Cochranella oyampiensis ( Lescure, 1975 )

Guayasamin, Juan M., Cisneros-Heredia, Diego F. & Castroviejo-Fisher, Santiago, 2008, Taxonomic identity of Cochranella petersi Goin, 1961 and Centrolenella ametarsia Flores, 1987, Zootaxa 1815, pp. 25-34 : 29-32

Cochranella oyampiensis ( Lescure, 1975)

Centrolenella oyampiensis Lescure, 1975:100 . Holotype: MNHNP 1973.1673. Type locality: "village Zidok (Haut- Oyapock), Guyane Française".

Centrolenella ametarsia— Flores, 1987:185. Holotype: MCZ A96522. Type locality: “the headwaters of Río Caiwima, a tributary of the Río Amaca-Yacu, ca. 70 km NNE Puerto Nariño, Amazonas, Colombia (approximately 3°20' S, 70°20' W)”. New synonymy.

Cochranella ametarsia— Ruiz-Carranza and Lynch 1991:21.

Diagnosis. Among Glassfrogs, Cochranella oyampiensis is unique by having a green dorsum with small black spots, a small size (adults = 20 mm), transparent hepatic peritoneum, white gastrointestinal peritoneum, anterior third of ventral parietal peritoneum white, and a distinct prepollex. The only Glassfrog that could be confused with C. oyampiensis is C. helenae , which differs by having a yellow iris (grayish white with a fine dark reticulation in C. oyampiensis ), dorsum light greenish yellow with dark punctuations (green with dark with dark punctuations in C. oyampiensis ; Fig. 2 ), and a mostly white hepatic peritoneum (hepatic peritoneum mostly transparent, showing the brown liver, except for some iridophores on the upper border in C. oyampiensis ; Fig. 3 ).

Characterization. (1) dentigerous process of the vomer with one tooth or lacking teeth; (2) snout rounded in dorsal and lateral views; (3) tympanum visible, moderate in size, its diameter 25.8–35.4% of eye diameter; tympanic annulus visible except for posterodorsal border covered by supratympanic fold; tympanic membrane differentiated and translucent, pigmented as surrounding skin; (4) dorsal surfaces shagreen; males and females lack spinules; (5) ventral surfaces granular, a pair of enlarged tubercles below the vent; (6) anterior 25–40% of ventral parietal peritoneum white, posterior portion transparent; pericardium and gastrointestinal peritoneum white; (7) lobed liver covered by an almost completely transparent peritoneum except for its anterior part that may be covered by a thin layer of iridophores; (8) humeral spines absent; (9) webbing between Fingers I–III absent, moderate between outer fingers; webbing formula: III (2– –2 1/3) — (1+–2–) IV; (10) webbing between toes moderate; webbing formula: I 1 — (2– –2) II (1–1+) — (2–2 1/4) III (1+–1 1/2) — 2+ IV (2–2 1/3) — 1 V; (11) low ulnar fold, lacking iridophores; low inner tarsal fold present, lacking iridophores; outer tarsal fold absent; (12) nuptial pad Type I in males; distinct prepollex (distal portion separated from Finger I); (13) Fingers I slightly longer than Finger II (FII/FI = 0.840–0.921); (14) disc of Finger III moderate, its width 31.0– 42.3% of eye diameter; (15) in life, dorsum green with small dark flecks; bones green; (16) in preservative, dorsum lavender with dark flecks; (17) iris grayish white with a fine dark reticulation; (18) melanophores covering dorsal surface of Fingers III and IV, absent from Fingers I and II; (19) males call from the upper side of leaves; single and double note advertisement call of 0.10– 0.15 s duration, emphasized frequency of 4640– 5160 Hz ( Zimmerman & Bogart 1984); (20) fighting behavior unknown; (21) eggs deposited on the upper- or underside of leaves ( Lima et al., 2005); parental care unknown; (22) tadpoles unknown; (23) in adult males, SVL 17.1–20.1 mm (= 18.8 ± 1.250, n = 6); in two adult females, SVL 19.8–19.9 mm; Lima et al. (2005) provide the following data for the species in central Amazonia: SVL in males 17–21 mm, in females 21–24 mm.

Remarks. Our conclusions are the result of the analysis of morphological traits; however, we cannot rule out the existence of morphologically cryptic species, a possibility that has to be addressed with acoustic and/ or molecular data, unavailable now. The wide distribution of the C. oyampiensi s (from the Guianas across western Amazonia; Lescure 1975; Flores 1987; Lescure & Marty 2001; Lima et al. 2005; Guayasamin et al. 2006; Cisneros-Heredia & McDiarmid 2007b; Kok & Castroviejo 2008) opens the possibility of testing hypotheses of diversification through phylogeographic studies.

Figures

FIGURE 2. Color photographs of Cochranella pulverata (A: QCAZ 32066, photo by Martín Bustamante), Cochranella oyampiensis (B left: QCAZ 16652, photo by Santiago Ron; B right: MB 202, photo by Michel Blanc), and Cochranella helenae (C: IRSNB 13980, photo by Philippe Kok).

FIGURE 3. Photographs of preserved specimens of Cochranella oyampiensis. (A) Holotype of Centrolenella ametarsia, MCZ 96522; body cavity, RMNH 37670; dorsal and ventral views of ICN 50846.