Megophrys (Panophrys) shimentaina Lyu, Liu & Wang, 2020
|
publication ID |
https://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys..47983 |
|
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:96C50618-823C-4800-9348-97879B6B3B06 |
|
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/E9F8A869-8923-4C0F-8750-181EE0843A07 |
|
taxon LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:act:E9F8A869-8923-4C0F-8750-181EE0843A07 |
|
treatment provided by |
|
|
scientific name |
Megophrys (Panophrys) shimentaina Lyu, Liu & Wang |
| status |
sp. nov. |
Megophrys (Panophrys) shimentaina Lyu, Liu & Wang sp. nov. Figures 4B View Figure 4 , 5 View Figure 5 , 6A View Figure 6
Chresonymy.
Megophrys sp29 (SYS a002077, 2081, 4172-4173 in Liu et al. 2018)
Type material.
Holotype. SYS a004710 (Figs 4B View Figure 4 , 5 View Figure 5 ), adult male, collected on 27 April 2016 by Zhi-Tong Lyu and Yuan-Qiu Li from Shimentai Nature Reserve (24.4095N, 113.1095E; ca 370 m a.s.l.), Yingde City, Qingyuan City, Guangdong Province, PR China.
Paratypes. Eleven adult males from the same locality as the holotype: SYS a002077, 2081-2085, collected on 25-26 April 2013 by Run-Lin Li and Yuan-Qiu Li; SYS a004172-4173, collected on 27 July 2015 by Ying-Yong Wang and Yuan-Qiu Li; SYS a005448/ CIB 110015 collected on 19 August 2016 and SYS a005992-5993 collected on 20 June 2017 by Zhi-Tong Lyu and Yong-You Zhao.
Etymology.
The specific epithet shimentaina refers to its type locality, Shimentai Nature Reserve.
Common name.
Shimentai Horned Toad (in English) / Shí Mén Taí Jiăo Chán (石门台角蟾in Chinese)
Diagnosis.
(1) Body size small, SVL 28.0-30.6 (28.9 ± 0.9, N = 12) mm in adult males; (2) snout rounded in dorsal view; (3) tympanum clear, TD/ED 0.57-0.66; (4) presence of weak vomerine ridge and vomerine teeth; (5) margin of tongue rounded, not notched behind; (6) hindlimbs slender, heels overlapping and tibio-tarsal articulation reaching forward between tympanum to anterior corner of eye; (7) tibia 0.44-0.53 of SVL and foot 0.62-0.76 of SVL; (8) fingers with narrow lateral fringes, presence of indistinct subarticular tubercles at the bases; (9) toes with narrow lateral fringes and rudiment of webs, absence of subarticular tubercle; (10) presence of a small horn-like tubercle at the edge of upper eyelid; (11) presence of tiny, barely visible, black to dark brown spines on the whole dorsal skin, flanks, dorsal limbs, the region around cloaca, and rear of hindlimbs; (12) dorsal skin rough, a discontinuous "/ \"-shaped ridge with two discontinuous dorsolateral ridges on two sides on the back; (13) several large warts on the flanks; (14) supratympanic fold distinct and white, with tiny spines; (15) light brown above, a dark brown stripe on each upper eyelid; (16) single subgular vocal sac in males; (17) weak nuptial pads with serried olive nuptial spines, on the dorsal surface of the first and second fingers in adult males.
Comparison.
Comparative data of Megophrys (Panophrys) shimentaina sp. nov. with M. (Pa.) mirabilis sp. nov. and 42 recognized congeners of Panophrys are given in Table 4 View Table 4 .
Megophrys (Panophrys) shimentaina sp. nov. differs from M. (Pa.) mirabilis sp. nov. by the smaller body size, SVL 28.0-30.6 mm in males (vs. 55.8-61.4 mm in males), small horn-like tubercle at upper eyelid (vs. slightly large), presence of vomerine teeth (vs. absent), the presence of tiny spines on the whole dorsal skin, flanks, dorsal limbs, the region around cloaca, and rear of hindlimbs (vs. such spines absent), presence of vocal sac in males (vs. absent), and presence of nuptial spines in males (vs. absent).
Compared with the five Panophrys species previously recorded from the hilly areas among Guangdong, Guangxi, and Hunan, Megophrys (Panophrys) shimentaina sp. nov. differs from M. (Pa.) acuta by the small horn-like tubercle at upper eyelid (vs. slightly large), snout rounded in dorsal view (vs. strongly remarkably pointed), presence of vomerine teeth (vs. absent), presence of tiny spines on the whole dorsal skin, flanks, dorsal limbs, the region around cloaca, and rear of hindlimbs (vs. such spines absent), and overlapping heels (vs. not meeting). M. (Pa.) shimentaina sp. nov. differs from M. (Pa.) brachykolos by the smaller body size SVL 28.0-30.6 mm in males (vs. 33.7-39.3 mm in males), presence of vomerine teeth (vs. absent), presence of tiny spines on the whole dorsal skin, flanks, dorsal limbs, the region around cloaca, and rear of hindlimbs (vs. such spines absent), narrow lateral fringes on toes (vs. absent), and overlapping heels (vs. not meeting). M. (Pa.) shimentaina sp. nov. differs from M. (Pa.) nanlingensis by the presence of tiny spines on the whole dorsal skin, flanks, dorsal limbs, the region around cloaca, and rear of hindlimbs (vs. such spines absent), and tongue not notched behind (vs. notched). M. (Pa.) shimentaina sp. nov. differs from M. (Pa.) obesa by the smaller body size SVL 28.0-30.6 mm in males (vs. 35.6 mm in single male), presence of vomerine teeth (vs. absent), presence of tiny spines on the whole dorsal skin, flanks, dorsal limbs, the region around cloaca, and rear of hindlimbs (vs. such spines absent), narrow lateral fringes on toes (vs. absent), and overlapping heels (vs. not meeting). M. (Pa.) shimentaina sp. nov. differs from M. (Pa.) shunhuangensis by the presence of vomerine teeth (vs. absent), tibio-tarsal articulation reaching forward between tympanum to anterior corner of eye (vs. at the eye), and the presence of tiny spines on the whole dorsal skin, flanks, dorsal limbs, the region around cloaca, and rear of hindlimbs (vs. such spines absent).
With a small body size, SVL 28.0-30.6 mm in adult males, Megophrys (Panophrys) shimentaina sp. nov. is significantly different from 15 congeners whose SVL> 35 mm in males, namely M. (Pa.) baolongensis , M. (Pa.) binlingensis , M. (Pa.) caudoprocta , M. (Pa.) hoanglienensis , M. (Pa.) huangshanensis , M. (Pa.) insularis , M. (Pa.) jingdongensis , M. (Pa.) jinggangensis , M. (Pa.) latidactyla , M. (Pa.) liboensis , M. (Pa.) omeimontis , M. (Pa.) palpebralespinosa , M. (Pa.) sangzhiensis , M. (Pa.) shuichengensis , and M. (Pa.) spinata .
Megophrys (Panophrys) shimentaina sp. nov. can be further distinguished from the remaining 22 congeners by the following characteristics: vomerine teeth present [vs. absent in M. (Pa.) binchuanensis , M. (Pa.) boettgeri , M. (Pa.) cheni , M. (Pa.) jiangi , M. (Pa.) kuatunensis , M. (Pa.) leishanensis , M. (Pa.) lini , M. (Pa.) lishuiensis , M. (Pa.) minor , M. (Pa.) mufumontana , M. (Pa.) ombrophila , M. (Pa.) tuberogranulatus , M. (Pa.) wugongensis , M. (Pa.) wuliangshanensis , M. (Pa.) wushanensis , and M. (Pa.) xianjuensis ]; tongue not notched behind [vs. notched in M. (Pa.) cheni , M. (Pa.) boettgeri , M. (Pa.) fansipanensis , M. (Pa.) jiulianensis , M. (Pa.) kuatunensis , M. (Pa.) minor , and M. (Pa.) rubrimera ]; lateral fringes on toes narrow [vs. absent in M. (Pa.) daweimontis , M. (Pa.) dongguanensis , M. (Pa.) fansipanensis , M. (Pa.) jiangi , M. (Pa.) jiulianensis , M. (Pa.) leishanensis , M. (Pa.) lishuiensis , M. (Pa.) minor , M. (Pa.) nankunensis , M. (Pa.) ombrophila , M. (Pa.) tuberogranulatus , M. (Pa.) wugongensis , and M. (Pa.) wuliangshanensis ; wide in M. (Pa.) binchuanensis , M. (Pa.) boettgeri , M. (Pa.) cheni , and M. (Pa.) lini ; vs. absent in females while wide in males in M. (Pa.) wushanensis ]; rudimentary webs on toes [vs. lacking webs in M. (Pa.) daweimontis , M. (Pa.) fansipanensis , M. (Pa.) kuatunensis , M. (Pa.) lishuiensis , M. (Pa.) ombrophila , M. (Pa.) rubrimera , and M. (Pa.) wuliangshanensis ].
Description of holotype.
Adult male. Body size small, SVL 28.4 mm; head width slightly smaller than head length, HDW/HDL 0.95; snout rounded in dorsal view, projecting, sloping backward to mouth in profile, protruding well beyond margin of lower jaw; top of head flat; eyes large, ED 0.33 of HDL, pupil vertical; nostril oblique-ovoid; canthus rostralis well developed; loreal region slightly oblique; internasal distance slightly larger than interorbital distance; tympanum clear, in medium size, TD/ED 0.61; large ovoid choanae at the base of the maxilla; presence of weak vomerine ridge and vomerine teeth; margin of tongue rounded, not notched behind; presence of a single subgular vocal sac, a pair of slit-like openings at posterior of jaw.
Radio-ulna length 0.22 of SVL and hand 0.26 of SVL; hand without webs, fingers with narrow lateral fringes, relative finger length I ≈ II <IV <III; tips of fingers slightly dilated, round; one indistinct subarticular tubercle at the bases of each finger; inner metacarpal tubercle observably enlarged and the outer one smaller; nuptial pads with serried olive nuptial spines on the dorsal surface of the first and second fingers. Hindlimbs slender, tibio-tarsal articulation reaching forward to the posterior corner of eye when hindlimb is stretched along the side of the body; heels overlapping when the flexed hindlimbs are held at right angles to the body axis; tibia length 0.47 of SVL and foot length 0.67 of SVL; relative toe length I <II <V <III <IV; tips of toes round and slightly dilated; toes with distinct lateral fringes and rudiment of webs, without subarticular tubercle; inner metatarsal tubercle long ovoid and the outer one absent.
Dorsal skin rough; numerous granules densely arranged on the top of head, loreal region, lips, temporal region, dorsal body, flanks and dorsal limbs; several tubercles on upper eyelid, including a horn-like prominent tubercle on the edge; all granules and tubercles bearing tiny, barely visible spines; clear supratympanic fold with tiny spines, curving postero-ventrally from posterior corner of eye to a level above insertion of arm; tubercles and granules forming discontinuous "/ \"-shaped ridge and two discontinuous dorsolateral ridges on two sides at the central back; large tubercles and warts on the flanks; ventral surface smooth; several granules bearing black spines on the region around cloaca and rear of hindlimbs; small pectoral gland closer to axilla; a single large femoral gland on rear of thigh.
Coloration.
Light brown above in life; a dark brown stripe on dorsal surface of each eye; narrow dark brown transverse bands on forearms and hindlimbs; supratympanic fold white; dark vertical band below the eye; iris reddish brown; all spines black or dark brown; ventral surface pale; throat flesh color; scarlet spots on the chest; a large white blotch on the belly; a pair of lateroventral longitudinal broad black stripes with several white tubercles on two sides; ventral limbs flesh color with white spots; ventral hands and ventral feet brown, tips of digits pale brown; metacarpal tubercle and metatarsal tubercle reddish; pectoral gland and femoral gland white.
Variations.
Measurement data of type series are listed in Table 6 View Table 6 . All paratypes are extremely similar to the holotype but SYS a002082 has an “X” pattern on its back.
Distribution and ecology.
Currently, Megophrys (Panophrys) shimentaina sp. nov. is known only from Shimentai Nature Reserve, northern Guangdong. This toad is uncommon in its distribution areas. All individuals were found from two slowly flowing mountain streams between elevations of 210-500 m a.s.l. Males call on plant leaves from April to August, suggesting their breeding season corresponds to this period. Females and tadpoles have not been found.
Vocalization.
The advertisement calls of Megophrys (Panophrys) shimentaina sp. nov. were recorded from four males at 18-20 °C air temperature on 27 April 2016. Thirty calls with 96 notes are measured and the spectrograms are shown in Fig. 6A View Figure 6 . The advertisement call is made up of 3.8 ± 0.4 (3-4, N = 30) continuous click notes. Each call lasts 0.50 ± 0.07 s (0.36-0.58 s, N = 30) and each note lasts 85 ± 8 ms (64-101 ms, N = 96) with an interval of 67 ± 14 ms (44-121 ms, N = 71) between every two notes. The peak frequency measures at 4895 ± 124 Hz (4688-5156 Hz, N = 96).
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.