Gastrotheca flamma, Juncá, Flora Acuña & Nunes, Ivan, 2008

Juncá, Flora Acuña & Nunes, Ivan, 2008, A new species of marsupial frog of the genus Gastrotheca Fitzinger (Anura: Amphignatodontidae) from the State of Bahia, Northeastern Brazil, Zootaxa 1907, pp. 61-68 : 62-66

Gastrotheca flamma sp. nov.

( Figures 1 , 2 and 3 )

Gastrotheca sp. Juncá, 2006.

Holotype. MZUEFS 657 ( Fig. 1 ), adult female, from Serra da Jibóia, Municipality of Santa Terezinha (12o 51'S, 39º28'W, 850 m altitude), State of Bahia, Northeastern Brazil, collected on 14 June 2001 by F.A. Juncá. Diagnosis. A species promptly identified as a member of the genus Gastrotheca by having a dorsal pouch, and overall similarities. The new species is characterized by SVL 55.3 mm; TL half of SVL; UEW 57% of IOD; skin on dorsum weakly granular; skin co-ossified on head, lacking transversal ridges; two supraocular tubercles (anterior largest); calcars present; tympanum rounded; snout truncate in dorsal view, nearly vertical in profile; Finger I longer than Finger II; discs much wider than digits; webbing poorly developed between Fingers II-III and III-IV; coloration: dorsal surfaces bright yellowish-brown, with dark-brown irregular blotches on dorsum, and transversal dark-brown bars on dorsal surfaces of the thigh, tibia, and forearm; transverse dark-brown interorbital bar and another of same color midway between eyes and nostrils; small irregular brown blotches on the lip; hidden surfaces of legs and ventral surfaces beige with irregular brown spots in gular region and on feet; small irregular brown blotches on dorsal surfaces of feet.

Comparison with other species. Gastrotheca flamma sp. nov. differs from G. albolineata by its smaller female size (55.3 mm in G. flamma sp. nov., 60.0 mm in G. albolineata ), head length similar to head width (HL about 101% of HW in G. flamma sp. nov., 89% in G. albolineata ), skin adherent on head (not adherent in G. albolineata ), snout nearly vertical in profile (snout obtuse in profile in G. albolineata ), larger TD/ED ratio (TD 72% of ED in G. flamma sp. nov., 55-65% in G. albolineata ), upper eyelid with two supraocular tubercles (absent in G. albolineata ), presence of a fleshy calcar appendage (absent in G. albolineata ), different foot webbing formula (I 2– 2 II 1–2 1/ 2 III 1–2- IV 1 1/2– 1 V in G. flamma sp. nov., I 1– 2 II 1– 2 III 1– 1 IV 1– 1 V in G. albolineata ), skin on dorsum slightly granulate (smooth in G. albolineata ), different color pattern (see figures of G. albolineata in Sachsse et al. 1999, Gressler et al. 2008, and Izecksohn & Carvalho-e-Silva 2008).

Gastrotheca flamma sp. nov. differs from G. ernestoi by its head length similar to head width (HL about 101% of HW in G. flamma sp. nov., 93% in G. ernestoi ), snout truncate in dorsal view and nearly vertical in profile (snout rounded in dorsal and lateral views in G. ernestoi ), larger ED/TD ratio (TD 72% of ED in G. flamma sp. nov., 65% in G. ernestoi ), upper eyelid with two supraocular tubercles (absent in G. ernestoi ), different order of finger lengths (II<I<IV<III in G. flamma sp. nov., I=II<IV<III in G. ernestoi ); webbing poorly developed between Fingers II-III and III-IV (absent in G. ernestoi ), presence of a fleshy calcar appendage (absent in G. ernestoi ), different foot webbing formula (I 2– 2 II 1–2 1/ 2 III 1–2- IV 1 1/2– 1 V in G. f l a m m a sp. nov., I 2–2 + II 2 2/3– 3 III 2-– 3 IV 3–1 2/ 3 V in G. ernestoi ), skin on dorsum slightly granulate (smooth in G. ernestoi ), different color pattern (see figures of G. e r n e s t o i in Caramaschi & Rodrigues 2007, and Izecksohn & Carvalho-e- Silva 2008).

Gastrotheca flamma sp. nov. differs from G. fissipes by its smaller female size (55.3 mm in G. flamma sp. nov., 82.5-110.0 mm in G. f i s s i p e s), head length similar to head width (HL about 101% of HW in G. flamma sp. nov., 87% in G. f i s s i p e s), smaller TD/ED ratio (TD 72% of ED in G. f l a m m a sp. nov., 80-85% in G. f i s - sipes), tympanum rounded (vertically elliptical in G. fissipes ), upper eyelid with two supraocular tubercles (absent in G. fissipes ), webbing poorly developed between Fingers II-III and III-IV (absent in G. fissipes ), presence of a fleshy calcar appendage (absent in G. fissipes ), different foot webbing formula (I 2– 2 II 1–2 1/ 2 III 1–2- IV 1 1/2– 1 V in G. flamma sp. nov., webbing vestigial in G. fissipes ), different color pattern (see description of color pattern of G. fissipes in Caramaschi & Rodrigues 2007).

Gastrotheca flamma sp. nov. differs from G. f u l v o r u f a by its smaller female size (55.3 mm in G. flamma sp. nov., 60.4-77.2 mm in G. fulvorufa ), head length similar to head width (HL about 101% of HW in G. flamma sp. nov., 94%% in G. f u l v o r u f a), snout truncate in dorsal view and nearly vertical in profile (snout rounded in dorsal view and obtuse in profile in G. fulvorufa ), larger ED/TD ratio (TD 72% of ED in G. flamma sp. nov., 50% in G. fulvorufa ), upper eyelid with two supraocular tubercles (absent in G. fulvorufa ), webbing poorly developed between Fingers II-III and III-IV (absent in G. fulvorufa ), presence of a fleshy calcar appendage (absent in G. fulvorufa ), different foot webbing formula (I 2– 2 II 1–2 1/ 2 III 1–2- IV 1 1/2– 1 V in G. flamma sp. nov., I 1 1/2–2 1/ 2 II 1– 2 III 1 1/2–2- IV 2 2/3– 1 V in G. fulvorufa ), skin on dorsum slightly granulate (smooth in G. f u l v o r u f a), different color pattern (see figures of G. f u l v o r u f a in Caramaschi & Rodrigues 2007, and Izecksohn & Carvalho-e-Silva 2008).

Gastrotheca flamma sp. nov. differs from G. m i c ro d i s c u s by its larger female size (55.3 mm in G. flamma sp. nov., 48.3 mm in G. microdiscus ), head length similar to head width (HL about 101% of HW in G. flamma sp. nov., 93%% in G. m i c ro d i s c u s), skin adherent on head (not adherent in G. microdiscus ), snout truncate in dorsal view and nearly vertical in profile (snout rounded in dorsal view and obtuse in profile in G. microdiscus ), larger ED/TD ratio (TD 72% of ED in G. flamma sp. nov., 60% in G. m i c ro d i s c u s), upper eyelid with two supraocular tubercles (absent in G. microdiscus ), webbing poorly developed between fingers II-III and III-IV (absent in G. microdiscus ), presence of a fleshy calcar appendage (absent in G. m i c ro d i s c u s), different foot webbing formula (I 2– 2 II 1–2 1/ 2 III 1–2- IV 1 1/2– 1 V in G. flamma sp. nov., I vestigial II 2 -– 3 III 2– 3 IV 3– 2- V in G. m i c ro d i s c u s), different color pattern (see figure of G. microdiscus in Caramaschi & Rodrigues 2007).

Gastrotheca flamma sp. nov. differs from G. pulchra by its larger female size (55.3 mm in G. flamma sp. nov., 32.6-34.2 mm in G. p u l c h r a), head length similar to head width (HL about 101% of HW in G. flamma sp. nov., 88%% in G. pulchra ), skin adherent on head (not adherent in G. pulchra ), larger ED/TD ratio (TD 72% of ED in G. flamma sp. nov., 60% in G. pulchra ), upper eyelid with two small supraocular tubercles (upper eyelid with only one tubercle in G. p u l c h r a), different foot webbing formula (I 2– 2 II 1–2 1/ 2 III 1–2- IV 1 1/2– 1 V in G. f l a m m a sp. nov. and I 2–3 1/ 2 II 1 1/2–3 1/ 2 III 1+–2 1/ 2 IV 2 1/2–1 1/ 2 V in G. pulchra ), different color pattern (see figure of G. pulchra in Caramaschi & Rodrigues 2007).

Description of holotype. Adult female with a dorsal pouch opened on sacral region but without eggs. Body moderately robust ( Fig. 1 A,B). Head rounded in dorsal view, slightly longer than wide; HL 36.9% of SVL. Snout truncate in dorsal and lateral views ( Figs. 1 A and 2A); canthus rostralis angular; loreal region concave; nostrils anteriorly positioned, directed laterally, IND 16.7% of HW; lips thin, rounded. Vomerine teeth in two patches between the choanae. IOD 34.5% of HW; eyes prominent. Upper eyelid with two supraocular tubercles (anterior largest; folded on the left eye due to preservation, but see Fig. 2 B). Tympanum ovoid, TD 18.62% of HL, 71.7% of ED; tympanic annulus distinct and ovoid, smooth. Distinct dorsolateral fold from supratympanic region to mid-flank. Arms robust, forearm hypertrophied. Axillary membrane absent. Hand large ( Fig. 2 C), with ridge on external surface of Finger IV to wrist; fingers long, robust; fingers lengths II<I<IV<III. Subarticular tubercles large, rounded; thenar tubercle large, round; palmar tubercle absent or weakly developed; few medium-sized supernumerary tubercles. Disks large, rounded with shallow groove on inferior surfaces of disks; 3FD 89.5% of TD. Webbing poorly developed between Fingers II-III and III-IV, absent between others; fingers fringed. Hind limbs long, THL 98.9% of TL; sum of THL and TL 146% of SVL. Tarsal fold and outer metatarsal tubercle absent; ridge on outer edge of Toe V to end of plantar region; inner metatarsal tubercle moderately large, ovoid. Distinct calcar fleshy, triangular (folded due to preservation). Toes long, robust ( Fig. 2 D); toe lengths I<II<V<III<IV. Disks slightly smaller than those on fingers; 4TD 78.9% of TD. Subarticular tubercles medium sized, rounded; supernumerary tubercles small, numerous. Interdigital webbing formula I 2– 2 II 1–2 1/ 2 III 1–2- IV 1 1/2– 1 V. Skin adherent on head; skin on dorsum slightly granular; skin on venter strongly granular, except smooth on tarsus, arms, and anterior surfaces of thighs.

Color. In life ( Fig. 3 ), dorsal surfaces reddish-brown, with dark-brown irregular blotches on dorsum and transverse dark-brown bars on dorsal surfaces of the thigh, tibia, and forearm. Markings on head consist of transverse dark-brown interorbital bar and another of the same color midway between eyes and nostrils; small irregular brown blotches on lip. Hidden portions of the leg and ventral surfaces beige, with irregular brown spots on throat and foot; small irregular brown blotches on dorsal surfaces of feet. In preservative ( Figs. 1 and 2 ), the color pattern is the same, but colors are faded.

Mesurements of holotype. SVL 55.3, HL 20.4, HW 20.3, IND 3.4, NSD 2.1, ETD 0.4, ED 5.3, IOD 7.0, UEW 4.7, END 5.4, TD 3.8, FAL 11.1, HAL 15.5, 3FD 3.4, 4TD 3.0, THL 27.6, TL 27.9, FL 38.0.

Geographic distribution. Known only from the type locality in the Serra da Jibóia, which has a maximum elevation of approximately 850 m and; this mountain range is located between the municipalities of Santa Terezinha and Elísio Medrado, State of Bahia, northeastern Brazil. According to Juncá (2006), this region is an ecotone between the biomes of Mata Atlântica (Atlantic Rain Forest) and Caatinga (dry open forest) (sensu Ab’Saber 1977), and is one of the westernmost points of Atlantic Rain Forest in the State of Bahia. This area lies between the vast dry open forest to the west, humid forest to the east, and “campos rupestres” in highlands ( Juncá 2006; for a brief description and discussion about the Brazilian “campos rupestres”, see Heyer 1999). Farms are distributed throught the mountain range, and only small remnants of forest are present.

Etymology. The specific epithet flamma , a noun in apposition, is a Latin substantive used in allusion to the color pattern, which resemble “fire”.

Figures

FIGURE 1. Dorsal (A) and ventral (B) views of the holotype of Gastrotheca flamma sp. nov. (MZUEFS 657; female, SVL 58.3 mm).

FIGURE 2. Detail of lateral view of the head (A), detail of the supraocular fleshy horns (B), hand (C), and foot (D) of the holotype of Gastrotheca flamma sp. nov. (MZUEFS 657; female, SVL 58.3 mm).

FIGURE 3. Gastrotheca flamma sp. nov., photographed in life (UEFS 657, holotype).