Eleutherodactylus planirostris (Cope, 1862)
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.5287.1.1 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:78E23714-8973-4755-BC94-0A751D7D2B37 |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7967009 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/88502B73-FFBF-B850-FF6B-44D078400D86 |
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
scientific name |
Eleutherodactylus planirostris (Cope, 1862) |
status |
|
Eleutherodactylus planirostris (Cope, 1862) View in CoL View at ENA — Non-native; Established.
Hylodes planirostris Cope, 1862: 153 . Type material: None designated; type material originally at “Mus. Salem” (= PEM) apparently lost (Schwartz & Thomas 1975: 33) . Type locality: “ New Providence Island , Bahamas ” .
Greenhouse Frog
( Figure 5D View FIGURE 5 ; Tengah Forest)
Singapore records.
Eleutherodactylus planirostris —Groenewoud & I.S. Law, 2016a: 59 (Sembawang).—A. Tay et al., 2017: 103 (Clementi Woods).—A. Yeo et al., 2018: 1 (Dairy Farm Nature Park).—B.C. Ng, 2021: 135, 137 (Pang Sua Woodland).—L. Ong, 2022: 1 (Fort Canning Park).—Puniamoorthy et al., 2022: 1 (Mount Serapong, [Sentosa]).
Remarks. On 3 December 2015, one individual of E. planirostris was found at a housing estate in Sembawang (Groenewoud & Law 2016). Two years later, several individuals were found at Clementi Woods on 28 July 2017 (Tay et al. 2017) and one individual was found at DFNP on 18 November 2017 (Yeo et al. 2018), suggesting either multiple introductions or rapid dispersion away from its introductory site. We believe the former to be true as the colonisation of E. planirostris at unoccupied sites appears to be linked to construction works (A. Figueroa pers. obs.). Today, E. planirostris is very common and is found throughout Singapore, including CNR (A. Figueroa unpubl. data). Native to Cuba, Bahamas, and Grand Cayman ( Heinicke et al. 2011), E. planirostris has established populations throughout the Caribbean, U.S., Mexico down to South America, Hawaii, Guam, Philippines, Hong Kong, and Nigeria ( Kraus 2009; Ukpong et al. 2012; Lee et al. 2016). The main driver behind its expansion is the plant trade ( Kraus 2009), which is how E. planirostris is believed to have reached Singapore (Groenewoud & Law 2016). The populations in Hong Kong are regarded to have arrived via plants imported from the United States of America in the early 2000s, which in turn, exports plants to Singapore ( Lee et al. 2016). Molecular analysis into the origin of E. planirostris in Shenzen, China indicated that the species was introduced from Hong Kong, the Philippines, Panama, but most likely Florida, USA ( Hong et al. 2022). Presently, E. planirostris ’ impact to native fauna remains unknown. However, given its small size, occupancy of leaf litter, and insectivorous diet, we foresee E. planirostris possibly competing with species of Microhyla .
Occurrence. Widespread, excluding Nature Reserves and most Nature Parks. Common.
Singapore conservation status. Not Applicable.
Conservation priority. None, non-native species.
IUCN conservation status. Least Concern [2021].
LKCNHM & NHMUK Museum specimens. Clementi Woods Park: ZRC.1.13124– ZRC.1.13128 (09-Aug-2017) , ZRC.1.13129– ZRC.1.13131 (14-Aug-2017) .
Additional Singapore museum specimens. No specimens.
Singapore localities. Clementi Woods—Dairy Farm Nature Park—Fort Canning Park—Pang Sua Woodland— Sembawang—Sentosa—Tengah Forest.
Family Megophryidae Bonaparte, 1850 (2 species)
Megalophreidina Bonaparte, 1850: 1 (type genus Megophrys Kuhl & Van Hasselt, 1822 ).
Genus Leptobrachium Tschudi, 1838 (1 species)
Leptobrachium Tschudi, 1838: 81 (type species: Leptobrachium hasseltii Tschudi, 1838 , by monotypy; gender neuter).
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 |
|
Genus |
Eleutherodactylus planirostris (Cope, 1862)
Figueroa, Alex, Low, Martyn E. Y. & Lim, Kelvin K. P. 2023 |
Hylodes planirostris
Cope 1862: 153 |