Boulenophrys hengshanensis, Qian & Hu & Mo & Gao & Zhang & Yang, 2023

Qian, Tianyu, Hu, Ke, Mo, Xiaoyang, Gao, Zhiwei, Zhang, Na & Yang, Daode, 2023, A new species of Boulenophrys from central Hunan Province, China (Anura: Megophryidae), Vertebrate Zoology 73, pp. 915-930 : 915

Boulenophrys hengshanensis sp. nov.

Figures 3 , 4 , 5

Chresonymy.

Megophrys brachykolos - Mo et al. (2009), Shen et al. (2014), Gao et al. (2022)

Holotype.

HNNU 0706000A, adult female, collected by Youhui Shen from Nanyue Hengshan, Hengyang, Hunan Province, China in June 2007.

Paratypes.

HNNU 1997:6-17, adult female, collected by Youhui Shen from Laotage, Nanyue Hengshan, Hengyang, Hunan Province, China on 17 June 1997; CSUFT HS210602-603, 605-610, 612-616, and 618-620, sixteen adult males; CSUFT HS210604, 611, 617, and 621, four adult females, collected by KH and ZG from Nanyue Hengshan Scenic Area (112.714N, 27.277E, ca. 450 m a.s.l.), Nanyue District, Hengyang Prefecture, Hunan Province, China on 4 June 2021.

Etymology.

The specific epithet " hengshanensis " refers to Mt. Hengshan, the type locality of the new species.

Diagnosis.

Among the ten genera of the subfamily Megophryinae , the new species is assigned to Boulenophrys based on its slender body (vs. thickset and stocky in Brachytarsophrys ), a distinct tympanum visible (vs. concealed and invisible in Brachytarsophrys ), a narrower and non-depressed head (vs. enlarged and depressed in Brachytarsophrys , Grillitschia , Pelobatrachus , and Megophrys ), head without a transverse groove behind (vs. present in Brachytarsophrys , Pelobatrachus , and Megophrys ), the short temporal region being relatively closer to the posterior corner of eye (vs. elongated and far from posterior corner of eye in Grillitschia , Megophrys , and Pelobatrachus ), maxillary teeth present (vs. absent in Ophryophryne ), a small horn-like tubercle on upper eyelid present (vs. margin of eyelid smooth in Atympanophrys ), supratympanic fold distinctly curved over tympanum (vs. slightly curved or not curved in Atympanophrys ), asperities on lower jaw absent (vs. present in Xenophrys ), subarticular tubercles on fingers present (vs. absent in Jingophrys , Xenophrys , and Sarawakiphrys ), nuptial pad present on fingers I and II in breeding males (vs. absent in Sarawakiphrys , and absent or only present on finger I in Jingophrys ), and the absence of ventrolateral tubercles (vs. present in Jingophrys ).

Boulenophrys hengshanensis sp. nov. can be further distinguished from its congeners by the combination of: (1) body of moderate size of SVL 35.7-41.2 mm (n = 16) in males, and 37.5-50.2 mm (n = 6) in females; (2) hindlimbs short, heels not meeting each other when hindlimbs held at right angles to body, TIB/SVL 0.38-0.46; (3) tympanum rounded, upper margin concealed by supratympanic fold, TD/ED 0.48-0.63; (4) absence of vomerine teeth and vomerine ridges; (5) posterior margin of tongue not notched; (6) dorsum skin rough with several granules and not continuous X-shaped skin ridges in males, relatively smooth in females; (7) ventral surface smooth with rounded tubercles; (8) two metacarpal tubercles present; (9) distinct subarticular tubercles on bases of each finger; (10) fingers lacking webs and lateral fringes; (11) relative finger length III> I> II ≥ IV; (12) rudimentary toe webs, absent lateral fringes; (13) the presence of dense tiny spines on surface of temporal region, upper and lower lips, and from the loreal region to the tip of snout in males; and (14) in breeding males, nuptial pads with small dense spines on fingers I-II.

Description of the holotype.

Adult female, moderate body size, SVL 37.5 mm; head wider than long, HDL/HDW 0.97; snout short, with a bluntly rounded tip, SNT/HDL 0.33; eye large, with vertical pupils, ED/HDL 0.32; tympanum distinct and round, with upper border concealed by supratympanum fold, TD/ED 0.53; oval nostrils, orientated laterally, narial rim slightly prominent; absence of vomerine teeth and vomerine ridge; maxillary teeth present; rounded tongue with no notch at the posterior margin.

Fingers without webbing and lateral fringes; relative finger length III> I> II> IV; distinct subarticular tubercles present at the bases of each finger; large inner metacarpal tubercle, relatively small outer metacarpal tubercle, both distinctly visible.

Hindlimbs short, TIB/SVL 0.45; heels not touching each other when hindlimbs held at right angles to the body; toes with rudimentary webs and lacking lateral fringes; relative toe length IV> III> V> II> I; subarticular tubercles distinct at bases of toes I, II, and III, absent at base of toe IV, and very small and flat at base of toe V; inner metatarsal tubercle elongated and large, outer metatarsal tubercle absent.

Dorsal skin rough, with several posterior enlarged tubercles on dorsum and flanks; weakly X-shaped skin ridge and dorsolateral skin ridges on dorsum; small horn-like tubercle at the edge of each upper eyelid; supratympanic fold distinct and narrow, extending from posterior eye borders, curves down broadly through upper tympanum and gradually widen above insertion of arm; flanks with sparse tubercles; ventral surface of head and body granular; thigh smooth anteriorly, with dense tubercles posteriorly; pectoral and femoral glands prominent, the latter closer to knee than to vent.

Coloration of holotype.

In preservation, dorsally light brown without distinct markings; several brown narrow stripes present on lower arms, hands, thighs and shanks; dark brown pigmentation present on hindlimbs posteriorly where meets the venter. Ventrally, skin beige with light brown pigmentation; several dark brown blotches present on lower lip; a distinct, short, dark brown stripe longitudinally on throat; a dark brown, wide band present on ventrolateral margin of trunk; several brown spots scattered on belly; inner thigh almost clear proximally, with several brown spots on distal half; shanks and foots scattered with brown spots; pectoral and femoral glands clear, unpigmented; palm and sole brown with pale tubercles.

Coloration of paratype in life.

A color photograph of the holotype in life is available in Shen et al. (2014), but with a low resolution. The detailed description of the coloration in life was based on newly collected paratype specimens. - MALE. The following description is based on a male paratype CSUFT HS210605 (Fig. 4A-B ). The dorsal surface is light brown with dark brown markings; reddish small tubercles cover the dorsal surface; a wide dark brown band is present on each upper eyelid, and extends posteriorly where the two bands meet each other; the dorsal pattern shows several transverse bars; a distinct large X-shaped pattern is present on the middle of the dorsum; the intersection of the X-shape is elongated longitudinally; wide dark brown bars are present on dorsal surface of lower arms and hindlimbs, and form large blotches on elbows. The background coloration on ventral surface is dark purple; the skin on chin and chest is rather dark, with several white blotches and stripes that are embellished with red pigmentation; four distinct longitudinal stripes on throat; on the chest, the background skin color is gradually faded; dense red spots are distinctly visible, and extend laterally to flanks; two white pectoral glands are distinctly prominent; white blotches cover the most of the belly, which is scattered with grey and dark brown spots, and sparse red spots; the ventral surface of the thigh is purple, with white tubercles proximally and white blotches distally; two white femoral glands are distinctly prominent; the palm and sole are dark purple; the digital discs, palm tubercles are pale whitish-purple; the groin is pigmented red. Laterally, the enlarged portion of supratympanic fold above insertion of arm is beige; the iris is reddish-white; the sclera is golden; the tympanum is golden with dark brown pigmentation, with a distinct dark spot in the center. - FEMALE. A female paratype CSUFT HS210604 (Fig. 4C-D ) has a similar dorsal pattern to the description above; the ventral surface is paler, and with fewer reddish pigmentation; the inner aspect of thigh lacks white blotches, but with pale gray pigmentation and several black dots; the tip of toe is pink, with pale orange pigmentation.

Sexual secondary characteristics.

In male specimens, tubercles with tiny central spines are present on the surface of the temporal region, on the upper and lower lip, and from the loreal region to the tip of snout; similar spines are also present on the tubercles around the cloacal region, the inner aspects of thigh, shank, and tarsus. Several individuals show these spines on the outer aspect of the hindlimbs and lower arms, and alongside the ridge of supratympanic fold (CSUFT HS210602-603, 613, 616, 618-620). Nuptial pads are present on fingers I and II. Additionally, male specimens have strong arms during the breeding season, and show a rough dorsum with granules, while the dorsum of female specimens is relatively smooth.

Variation.

Measurements of all type specimens are shown in Table 2 . The relative finger length is III>I>II=IV in several specimens (CSUFT HS210601-603, 609, 611, 613-616). The extension of supratympanic fold above insertion of arm forms a depressed supraaxillary gland in two specimens (CSUFT HS210604, 620), and is slightly swollen in five specimens (CSUFT HS210606, 611-14), and is very swollen in several specimens (CSUFT HS210602-603, 605, 607, 609-610, 615-619, 621). In life, several individuals (CSUFT HS210608, 15, 18, 21) show an extremely dark skin on the venter and an absence of red pigmentation, sometimes rendering the longitudinal stripes on throat indistinguishable (CSUFT HS210615).

Advertisement call.

Call descriptions are based on the calls of male paratype CSUFT HS210614 (SVL 39.1 mm). Spectrograms and waveforms are shown in Fig. 5 . Six call groups with a total of 135 calls were analyzed. Each call group contains an average of 22.5 ± 2.9 (20-28) calls. Calls were an average of 100 ± 6.8 (87-123) ms in duration, with an average inter-call interval of 168 ± 48.7 (95-492) ms. Calls were repeated at a rate of 3.7 ± 0.1 (3.6-3.9) calls/s per call group. Each call consisted of 18 ± 1.6 (14-24) pulses. The dominant frequency was 2.7 ± 0.1 (2.5-2.8) kHz, no evident harmonics.

Comparisons.

By having a moderate body size of SVL 35.7-41.2 mm (n = 17) in males, and 37.5-50.2 mm (n = 5) in females, B. hengshanensis sp. nov. differs from the larger species B. binlingensis (vs. 45.1-51.0 mm [n = 3] in males), B. caudoprocta (vs. 70.8-81.3 mm [n = 3] in males, and 77.8 mm [n = 1] in female), B. chishuiensis (vs. 43.1-44.1 mm [n = 3] in males), B. jingdongensis (vs. 53.0-56.5 mm [n = 3] in males, and 63.5 mm [n = 1] in female), B. liboensis (vs. 60.8-70.6 mm [n = 8] in females), B. mirabilis (vs. 55.8-61.4 mm [n = 2] in males, and 68.5-74.8 mm [n = 2] in females), B. omeimontis (vs. 56.0-59.5 mm [n = 10] in males, and 58.0-72.5 mm [n = 3] in females), B. qianbeiensis (vs. 49.3-58.2 mm [n = 6] in males), B. sangzhiensis (vs. 53.0-60.8 mm [n = 7] in males, and 73.0 mm [n = 1] in female), B. shuichengensis (vs. 102.0-118.3 mm [n = 8] in males, and 99.8-115.6 mm [n = 7] in females), B. spinata (vs. 47.2-54.4 mm [n = 18] in males, and 54.0-55.0 mm [n = 2] in females); and the smaller species B. acuta (vs. 27.1-33.0 mm [n = 10] in males, and 34.4 mm [n = 1] in female), B. angka (vs. 31.2-32.1 mm [n = 2] in males), B. baishanzuensis (vs. 28.4-32.4 mm [n = 6] in males), B. cheni (vs. 26.2-29.5 mm [n = 15] in males, and 31.8-34.1 [n = 3] in females), B. congjiangensis (vs. 28.6-33.4 mm [n = 15] in males), B. daiyunensis (vs. 27.6-28.7 mm [n = 4] in males, and 33.7-35.6 mm [n = 3] in females), B. daoji (vs. 32.6-33.6 mm [n = 4] in males), B. frigida (vs. 30.3-31.8 mm [n = 4] in males), B. jiangi (vs. 39.5-40.4 mm [n = 2] in females), B. jiulianensis (vs. 30.4-33.9 mm [n = 9] in males), B. kuatunensis (vs. 26.2-31.4 mm [n = 24] in males), B. lishuiensis (vs. 31.0-34.8 mm [n = 2] in males), B. mufumontana (vs. 30.1-30.8 mm [n = 2] in males, and 36.3 mm [n = 2] in females), B. nankunensis (vs. 29.9-34.9 mm [n = 11] in males), B. ombrophila (vs. 27.4-34.5 mm [n = 5] in males, and 32.8-35.0 mm [n = 4] in females), B. rubrimera (vs. 26.7-30.5 mm [n = 8] in males), B. sanmingensis (vs. 28.0-30.6 mm [n = 12] in males, and 32.9 mm [n = 1] in female), B. shimentaina (vs. 28.0-30.6 mm [n = 12] in males), B. shunhuangensis (vs. 30.3-33.7 mm [n = 10] in males), B. tongboensis (vs. 26.5-31.5 mm [n = 5] in males), B. wugongensis (vs. 31.0-34.1 mm [n = 4] in males), B. wuliangshanensis (vs. 27.3-31.6 mm [n = 10] in males), B. wushanensis (vs. 30.4-35.5 mm [n = 10] in males), B. yingdeensis (vs. 33.2-35.3 mm [n = 4] in males), B. puningensis (vs. 31.7-34.6 mm [n = 4] in males), and B. hungtai (vs. 25.8-33.3 mm [n = 12] in males).

Boulenophrys hengshanensis sp. nov. differs from its phylogenetically closest congeners B. xuefengmontis , B. shunhuangensis , and B. mirabilis by heels not meeting each other when hindlimbs are held at right angles to the body (vs. just meeting in B. xuefengmontis , and overlapping in B. shunhuangensis and B. mirabilis ), the presence of dense tiny spines on the surface of the tympanic region, upper and lower lip, and from the loreal region to the tip of snout in males (vs. absent in B. xuefengmontis ), a relative finger length of III>I>II≥IV (vs. III>IV>II>I in B. shunhuangensis , and III>IV>I>II in B. xuefengmontis and B. mirabilis ), the upper margin of the tympanum concealed by a supratympanic fold (vs. tympanum with clear boundary in B. mirabilis ), a small horn-like tubercle on the upper eyelid (vs. large in B. mirabilis ), the absence of lateral fringes on the fingers (vs. presence in B. mirabilis ), an internasal distance larger than the interorbital distance (vs. smaller in B. mirabilis ), and the presence of distinct subarticular tubercles on bases of each finger (vs. indistinct in B. mirabilis ).

Compared to other congeners occurring in Hunan Province, B. hengshanensis sp. nov. differs by the absence of vomerine teeth and vomerine ridges (vs. presence of vomerine teeth in B. caudoprocta , B. jiulianensis , B. nanlingensis , and B. shimentaina ; B. xiangnanensis and B. yangmingensis lack vomerine teeth, but have weak or strong vomerine ridges), the unnotched posterior margin of tongue (vs. notched in B. cheni , B. nanlingensis , B. jiulianensis , and B. sangzhiensis ), by a small horn-like tubercle on the upper eyelid (vs. a large tubercle in B. caudoprocta , and B. jinggangensis ). Boulenophrys hengshanensis sp. nov. differs from B. cheni , B. lini , B. sangzhiensis [male only], and B. xiangnanensis by lateral fringes on toes absent (vs. moderate or wide fringes), by having only rudimentary webbing on toes (vs. 1/4 on each side of toe IV in B. sangzhiensis ), the absence of lateral fringes on fingers (vs. present in B. shimentaina ), the presence of distinct subarticular tubercles on bases of each finger (vs. absent or indistinct in B. shimentaina , and B. jiulianensis ), heels not meeting each other when hindlimbs are held at right angles to the body (vs. just touching or overlapping in B. cheni , B. jinggangensis , B. jiulianensis , B. lini , B. mufumontana , B. nanlingensis , B. sangzhiensis , B. shimentaina , B. tuberogranulata , and B. yangmingensis ), the upper margin of tympanum concealed by a supratympanic fold (vs. tympanum with clear boundary in B. jinggangensis , B. jiulianensis , B. lini , B. ombrophila , B. shimentaina , B. wugongensis , B. xiangnanensis , and B. yangmingensis ), the presence of dense tiny spines on the surface of the tympanic region, upper and lower lip, and from the loreal region to the tip of snout in males (vs. absent in B. tuberogranulata ), nuptial pads with small, dense spines present on fingers I-II in breeding males (vs. absence of nuptial pads in breeding males in B. nanlingensis , and nuptial pads with large spines in B. sangzhiensis ), a relative finger length of III>I>II≥IV (vs. II>IV>I>II in B. jinggangensis , II>IV>I≥II in B. lini , III>IV>II>I in B. cheni , II>IV=I>II in B. dongguanensis , III>IV=I>II in B. wugongensis , and III>I>IV=II in B. mufumontana ), and the presence of vocal sacs in males (vs. absent in B. caudoprocta ).

Furthermore, B. hengshanensis sp. nov. differs by the absence of vomerine teeth and vomerine ridges from B. daiyunensis , B. daweimontis , B. dongguanensis , B. fansipanensis , B. fengshunensis , B. frigida , B. hoanglienensis , B. insularis , B. jingdongensis , B. liboensis , B. lushuiensis , B. nankunensis , B. palpebralespinosa , B. puningensis , B. qianbeiensis , B. rubrimera , B. tongboensis , and B. yingdeensis , all of which have vomerine teeth, and it further differs from B. obesa , B. yaoshanensis , and B. xianjuensis , all of which lack vomerine teeth but have weak or strong vomerine ridges. Boulenophrys hengshanensis sp. nov. differs by the posterior margin of the tongue being not notche, from B. binlingensis , B. boettgeri , B. jingdongensis , B. kuatunensis , B. liboensis , B. minor , B. omeimontis , B. sanmingensis , B. spinata , and B. tongboensis , all of which have a notch on the posterior tongue. Furthermore, B. hengshanensis sp. nov. differs from B. baolongensis , B. hoanglienensis , B. insularis , B. lushuiensis , B. qianbeiensis , and B. shuichengensis , all of which have a weakly or feebly notched tongue on posterior margin, by having a small horn-like tubercle on upper eyelid. Boulenophrys hengshanensis sp. nov. differs from B. acuta , B. liboensis , B. palpebralespinosa , and B. shuichengensis , all of which have a large horn-like tubercle on upper eyelid, by lateral fringes on toes being absent. Boulenophrys hengshanensis sp. nov. differs from B. binchuanensis , B. boettgeri , B. jingdongensis , B. liboensis , B. qianbeiensis , B. sanmingensis , B. shuichengensis , B. spinata , and B. wushanensis (male only), all of which have moderate or wide lateral fringes on toes, by having only rudimentary webbing on toes, B. hengshanensis sp. nov. further differs from B. jingdongensis (vs. half-webbed), B. qianbeiensis (vs. one-third webbing), B. shuichengensis (vs. 1/3 one each side of toe IV), and B. spinata (vs. half-webbed). By the absence of lateral fringes on fingers, B. hengshanensis sp. nov. differs from B. daiyunensis , B. daoji , and B. tongboensis , all of which have lateral fringes on fingers. By the presence of distinct subarticular tubercles on bases of each finger, B. hengshanensis sp. nov. differs from B. wuliangshanensis , B. nankunensis , B. fansipanensis , B. hoanglienensis , B. frigida , and B. rubrimera , in all of which subarticular tubercles are absent or indistinct; it also differs in this trait from B. angka (subarticular tubercles only present on the base of fingers I-II). Boulenophrys hengshanensis sp. nov. differs by heels not meeting each other when the hindlimbs are held at right angles to the body from B. acuta , B. anlongensis , B. baishanzuensis , B. baolongensis , B. binlingensis , B. boettgeri , B. congjiangensis , B. chishuiensis , B. daoji , B. jiangi , B. jingdongensis , B. leishanensis , B. liboensis , B. lishuiensis , B. jiangi , B. obesa , B. omeimontis , B. palpebralespinosa , B. qianbeiensis , B. sanmingensis , B. spinata , B. tongboensis , B. wuliangshanensis , B. xianjuensis , B. yunkaiensis , and B. yaoshanensis , in all of which the heels are touching or overlapping. Furthermore, B. hengshanensis sp. nov. differs by the upper margin of the tympanum concealed by a supratympanic fold from B. acuta , B. boettgeri , B. dongguanensis , B. fengshunensis , B. hungtai , B. insularis , B. kuatunensis , B. leishanensis , B. lishuiensis , B. nankunensis , B. obesa , B. puningensis , B. rubrimera , B. xianjuensis , B. yingdeensis , B. yaoshanensis , and B. yunkaiensis , all of which have a tympanum with clear boundary. Boulenophrys hengshanensis sp. nov. differs by the presence of dense tiny spines on the surface of the tympanic region, the upper and lower lip, and from the loreal region to the tip of the snout in males from B. hungtai , B. puningensis , B. yaoshanensis , and B. yingdeensis , all of which are lacking these spines. Boulenophrys hengshanensis sp. nov. differs by nuptial pads with small, dense spines present on fingers I-II in breeding males from B. daiyunensis having no nuptial pads in breeding males; it further differs from B. daoji , B. sanmingensis , and B. angka , all of which nuptial pad only present on finger I, and from B. qianbeiensis , and B. spinata , both have large spines on nuptial pads. By having a relative finger length of III> I> II ≥ IV, B. hengshanensis sp nov. differs from B. daiyunensis (vs. III>IV>II=I), B. sanmingensis (vs. III>IV>II>I), B. tongboensis (vs. III>IV>I>II), B. dongguanensis (III>IV≥I>II), B. nankunensis (vs. III>IV>I>II), B. xianjuensis (vs. III>IV>I>II), B. puningensis (vs. III>IV>II=I), B. hungtai (vs. III>IV>II>I), and B. baishanzuensis (vs. III>IV>II>I). By the presence of outer metacarpal tubercle, B. hengshanensis sp. nov. differs from B. fansipanensis and B. hoanglienensis , in which the outer metacarpal tubercle is absent.

Distribution and Habitat.

The new species is currently only known from Mt. Hengshan, Nanyue District, Hengyang Prefecture, Hunan Province, China. The amphibian fauna in this area was first reported by Shen (1965), with a total of 14 amphibians recorded: Bufo gargarizans Cantor, 1842, Fejervarya multistriata (Hallowell, 1860), Hoplobatrachus chinensis (Osbeck, 1765), Quasipaa boulengeri ( Günther, 1889), Rana hanluica Shen, Jiang & Yang, 2007 (reported as Rana japonica japonica Boulenger, 1879), Pelophylax hubeiensis (Fei & Ye, 1982), Pelophylax nigromaculatus (Hallowell, 1860), Hylarana latouchii (Boulenger, 1899), Hylarana guentheri (Boulenger, 1882), Polypedates megacephalus Hallowell, 1861, Microhyla heymonsi Vogt, 1911, M. pulchra (Hallowell, 1860), and M. fissipes Boulenger, 1884. Due to the following checklist reported by Shen (1983), Andrias davidianus (Blanchard, 1871), Amolops sinensis Lyu, Wang & Wang, 2019 (reported as Amolops ricketii [Boulenger, 1899]), Zhangixalus dennysi (Blanford, 1881) were also recorded in Mt. Hengshan. A relatively comprehensive amphibian survey in Mt. Hengshan was conducted from 2006 to 2007 by Mo et al. (2009). These authors reported the new species (identified as B. brachykolos ) from the forest road between 744-900 m elevation during night surveys from 19:00 to 23: 00 h. They also recorded H. guentheri , F. multistriata , and M. heymonsi occurred between 200-300 m elevation; P. megacephalus and M. heymonsi between 600-700 m elevation; and Bu. gargarizans , R. hanluica between 1000-1100 m elevation. During our rapid survey conducted in June 2021, we observed Bu. gargarizans , Quasipaa exilispinosa (Liu & Hu, 1975), P. megacephalus , and A. sinensis to co-exist with B. hengshanensis sp. nov. at 450 m elevation. The calling activities of male B. hengshanensis sp. nov. started at about 18:00 h and did not decline until 23:00 h. Calling male frogs were found sitting in a roadside ditch, with shallow flowing water attaining the feet, or hide in the bush, or perched on low plants (Fig. 6 ).

Conservation status.

Mt. Hengshan is a relatively isolated mountain in Hunan Province (Fig. 1 ). Unsuitable habitat (e.g. farmland, country, rivers, and roads) and large regions with low altitude areas around Hengshan could be barriers to the dispersal of the new species. As noticed by Mo et al. (2009), Mt. Hengshan is protected by the Hunan Nanyuehengshan National Nature Reserve, but it is also a famous tourist destination (known as Nanyuehengshan Scenic Area). The potential threat to all amphibians in Mt. Hengshan is mainly human disturbance from tourist areas ( Mo et al. 2009).

Figures

Figure 1. Distribution map of Boulenophrys species in Hunan Province (A). The green spot in (B) indicates the collection site of Boulenophrys hengshanensis sp. nov. in China. The map in (C) represents a zoomed-in topographic map of Mt. Hengshan.

Figure 3. Holotype of Boulenophrys hengshanensis sp. nov. (HNNU 0706000 A, adult female). A Dorsal, B ventral views of body; C lateral view of head; D volar view of hand; E plantar view of foot. Scale bars equal to 10 mm.

Figure 4. Paratypes of Boulenophrys hengshanensis sp. nov. in life. A, B Male paratype CSUFT HS 210605; C, D Female paratype CSUFT HS 210604.

Figure 5. Advertisement call of Boulenophrys hengshanensis sp. nov. A 60 s waveform showing five call groups; B 2 s waveform; C respective spectrogram showing seven calls form male paratype CSUFT HS 210614.

Figure 6. Unvouchered calling male frog of Boulenophrys hengshanensis sp. nov. under a bush.