Phyllomedusidae Günther, 1859
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.4104.1.1 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:D598E724-C9E4-4BBA-B25D-511300A47B1D |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5458532 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03EA87A5-FFB6-1236-F398-8FA2317AF578 |
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
scientific name |
Phyllomedusidae Günther, 1859 |
status |
|
Family Phyllomedusidae Günther, 1859 View in CoL
Phyllomedusidae Günther, “1858 View in CoL ” 1859:346. Type genus: Phyllomedusa Wagler, 1830 , by monotypy.
Definition. Iris vertically elliptical; arciferal pectoral girdle, eight procoelous presacral vertebrae, separate calcaneum and astragalus, intercalary cartilages between terminal and penultimate phalanges, claw-shaped terminal phalanges, SVL from 45 mm in Callimedusa atelopoides ( Duellman et al. 1988) View in CoL to 119 mm in Phyllomedusa bicolor ( Venâncio & Melo-Sampiro, 2010) . Chromosome complement 2n = 26.
Content. Eight genera, 59 species.
Distribution. Neotropics, from Mexico to northern Argentina.
Etymology. The familial name is derived from the Greek phyll, meaning leaf, and the Greek Medousa. The name alludes to the gelatinous egg masses deposited on leaves of trees.
Remarks. Herein we include three genera that have not been recognized recently by previous authors. Two of these names are resurrected from the synonomies of Agalychnis and Phyllomedusa , whereas the third is new. Our maximum likelihood analysis includes 46 species, 78% of the known members of the family. In the parsimony analysis of 45 species by Faivovich et al. (2010), some of the same clades emerge as in our analysis. The principal difference is in the proposed classifications. Our proposal of three additional genera is a reflection on some of the species groups recognized by Faivovich et al. (2010). We recovered a major clade of phyllomedusids with 100% support. Within this clade are large frogs, genus Phyllomedusa (100% support), with vomerine teeth and another clade with 100% support of smaller frogs lacking vomerine teeth (100% support). Within the latter are two clades with significant support. One clade, Pithecopus (100% support), is characterized by having opposable thumbs and no bright flash colors. In the second clade, Callimedusa (78% support), the thumb is not opposable, and with one exception, all have bright flash colors.
No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.
Kingdom |
|
Phylum |
|
Class |
|
Order |
|
Family |
Phyllomedusidae Günther, 1859
Duellman, William E., Marion, Angela B. & Hedges, Blair 2016 |
Phyllomedusa bicolor ( Venâncio & Melo-Sampiro, 2010 )
Venancio & Melo-Sampiro 2010 |
Callimedusa atelopoides (
Duellman et al. 1988 |
Phyllomedusidae Günther, “1858
Gunther 1858 |
Phyllomedusa
Wagler 1830 |