±0.4 (1.1–2.2)
T4D 1.4±0.2 (1.2–1.7)	1.6±0.2 (1.4–1.9)	0.8±0.2 (0.6–1.1)
HDW/HDL 1.1±0.1 (1.0–1.2)	1.0±0.0 (1.0–1.1)	1.2±0.1 (1.0–1.3)
HDL/SVL 0.4±0.0 (0.3–0.4)	0.4±0.0 (0.3–0.4)	0.3±0.0 (0.3–0.4)