Rana umbraculata Bush 1952
Authors/Creators
Description
Identification of Rana umbraculata Bush, 1952
Bush (1952) distinguished R. umbraculata from R. vertebralis on the basis of its large size compared to the immature type of Rana vertebralis, and small differences in the pectoral girdle. These were later shown by Poynton (1964) to not be valid. The description, excellent photographs, and examination of the topotype NMSA 2608 shows that while most statements are not diagnostic, five refer to the Maluti River Frog—Interorbital space 1 to 1.25 the distance between nostrils; eye-tympanum slightly less than eye; fingers with small rounded discs or tubercles; web reaches terminal tubercle of toes; tympanum smaller than eye-tympanum distance. A single statement does not refer to all Maluti River Frogs—Heels meet but do not overlap when the limbs are folded at right angles to the body axis. The short legs of the type are illustrated in Tarrant et al. (2008 Fig 2 B). Note that the Tarrant et al. Figure 2 B is flipped horizontally. Examination of the paratypes NMSA 712, and NMSA 2608, a large 120 mm SUL topotype collected from the Umzimkulu River by Bob Crass in 1951 show that the heels overlap considerably, demonstrating that leg length is variable in the population.
Identification of Rana draconensis FitzSimons, 1948 and Phrynobatrachus lawrencei FitzSimons, 1947 Poynton (1964) assigned both these names as junior synonyms of Rana hymenopus Boulenger, 1920. This action is not in contention. I examined the types of Rana draconensis NMSA 734 and Phrynobatrachus lawrencei NMSA 669 confirming that these are typical Phofung River Frogs (Fig. 2).
DNA sequences. On the basis of a molecular study, Tarrant et al. (2008) placed the Phofung River Frog in the genus Amietia as it formed a clade with Amietia dracomontana (Channing, 1978) now a junior synonym of Amietia quecketti (Boulenger, 1894), plus two forms identified as Amietia angolensis (Bocage, 1866) and the Maluti River Frog. The genus Strongylopus formed a separate clade, represented by S. bonaespei (Dubois, 1980), S. fasciatus (Smith, 1849) and S. wageri (Wager, 1961). A new phylogeny of all the species of Amietia, using four genes, confirms that the Phofung River Frog is firmly embedded within this genus (A. Channing unpubl. data).
Notes
Files
Files
(2.8 kB)
| Name | Size | Download all |
|---|---|---|
|
md5:cd47dccc90ff7dbf3cb7b393ab967549
|
2.8 kB | Download |
System files
(14.4 kB)
| Name | Size | Download all |
|---|---|---|
|
md5:ad14884cc767d347c0f5b8f8ff2c525b
|
14.4 kB | Download |
Linked records
Additional details
Identifiers
Biodiversity
- Scientific name authorship
- Bush
- Kingdom
- Animalia
- Phylum
- Chordata
- Order
- Anura
- Family
- Ranidae
- Genus
- Rana
- Species
- umbraculata
- Taxon rank
- species
- Taxonomic concept label
- Rana umbraculata Bush, 1952 sec. Channing, 2015
References
- Bush, S. F. (1952) On Rana umbraculata, a new frog from South Africa. Annals of the Natal Museum, 12, 153 - 164, plates III - VI.
- Poynton, J. C. (1964) The Amphibia of Southern Africa: a faunal study. Annals of the Natal Museum, 17, 1 - 334.
- Tarrant, J., Cunningham, M. J. & Du Preez, L. H. (2008) Maluti Mystery: A systematic review of Amietia vertebralis (Hewitt, 1927) and Strongylopus hymenopus (Boulenger, 1920) (Anura: Pyxicephalidae). Zootaxa, 1962, 33 - 48.
- FitzSimons, V. (1947) Descriptions of new species and subspecies of reptiles and amphibians from Natal, together with notes on some other little known species. Annals of the Natal Museum, 11, 111 - 137, plates I - III.
- Boulenger, G. A. (1920) Descriptions of three new frogs in the collection of the British Museum. The Annals and Magazine of Natural History, 6, 106. http: // dx. doi. org / 10.1080 / 00222932008632416