BOLETIM DO MUSEU NACIONAL

NOVA SÉRIE RIO DE JANEIRO - BRASIL
ISSN 0080-312X

ZOOLOGIA

N 527
o

12 DE AGOSTO DE 2010

NOTES ON THE TAXONOMIC STATUS OF ELACHISTOCLEIS OVALIS (SCHNEIDER, 1799) AND DESCRIPTION OF FIVE NEW SPECIES OF ELACHISTOCLEIS PARKER, 1927 (AMPHIBIA, ANURA, MICROHYLIDAE)1
(With 6 figures) ULISSES CARAMASCHI2
ABSTRACT: The taxonomic position of Elachistocleis ovalis (Schneider, 1799) is discussed and the taxon is considered a nomen dubium, referred to a species inquirenda. Five new species of the genus Elachistocleis are described. Elachistocleis helianneae sp.nov., from Humaitá (07o35’S, 62o40’W; 90m altitude), State of Amazonas, Brazil, is characterized by small size (SVL 22.6-28.7mm in males, 29.336.4mm in females), dorsum grayish brown with minute scattered light gray spots and a distinctive middle longitudinal light cream stripe from the tip of snout to vent, and venter immaculate clear cream, with a sharp color limit between the dorsal and ventral regions. Elachistocleis surumu sp.nov., from Vila Surumu (04o12’N, 60o48’W; 80m altitude), Municipality of Pacaraima, State of Roraima, Brazil, is diagnosed by the small size (SVL 19.6-27.0mm in males, 23.2-26.9mm in females), dorsum dark gray with small irregular clear gray spots scattered without forming defined pattern, mid dorsal longitudinal light stripe absent, venter gray with many irregular cream spots regularly distributed, including the throat area, and undefined color transition between the dorsal and ventral regions. Elachistocleis carvalhoi sp.nov., from Aragominas (07o10’S, 48o32’W; 345m altitude), State of Tocantins, Brazil, is separated by the medium size (SVL 24.0-31.9mm in males, 32.0-37.1mm in females), dorsum uniformly dark gray without marks or pattern, and venter and flanks grayish with large anastomosed whitish spots, producing a coarse marbled pattern, mainly on the chest. Elachistocleis bumbameuboi sp.nov., from UHE Ponta da Madeira, Municipality of São Luís (02o32’S, 44o18’W; 24m altitude), State of Maranhão, Brazil, is diagnosed by the medium size (SVL 26.9-28.8mm in males, 32.8-43.4mm in females), dorsum uniformly dark gray, without spots nor light mid-dorsal stripe, venter gray, with minute anastomosed whitish blotches, producing a salt-and-pepper pattern, extending to the ventrolateral region. Elachistocleis matogrosso sp.nov., from Cuiabá (15o36’S, 56o06’W; 177m altitude), State of Mato Grosso, Brazil, is characterized by small size (SVL 21.5-24.6mm in males, 29.0-33.2mm in females), dorsum uniformly grayish brown, a mid dorsal longitudinal light cream stripe from the post-cephalic dermal fold to vent, and venter immaculate clear cream, with a poorly defined color limit between the dorsal and ventral regions. The geographic distributions of the new species and of Elachistocleis bicolor and E. cesarii are realized and mapped.

1 2

Received on 17 de junho de 2010. Accepted on 23 de junho de 2010. Museu Nacional/UFRJ, Departamento de Vertebrados. Quinta da Boa Vista, São Cristóvão, 20940040 Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil. E-mail: ulisses@acd.ufrj.br. Fellow of Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq).

2

U.CARAMASCHI

Key words: Gastrophryninae. Elachistocleis helianneae sp.nov. Elachistocleis surumu sp.nov. Elachistocleis carvalhoi sp.nov. Elachistocleis bumbameuboi sp. nov. Elachistocleis matogrosso sp.nov. RESUMO: Notas sobre a posição taxonômica de Elachistocleis ovalis (Schneider, 1799) e descrição de cinco espécies novas de Elachistocleis Parker, 1927 (Amphibia, Anura, Microhylidae). A posição taxonômica de Elachistocleis ovalis (Schneider, 1799) é discutida e o táxon considerado um nomen dubium, relacionado a uma species inquirenda. Cinco novas espécies do gênero Elachistocleis são descritas. Elachistocleis helianneae sp.nov., de Humaitá (07o35’S, 62o40’W; 90m de altitude), Estado do Amazonas, Brasil, é diagnosticada pelo tamanho pequeno (CRA 22,6-28,7mm em machos, 29,3-36,4mm em fêmeas), dorso marrom acinzentado com pequenas manchas cinza claro espalhadas e uma característica linha longitudinal mediana creme claro desde a ponta do focinho ao ânus e ventre creme claro imaculado, com nítido limite de colorido entre as regiões dorsal e ventral. Elachistocleis surumu sp.nov., da Vila Surumu (04o12’N, 60o48’W; 80m de altitude), Município de Pacaraima, Estado de Roraima, Brasil, é caracterizada pelo tamanho pequeno (CRA 19,6-27,0mm em machos, 23,1-26,9mm em fêmeas), dorso cinza escuro com pequenas manchas cinza claro espalhadas sem formar padrão definido, linha longitudinal dorsal clara ausente, ventre cinza com muitas manchas irregulares creme regularmente distribuídas, incluindo a região gular, e transição de colorido indefinida entre as regiões dorsal e ventral. Elachistocleis carvalhoi sp.nov., de Aragominas (07o10’S, 48o32’W; 345m de altitude), Estado do Tocantins, Brasil, é separada pelo tamanho médio (CRA 24,9-31,9mm em machos, 32,0-37,1mm em fêmeas), dorso uniformemente cinza escuro sem desenhos ou padrão, e ventre e flancos cinza com grandes manchas esbranquiçadas anastomosadas, produzindo um padrão marmoreado grosseiro, principalmente na região peitoral. Elachistocleis bumbameuboi sp.nov., da UHE Ponta da Madeira, Município de São Luís (02o32’S, 44o18’W; 24m de altitude), Estado do Maranhão, Brasil, é diagnosticada pelo tamanho médio (CRA 26,9-28,8mm em machos, 32,8-43,4mm em fêmeas), dorso uniformemente cinza escuro, sem manchas nem linha clara mediana, ventre cinza, com pequenas manchas esbranquiçadas anastomosadas, produzindo um padrão de sal-e-pimenta que se estende até a região ventrolateral. Elachistocleis matogrosso sp.nov., de Cuiabá (15o36’S, 56o06’W; 177m de altitude), Estado do Mato Grosso, Brasil, é caracterizada pelo tamanho pequeno (CRA 21,5-24,6mm em machos, 29,0-33,2mm em fêmeas), dorso uniformemente marrom acinzentado, com uma linha creme claro longitudinal mediana desde a prega dérmica pós-cefálica até o ânus, e ventre creme claro imaculado, com limite de colorido pouco definido entre as regiões dorsal e ventral. As distribuições geográficas das novas espécies e de Elachistocleis bicolor e Elachistocleis cesarii são atualizadas e mapeadas. Palavras-chave: Gastrophryninae. Elachistocleis helianneae sp.nov. Elachistocleis surumu sp.nov. Elachistocleis carvalhoi sp.nov. Elachistocleis bumbameuboi sp.nov. Elachistocleis matogrosso sp.nov.

INTRODUCTION Currently, the genus Elachistocleis Parker, 1927 is composed by eight species, distributed in two ventral color pattern groups. One has immaculate chest and belly, involving E. bicolor (Guérin-Méneville, 1838) and E. ovalis (Schneider, 1799), and other with some kind of blotches or vermiculations on belly, including E. cesarii (MirandaRibeiro, 1920), E. erythrogaster Kwet & Di Bernardo, 1998, E. magnus Toledo, 2010, E. piauiensis Caramaschi & Jim, 1983, E. skotogaster Lavilla, Vaira & Ferrari, 2003, and E. surinamensis (Daudin, 1802) (FROST, 2010; TOLEDO, 2010; TOLEDO et al., 2010). LAVILLA et al. (2003) considered that three species in the genus are well defined and have associated name-bearing types and type localities. Elachistocleis piauiensis, described from Picos, State of Piauí, Brazil, has a small size (SVL 19.8-23.7mm in males, 21.1-28.3mm in females) and venter mottled in cream and gray, a thin and
Bol. Mus. Nac., N.S., Zool., Rio de Janeiro, n.527, p.1-30, ago.2010

NOTES ON THE TAXONOMIC STATUS OF ELACHISTOCLEIS OVALIS...

3

interrupted clear line on the posterior surface of thighs, and a large gland behind the posterior corner of mouth (CARAMASCHI & JIM, 1983); E. erythrogaster, described from São Francisco de Paula, State of Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil, presents size large (SVL 29.1-32.3mm in males, 34.0-37.6mm in females) and deep black throats in males and females, black and blue marbled lateral surfaces, flashy red-orange venter, and no femoral posterior stripe nor postcommisural gland (KWET & DI BERNARDO, 1998); and E. skotogaster, described from Los Toldos, Departamento Santa Victoria, Salta, Argentina, has a large size (SVL 27.5-28.5mm in males, 30.3-34.4mm in females), belly and legs densely spotted in brown, dorsal region uniformly dark brown mottled with black, without a light vertebral stripe, and postcommisural gland absent (LAVILLA et al., 2003). To this group must be added the recently revalidated E. cesarii, type locality Piquete, State of São Paulo, Brazil, with medium size (SVL 22.6-26.7mm in males, 28.6-36.0mm in females) and dorsum and limbs brownish gray with small white dots, throat darker than venter, chest yellow with gray marks, belly white or yellow with gray marks and reticulations reaching the flanks, orange femoral stripe, and small postcommisural gland present (TOLEDO et al., 2010), and the recently described E. magnus, type locality Fazenda Jaburi, Municipality of Espigão do Oeste, State of Rondônia, Brazil, with large size (SVL 31.8-36.6mm in males, 39.8-43.8mm in females) and dorsum and limbs uniform dark grayish with scarce minute brighter dots on the outer boundaries of the dorsum, a thin mid-dorsal white stripe from the vent to the anterior third of the dorsum, throat brownish dark, darker than chest and belly, venter gray with minute scattered white spots mainly on the belly and ventral surface of legs, large irregular white spots on the groin and axillary region, a broad, not well defined femoral light stripe, and large postcommisural gland present (TOLEDO, 2010). On the other hand, the three remaining and older species do not have name-bearing types nor defined type localities and LAVILLA et al. (2003) showed that two of them, E. ovalis and E. bicolor, are involved in a enormous confusion since 1841 and, in fact, later contributions not only did not solve the problem but contributed to increase the controversy. In its turn, E. surinamensis has been treated as a junior synonym of E. ovalis, as a senior synonym of Hypopachus pearsei Ruthven, 1914 (currently Relictivomer pearsei), or as valid species. Attempting to throw some light on the problem, LAVILLA et al. (2003) proposed that it would be advisable to consider the latter three species to fit with the characters that describe the genus Elachistocleis and that E. surinamensis would have a spotted ventral color, an evident light vertebral stripe, and would inhabit the northern portion of the generic range; E. bicolor would have an immaculate venter and would occupy the southern portion of the generic range (Argentina, Bolivia, Paraguay, Uruguay, and southern Brazil), restricting the type locality of the species to Buenos Aires, Argentina; and E. ovalis would have an immaculate, yellow ventral color and would occur in the northern portion of the generic range. Nevertheless, in this concept E. ovalis is not associated with any existing natural population. Additionally, LAVILLA et al. (2003) stated that these three taxa constitute, without doubt, complexes of species and the decisions presented respecting the definitions would be only operative frameworks for a necessary revision. Pending that extensive revision and in order to improve the taxonomy of the genus Elachistocleis, in this paper the taxonomic status of Elachistocleis ovalis (Schneider, 1799) is discussed and five new species of Elachistocleis are described from Brazil.
Bol. Mus. Nac., N.S., Zool., Rio de Janeiro, n.527, p.1-30, ago.2010

All syntypes are currently not known and certainly are lost and. SHAW. Eiförmige E. currently in the MNRJ). m. Brazil). “pictura II tab.B. CFBH (Célio F.C. SP. and JJ (Jorge Jim Collection. and small eyes. Brazil). FL (foot length).Ex Asia. Universidade Federal da Bahia. UEW (upper eyelid width).”].”) and currently synonymized under Xenopus Wagler.. (Rana ovalis. 1820) stated the locality for the species. ovalis. Curitiba.. HW (head width). Mus.1-30.527. MZUFV (Museu de Zoologia João Moojen de Oliveira. a second specimen in the “Museo Barbyensi”. 1799). Universidade Federal Rural do Rio de Janeiro. and one specimen in the “Gronovius Musei II no..2010 . FITZINGER (1826) considered that its distribution would be “. END (eye to nostril distance).CARAMASCHI MATERIAL AND METHODS Specimens examined. Belém. Rio de Janeiro. Smithsonian Institution. EI (Eugenio Izecksohn Collection. Measurements were taken on preserved specimens using digital callipers under a dissecting microscope to the nearest 0. moreover. TL (tibia length). n. Universidade Estadual Paulista.. MZUSP (Museu de Zoologia. IOD (interorbital distance). the latter would have been that described by GRONOVIUS (1763. 65”) and illustrated by SEBA (1735. ED (eye diameter).” [“E. Belo Horizonte. D. Universidade Federal de Viçosa. are housed in the following collections: MNRJ (Museu Nacional. 2010). USNM (National Museum of Natural History.. RJ. MG. MG.4 U. BA.. Brazil). long snout. Washington. MERREM. Besides. India. Salvador. The affirmation of CUVIER (1829) was disputed by DUMÉRIL & BIBRON (1841). IND (internarial distance).. PA. “Zoophylacii no. USA). since Fitzinger Bol. Campus de Rio Claro. Rio de Janeiro. Snout profile terminology follows HEYER et al. actually. the only figured specimen in S EBA (1735) is a Breviceps gibbosus (Linnaeus. RJ. THL (thigh length). 1827 (Pipidae) (FROST.. HL (head length). RESULTS THE TAXONOMIC STATUS OF ELACHISTOCLEIS OVALIS (SCHNEIDER. globose body. CHUNB (Coleção Herpetológica da Universidade de Brasília. Nac. ago. The type locality was not stated and it is impossible to infer where the syntypes were collected on the basis of cited collections and figures. 1758) (Brevicipitidae). 67”. (1990). 2010). no one of the earlier and contemporary followers of Schneider (e. N. UFBA (Museu de Zoologia. deposited in MNRJ). Abbreviations of the measurements are: SVL (snout-vent length). p. Pontifícia Universidade Católica de Minas Gerais. 1802. Haddad Collection. 37 f.. Seropédica. a species known from Republic of South Africa (FROST. Brazil).. AL-MN (Adolpho Lutz Collection. referred in the text and in the Appendix. Universidade de São Paulo. MCNAM (Museu de Ciências Naturais. CUVIER (1829) associated Engystoma ovalis with the genus Dactylethra ¯ “l’Engystoma ovalis Fitz. 3”) (SCHNEIDER. DF). 1802.S. Brazil). with gray dorsum and yellowish venter. The syntypes were originally one specimen in the “Musei Ducalis Brunovicensis”. DAUDIN. SP.. a genus created by him for species from Southern Africa (“le midi de l’Afrique . Schneider) Ex Asia. MHNCI (Museu de História Natural do Capão da Imbuia. a species with small head.. HAL (hand length). Brazil). Brazil). Brazil). est un dactylètre” ¯. 1799) Elachistocleis ovalis was proposed by SCHNEIDER (1799) as Rana ovalis. Brazil). India. who said that it was a mistake. Zool.g.1mm. PR. MPEG (Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi.

S. In doing that. although biologically indefinite. Oxyrhincus bicolor Valenciennes. yellow ventral coloration. p. presents a central problem given that the name E. Microps unicolor Wagler. This action was followed by KLAPPENBACH & LANGONE (1992). ovalis. including FROST (2010 and earlier versions). bicolor with E. adult . LANGONE (1995). Oxyrhincus bicolor Guérin. ago. (Fig. which would be really a “Dactylèthre. 62o40’W. by all subsequent authors (LAVILLA et al. The proposition of LAVILLA et al. Rio de Janeiro. based on the immaculate. having examined putative specimens from Surinam and from Buenos Aires [Argentina].. Rana bufonia Merrem. that is. Additionally.. they conceded that regarding this distribution and if the statement of FITZINGER (1826) is in error and Elachistocleis is really a neotropical taxon. taxonomically the name E.NOTES ON THE TAXONOMIC STATUS OF ELACHISTOCLEIS OVALIS. they considered that Engystoma ovale occurred in South America (“l’Amerique méridionale”). Rana ovalis Schneider.nov. Zool. Engystoma ovale. Rana ovalis Schneider. 13/XII/1979. Attempting to present an operative framework for a necessary revision of what they considered a complex of species. the absence of a type locality. ovalis threatens the later congener E. Nac.. n. Engystoma ovalis Fitzinger. DUMÉRIL & BIBRON (1841) included a list of synonyms with all names purportedly associated with that species: Rana ovalis Schneider.. (2003). This distributional concept was followed.527. and KWET & DI BERNARDO (1998). a name of unknown or doubtful application (ICZN. this name is not applicable to a neotropical taxon. Bol. they conceded that Fitzinger also included in his genus Engystoma the “Pipe lisse” of Daudin. 1999). without discussion. 90m altitude). however. considering the brief and poorly informative original description. Bufo surinamensis Daudin. MNRJ 6989. LAVILLA et al. In view of this. Moreover.1) Holotype – BRAZIL: AMAZONAS: Humaitá (07o35’S. 1999). that is. ovalis will “fit with the characters that describe the genus Elachistocleis.2010 . in a meeting abstract. 1799 and its current combination Elachistocleis ovalis is here considered a nomen dubium. but not recognized by other authors. if FITZINGER (1826) is correct and DUMÉRIL & BIBRON (1841) are wrong. L’Engystome ovale. associated to a species inquirenda. yellow ventral color described for both taxa. CARCERELLI (1992). N. and to prevent the threat to a well known species. a currently well established species. and Stenocephalus microps Tschudi.. bicolor.. a species of doubtful identity needing further investigation (ICZN. as a synonym of his Engystoma ovale. SPECIES ACCOUNTS Elachistocleis helianneae sp. proposed the synonymization of E.1-30. Fitzinger”. collected by Ulisses Caramaschi. 2003). they included under the same concept the two known color morphs.” In the account on the “I. 1838). the inexistence of a name bearing type or types. have an immaculate. (2003) stated that E. the impossibility to associate the name with an actual population. and inhabit the northern portion of the generic range. overlooking the statement of FITZINGER (1841) on the distribution of the species.” Concluding. the decision presented was based on the exclusion of those specimens considered under the name Elachistocleis bicolor (Guérin-Méneville. Rana ovalis Shaw. Mus. In fact. Bufo ovalis Daudin. with spotted and immaculte venters. 5 gave. ovalis was not associated to any known frog population in South America and. however.

.CARAMASCHI Paratypes – All from the type locality: MNRJ 4818-4820. slightly broader than long. A poorly defined transverse skinfold across back of the head. Postcommisural gland poorly developed. A. MNRJ 66886-66887.). ago.M. A. only slightly protruding.. dorsum ¯ smooth. The new species is readily distinguished from E. Snout subelliptical in dorsal view. triangular.527.nov.nov. loreal region flat. a broad irregular cream line on the posterior surface of the thighs. MNRJ 66890-66892. p. HL less than 90% of HW in E. 26/III/1975. MNRJ 66894. matogrosso). irregular (thin.. head small.Carvalho. collected with the holotype. E. Diagnosis – A small sized species (SVL 22. postcommisural gland poorly developed.Silva and C. collected by L.nov.) All other species in the genus Elachistocleis present some type of ventral color pattern (venter immaculate in E.3% of SVL. bicolor). Comparisons with other species – The three species with immaculate venters are E.Carvalho. by the presence of minute light spots on dorsum and dorsal surfaces of members (absent in E.M. collected by A.Caramaschi and C. equalling the eye diameter.M.Carvalho. characterized by head length slightly smaller than the head width.Silva. I/1975. MNRJ 66880-66882. Nostrils small.6-28. matogrosso sp. dorsolateral. bicolor). and by the sharp color limit between the dorsal and ventral regions (color limit between dorsal and ventral regions poorly defined in E. and larger than the upper eyelid width. venter immaculate cream.1% of SVL.Menezes. collected by U.6% of HW (x = 94. by the presence of the mid-dorsal stripe (absent in E. collected by U. collected by M. A.Silva.M.M. collected by A. 10/IX/1974. 04/I/1979.. protruding in profile. head width 25. head length 97% of head width and 24. collected by U. helianneae (dorsal gray color of dorsum of the snout invading the loreal region almost to the upper lip border in E. 24/I/1979. closer to tip of snout than to eye. matogrosso sp. bicolor). lips not flared. collected by D.Caramaschi and C. 13/I/1979.nov. MNRJ 66888-66889. the new species is separated by the mid-dorsal stripe extending from the tip of snout to vent (extending from the postcephalic dermal fold to vent in E. Interorbital space slightly convex. matogrosso sp.Silva. no spots on axillae or groin. Mus. collected by L. internarial distance smaller than the eye to nostril and interorbital distances. HL about 94.Silva.M. helianneae sp. Eyes small. sloping abruptly to the upper lip.nov. n.) Description of holotype – Body ovoid. a sharp color limit between the dorsal and ventral regions. a large light cream spot on the proximal internal surface of tibiae.Z.nov. Zool. almost two times the upper eyelid width.Silva. N. SD = 8. a distinctive middle longitudinal light cream stripe. 06-07/III/1975.M. Rio de Janeiro.6 U.Silva and C. collected by U.4mm in females).Silva. 19/III/ 1975. MNRJ 6687066871.1-30. 29.Silva and L. MNRJ 6990-6993.3-36. MNRJ 66872-66879. directed anterolaterally. n = 33)... From E.nov.Carvalho. MNRJ 66895. 13/I/1979. 26/II/1976. not protuberant. No cranial crests. by the presence of minute light spots on dorsum and dorsal surfaces of members (absent in E. 01/VI/1974. matogrosso sp. by the loreal region conspicuously white in E.nov. bicolor by the longer head (HL greater than 94% of HW in H. bicolor).M.Araujo and V. collected by C.03. helianneae sp.S. MNRJ 66893. bicolor.P. on 17/IX/1974. Canthus rostralis rounded. and by the stripe on the posterior surface of thighs broad. matogrosso sp.Caramaschi. well defined in E. bending Bol. MNRJ 66883-66885. MNRJ 4822.Silva and C.2010 . from the tip of snout to vent. Nac. and E.7mm in males.Carvalho.6. helianneae sp.M. collected by A. in preservative grayish brown with minute scattered light gray spots. MNRJ 6829668297. a narrow light cream stripe surrounding the knees and reaching the middle of the tarsus.Carvalho.Wrani.).

supranumerary tubercles absent. Lower jaw with truncate. Tympanum concealed. with subarticular tubercles developed. a poorly defined skinfold through dorsolateral region from the axilla to the groin. ago. not expanded externally. Bol. fingers slender.2010 .. Fig. nuptial pads or asperities absent.1..1-30.5mm). 1<2<4<3. SVL 26. n. and vomerine odontophores absent.nov. Vocal sac subgular. Tongue large. and head profile. A weak skinfold crossing the chest between axillae. palmar tubercle large. Zool. Vocal slits present. without a notch on posterior border. maxillary. N. rounded. dorsal and ventral views of body. Rio de Janeiro. free. Premaxillary.... Prepollex not evident.NOTES ON THE TAXONOMIC STATUS OF ELACHISTOCLEIS OVALIS.527. Arms moderately robust. trilobed anterior margin. divided longitudinally.Elachistocleis helianneae sp. no tubercles or crests on forearm. twice the size of the thenar tubercle. Nac. Choanae large. 7 downwards slightly behind the eyes to the shoulder. oval. Mus.S. subcircular.. tip of fingers not flattened or expanded. terminal grooves absent. p. widely separated. Relative lengths of fingers. holotype (MNRJ 6989. supratympanic fold absent.

8% of SVL. p. HW 6.0mm SVL. n. line surrounding knees and tarsus yellow.7. dorsum and dorsal surfaces of limbs grayish brown. an oval inner but no outer metatarsal tubercle. The females are bigger than males.6% of SVL.8 U. 1<2<5<3<4. besides the companionship in the home. a distinctive mid-dorsal light cream stripe. Measurements of holotype in mm – SVL 26. longitudinal mid-dorsal stripe yellow. Heel of adpressed legs not reaching axilla. the descripton of the holotype stands for males of the species.7. scattered. FL 12. a light cream stripe surrounding the knees and reaching the middle of the tarsus. throat gray. but has a manuscript label containing “Engystoma ovale bicolor (Val. a sharp color limit between the dorsal and ventral regions. robust.” The collection data are here considered in error.) / Assumpção . TL 10. but it is always present. due to an early labeling mistake or possible specimen exchange in some time of these almost 90 years in the collection. Dorsum and dorsal surfaces of limbs gray to dark gray. and in the laboratory work. In few specimens the middorsal stripe can be interrupted. do Paraguay / Coll. Nac. plantar tubercles absent. helianneae sp. HL 6. ago.6.3. size ranging from 26. subarticular tubercles developed.3. B. (2000) and in LIMA et al. Skin smooth above and beneath. stripe on posterior surface of thighs and spots on internal surfaces of tibiae orange red. Variation – Except for minor details in corporal proportions.8% of tibia length. in the field. venter uniformly yellow to greenish yellow. irregular black spots.2010 . helianneae are presented in table 1.5. tibia length 38. no spots on axillae and groin. HAL 5. no para-anal tubercles. / Miranda-Ribeiro [signed].S. N.CARAMASCHI Legs short. Size ranges from 23. with minute white dots scattered without forming a defined pattern. Thigh length smaller than tibia and foot lengths. heels touching when flexed legs held at right angle to body. Schouten 1929. in the Departments Beni and Santa Cruz (Fig. for her constant strength for the ups and downs of my professional and personal life. helianneae sp. and Rondonia. Pará. an irregular broad light cream stripe on the posterior surface of thighs. Rio de Janeiro. weakly fringed. Sum of thigh and tibia lengths 74. from the tip of snout to the urostile.4. Remarks – Good color pictures of E.5mm SVL and the intensity of the color of the throat can vary.nov. thigh length 36. Range. in the States of Amazonas. and in Bolivia. Zool.1. knee and heel with a transverse skinfold.8. THL 9.nov. in life are presented in DE LA RIVA et al. The specimen MNRJ 6949 fits the diagnosis for E. Bol. IOD 2. Etymology – The name of the species is given after Helianne de Niemeyer (MNRJ). supranumerary tubercles absent. dull white. knee and elbow widely separated when limbs laid along the sides. Toes slender.6).1.527. rounded. In preservative. no tibial or tarsal ridges. UEW 1. iris brown with intense black vermiculations. bicolor.2% of SVL. anal opening not modified.1-30. mean. a mid-ventral white line from the chest to vent. light cream spot on the proximal internal surface of tibiae.R.0 to 29. terminal grooves absent. and standard deviation of the measurements of the type specimens of E. free.. Relative lengths of toes.. venter immaculate..5. IND 1. Mus. crossed by a transversal white line between the axillae. (2006). identified as E. END 2.7. with small. throat grayish. tips of toes not flattened or expanded. thigh length 95. a large irregular.3 to 37.. Geographical distribution – Northern Brazil. ED 1.

80 0. 9 TABLE 1. C HARACTERS SVL HL HW IND END ED UEW IOD HAL THL TL FL R ANGE 23.7 10.1 1.. a broad irregular. poorly defined line on the posterior surface of the thighs. n.nov.7 1..3 11. and Décio F.3 1.9 11.8-15. MNRJ 25210. ago.8 13.0 2.2-1. 121m altitude).2 2.55-8.NOTES ON THE TAXONOMIC STATUS OF ELACHISTOCLEIS OVALIS.9 (n = 15) ¯ x 26. bumbameuboi sp. E.6-6.16 0. Rio de Janeiro.12 0.nov.4-7.. collected by Ulisses Caramaschi. 23.2 2.7-2. diagnosed by the head length shorter than the head width. in preservative dark gray with small irregular clear gray spots scattered without forming defined pattern.9 SD 2. postcommisural gland present.2-26. Mus.6-3.3 3.92 1.6.2-2.0mm in males.0-3.9mm in females). Comparisons with other species – The species with some kind of ventral color pattern are E. Nac.20 0.2-12. 20/X-10/XI/1998.4 1.6-2. dorsum uniform dark grayish with scarce minute Bol. and standard deviation (SD) of the measurements of the type ¯ specimens of Elachistocleis helianneae sp.527. venter gray with many irregular cream spots regularly distributed. erythrogaster. small.3-37. dorsum orange marbled with black and blue in females of E. and mid longitudinal light stripe absent.47 0.70 0. E.4 6. including the throat area.37 0. Diagnosis – A small sized species (SVL 19.nov. HL about 85. de Moraes Jr. skotogaster.2 11.93 0.7 2. blue.8 10.1-2.5 4.39 0.7 1.65-6.2 12.82 0. N.1-7. surinamensis. an undefined color transition between the dorsal and ventral regions.8 (n = 18) ¯ x 31.0 1.8 5.7 7. Paratypes – Collected with the holotype: MNRJ 25211-25300.0 SD 1.7 8. Vila Surumu (04o12’N. piauiensis.9 5.0 7.0-1. E. no light stripe on knee and tarsus.27 0.8 10.2-12. small.. (Fig.21 Elachistocleis surumu sp. carvalhoi sp.1 6.0-10. 60o48’W.4-11.09 0.1-30.6 5. defined white spots on axilla and groin.5 1.6 2. and E.5 1.85 5. and some orange in males.09 0. Zool.. 25302-25305. mean (x ). dorsum dark gray marbled with black..0 6.82 0.3 2.4 9.1-3. SD = 4.7-7.0 1.2) Holotype – BRAZIL: RORAIMA: Municipality of Pacaraima. E. E.35-2. E.S. n = 24).2010 .37 0.65 1.61 0. (n = number of specimens).16 0.18 0.52 1.5 8.6-27. Range (mm).27. The new species is distinguished from these species by the dorsal color dark gray with small irregular clear gray spots (dorsal surfaces dark gray with small white dots in E.0-29.83 R ANGE 26. 25338-25344.15 2.3 2.1 6.. erythrogaster.24 0. adult . 2530725326.2 9.5-13. cesarii.6 1.nov.5 5.29 0. Helianne de Niemeyer. dorsum smooth.6% of HW (x¯ = 85. magnus. cesarii. p.

piauiensis. supranumerary tubercles absent. heavily grayish spotted. loreal region flat. broader than long.S. 2003. Interorbital space slightly convex. p. Canthus rostralis rounded.. Mus. Thigh length larger than tibia and smaller than foot length. ago. venter gray. widely separated. in E.1-30. thigh Bol. 1998. with subarticular tubercles developed.. divided longitudinally. Relative lengths of fingers. KWET & DI BERNARDO. magnus.2010 . Rio de Janeiro.. venter dark gray or black with large yellow and small white spots in E. in E. marbled. A skinfold crosses the chest between axillae. only slightly protruding. robust. triangular. skotogaster. and venter gray with minute anastomosed whitish spots. Vocal slits present. Description of holotype – Body ovoid. head width 28.7% of head width and 25. fingers slender. a poorly defined skinfold through dorsolateral region from the axilla to the groin. twice the size of the thenar tubercle. 2010. mottled with dark brown in E. helianneae. supratympanic fold absent. magnus.. A transverse skinfold across back of the head. in E. The new species is readily distinguished from these species by having venter gray with many irregular cream spots regularly distributed and an undefined color transition between the dorsal and ventral regions. Choanae large. small. Legs short.nov. 1983. color in figures and/or described in KENNY. not protuberant. with hindlimbs largely black mottled in bright blue in E. subcircular. Postcommisural gland present. (chest yellow with gray marks and belly white or yellow with gray marks and reticulations in E. TOLEDO. CARAMASCHI & JIM. and E. venter dull white or light yellow. Prepollex not evident. Snout rounded in dorsal view. Nac. piauiensis. lips not flared. Eyes small. No cranial crests. Nostrils small. surinamensis. Premaxillary. 1969. NUNES et al. surumu sp.. Arms moderately robust. The three species with immaculate venters and a defined color limit between the dorsal and ventral regions are E. palmar tubercle large. in E. Tympanum concealed.527. almost two times the upper eyelid width. LAVILLA et al. oval. 1<2<4<3.10 U. skotogaster. closer to tip of snout than to eye. E. n.8% of SVL. no tubercles or crests on forearm. matogrosso sp. Lower jaw with truncate. venter red orange. nuptial pads or asperities absent. Sum of thigh and tibia lengths 80. maxillary.1% of SVL. venter grayish with large anastomosed yellow or whitish yellow blotches. terminal grooves absent. 2010). producing a coarse marbled pattern. dorsolateral. Vocal sac subgular. sloping abruptly to the upper lip. carvalhoi sp. Zool. protruding in profile. directed laterally.nov. bumbameuboi sp. N. dorsum dark brown mottled with black and white spots in E. rounded. tibia length 93.nov.2% of SVL. producing a salt-and-pepper pattern..3% of thigh length. trilobed anterior margin. dorsum dark gray or black with an evident light vertebral stripe in E. head length 89.CARAMASCHI brighter dots in the outer boundaries in E.nov. internarial distance smaller than the eye to nostril and interorbital distances. bumbameuboi sp.). Tongue large.nov. carvalhoi sp. and TOLEDO et al. cesarii. head small. mainly in the chest area. and vomerine odontophores absent. dorsum uniformly gray with scarce minute irregular bright dots in E. venter gray with minute scattered white spots. not expanded externally. by the venter and throat gray with many irregular yellow spots regularly distributed in E. surinamensis. dorsum uniformly brown or dark gray without marks in E. erythrogaster. bending downwards slightly behind the eyes to the shoulder.nov. and E. without a notch on posterior border. bicolor... tip of fingers not flattened or expanded. mainly on the belly and ventral surfaces of legs. and larger than the eye diameter and upper eyelid width. free. 2010.

1-30.4mm).527.S. Bol. Toes slender. free. an undefined color transition between the dorsal and ventral regions. p. 1<2<5<3<4.. and head profile.0% of SVL. heels touching when flexed legs held at right angle to body. venter gray with many irregular cream spots regularly distributed. dorsum dark gray with small irregular gray spots scattered without forming defined pattern. anal opening not modified. Nac. Zool. internal sufaces of tibiae with white spots. In preservative. tips of toes not flattened or expanded. supranumerary tubercles absent. knee and elbow widely separated when limbs laid along the sides.nov.2. not fringed. Rio de Janeiro. N. no para-anal tubercles. Relative lengths of toes. length 41. terminal grooves absent. no light stripe on knee and tarsus. dorsal and ventral views of body. knee and heel with a weak transversal skinfold. plantar tubercles absent. ago. n.. rounded.. and mid-longitudinal light stripe absent.2010 ..Elachistocleis surumu sp. small.8% of SVL...NOTES ON THE TAXONOMIC STATUS OF ELACHISTOCLEIS OVALIS. Heel of adpressed legs failing to reach axilla. a short irregular. tibia length 39. SVL 25. subarticular tubercles developed. holotype (MNRJ 25210. poorly defined cream line on the posterior surface of the thighs. Skin smooth above and beneath. a small oval inner but no outer metatarsal tubercle. defined white spots on axilla and groin. no tibial or tarsal ridges. 11 Fig. Mus.

6.6. TABLE 2. MNRJ 51385. FL 11. a noun in apposition.4 2.Carneiro. adult .9mm SVL. northern Brazil.35 9.11 0.7 0. HL 6.7 2. groin.17 0.9 6.6 to 27. CHARACTERS SVL HL HW IND END ED UEW IOD HAL THL TL FL RANGE 19.39 0.05-5.6.2 2.52 1. Size ranges from 19. 257m).. END 2. Santa Fé do Araguaia (07o09’S.61 0.2 SD 1. Paratypes – BRAZIL: TOCANTINS: Collected with the holotype.9-2. IND 1.9 5. UEW 1. Geographical distribution – Northern Brazil.1.40 0. based on a photograph of a recently preserved specimen not specified.76 Elachistocleis carvalhoi sp.Pereira and P.65 8.13 0.6-27.3-1.Fatorelli and L. mean (x ).5 5.7 7.6 SD 1.14 0. HW 7. orange red.1 8.2 to 26.69 1.9 5. 48o32’W.3) Holotype – BRAZIL: TOCANTINS: Aragominas (07o10’S.7 5. (Fig..2 6.1-11. IOD 2. 28/XI/2007.2 8.6 (n = 4) ¯ x 25. 25/XI/2007.2 1.0-1.94 0. Range (mm).3-7. VI/2007.8.4 1.6-5. MNRJ 51384 . a small village currently included in the Reserva Indígena Raposa Serra do Sol. collected by P.06 RAN GE 23. 12 Measurements of holotype in mm – SVL 25.4.4 8.9-7.17 0.2 5.9-1. Remarks – The color in life.4.7 1. MNRJ 51386. presents dorsum and flanks dark gray with small irregular light gray spots. the descripton of the holotype stands for males of the species.6.0 1. Range.6 7. venter. size ranging from 23.9 8.1 5.F.3 9.19 0. 190m).5-1.55 2. (n = number of specimens).09 0.8 4.2-26. TL 9. and standard deviation of the measurements of the type specimens of E.2.6). posterior surface of tibia.88 0. 48o42’W.0mm SVL and the intensity of the color of the throat can vary.Machado.2-9.4-2.0 4. MNRJ 48220.3 2. The females are slightly bigger than males.4-2. throat. and standard deviation (SD) of the measurements of the type ¯ specimens of Elachistocleis surumu sp.2 1.4 (n = 20) ¯ x 23.3-10. and thigh stripe.1-2.G. spots on axilla.3 2.15 1.C.nov. mean. PARÁ: Canaã dos Carajás (06o30’S. iris brown with intense black vermiculations. and undersurfaces of limbs black with many irregular yellow spots. EPHIPPIUM.Machado. 48o25’W.5 1. Nova Olinda (07o38’S. in the State of Roraima (Fig. .0 1.1-7.Fatorelli and L. is an allusion to the type locality.5-13.23 0.1.6 9.11 0.9.1-9.65 1.21 0.6 1.51 0. are presented in table 2.4-1. Etymology – The name of the species.4.5 1.3 9. 345m altitude).3-11. collected by P.6 5. THL 10.nov.2 1. collected by E.POSIÇÃO TAXONÔMICA DAS “VARIEDADES” DE B.27 1. HAL 5. Variation – Except for minor details in corporal proportions.2 1.44 0. surumu sp.nov.49 0. in the State of Roraima. ED 1.7-2.12 0.7-5.9 11.9 5.

49o07’W. E. Nac. 16/XI/2007.6% of HW (x = 86. 150m).Assis. piauiensis. in ¯ preservative uniformly dark gray without marks or pattern.. postcommisural gland developed. 2003. by the venter grayish with large anastomosed yellow or whitish yellow blotches. Comparisons with other species – The species with some kind of ventral color pattern are E. HL about 86. venter red orange. III/2003. 48o52’W. 32. cesarii. 1969. E. surinamensis. 215m). venter dark gray or black with large yellow and small white spots in E. erythrogaster. N. collected by V. dorsum uniformly gray with scarce minute irregular bright dots in E. skotogaster. n. marbled. in E.38. a broad irregular. MNRJ 60285. Rio de Janeiro. n = 9).NOTES ON THE TAXONOMIC STATUS OF ELACHISTOCLEIS OVALIS. NUNES et al. and E. collected by P.0-31. 07/VI/2009. p..2010 . 84m). 2010.. groin. dorsum dark gray or black with an evident light vertebral stripe in E. 05/II/2008.Fatorelli and L. piauiensis.Wogel and R. MNRJ 52734. venter and flanks grayish with large anastomosed whitish spots.Machado. The new species is distinguished from these species by the dorsum uniformly brown or dark gray without marks (dorsal surfaces dark gray with small white dots in E.. dorsum dark brown mottled with black and white spots in E. in E. Bol. and an undefined color transition between the dorsal and ventral regions. ago. cesarii. mottled with dark brown in E..6. mainly on the chest. bumbameuboi sp. E.. venter gray with minute scattered white spots. cesarii. bumbameuboi sp. SD = 6. 2010. dorsum dark gray with small irregular clear gray spots in E.B. E. 210m). E. surumu. Zool. no light stripe on knee and tarsus. surinamensis. The three species with immaculate venter and a sharp color limit between the dorsal and ventral regions are E. Diagnosis – A medium sized species (SVL 24. dorsum orange marbled with black and blue in females of E. producing a coarse marbled pattern. The new species is readily distinguished from these species by having venter grayish with large anastomosed yellow or whitish yellow blotches. 2010). magnus. Mus. MNRJ 51387. Marabá (05o22’S. Reserva Mãe Maria. MNRJ 58858. color in figures and/or described in KENNY. producing a coarse marbled pattern. and E. dorsum uniformly dark gray or black without marks in E. E. and posterior surfaces of tibiae.1mm in females). 1983.nov. heavily grayish spotted. E. LAVILLA et al.Bérnils. with hindlimbs largely black mottled in bright blue in E.D.S. mainly in the chest area. III/2002. Mineração Serra do Sossego. collected by P.0-37. 12/II/2009.. Piçarra (06o26’S. dorsum dark gray marbled with black.Fatorelli and D. mainly in the chest area (chest yellow with gray marks and belly white or yellow with gray marks and reticulations in E. São Geraldo do Araguaia (06o24’S. Serra dos Carajás. surumu. venter and throat gray with many irregular yellow spots regularly distributed in E. CARAMASCHI & JIM.1-30. TOLEDO. erythrogaster. venter gray. Parauapebas (06o24’S. blue. dorsum uniform dark grayish with scarce minute brighter dots in the outer boundaries in E. collected by V. skotogaster. poorly defined line on the posterior surface of the thighs. producing a coarse marbled pattern. large cream spots on axillae. magnus.nov. helianneae. in E. 49o54’W. magnus. bumbameuboi sp. producing a salt-and-pepper pattern. and venter gray with minute anastomosed whitish spots. characterized by the head length shorter than the head width.). dorsum smooth..B. surumu. MNRJ 52474. erythrogaster. matogrosso sp. venter dull white or light yellow. MPEG 16265-16266.9mm in males. piauiensis.. and TOLEDO et al.Rocha. mainly on the belly and ventral surfaces of legs. collected by H. and some orange in males.nov. 13 49o53’W. skotogaster. 145m). 48o33’W. surinamensis.Assis.nov.527. no collector. bicolor. 1998. KWET & DI BERNARDO.

Fig. Vocal sac subgular.2010 . n.CARAMASCHI Description of holotype – Body ovoid. internarial distance smaller than the eye to nostril and interorbital distances..nov.S.Elachistocleis carvalhoi sp. No cranial crests. dorsolateral. triangular. protruding in profile.0% of SVL. A poorly defined transverse skinfold across back of the head. Premaxillary. slightly broader than long. subcircular. and vomerine odontophores absent. head width 25. Snout rounded in dorsal view.3.14 U. and larger than the eye diameter and upper eyelid width. Zool. 2. Vocal slits present. without a notch on posterior border. trilobed anterior margin.527. Eyes small. Mus. and head profile. maxillary. p. Nac.. Tympanum concealed. directed laterally.7% of SVL. only slightly protruding. Choanae large. Bol. A weak skinfold crossing the chest between axillae. a skinfold through dorsolateral region from the axilla to the groin. widely separated. holotype (MNRJ 51384. sloping abruptly to the upper lip.3 times the upper eyelid width. bending downwards slightly behind the eyes to the shoulder. loreal region flat. Lower jaw with truncate.. Interorbital space slightly convex. head length 97. lips not flared. ago. Nostrils small..4mm). Canthus rostralis rounded. oval. not expanded externally. Rio de Janeiro. Postcommisural gland developed. SVL 31. dorsal and ventral views of body.4% of head width and 25. Tongue large. head small. closer to tip of snout than to eye.1-30. supratympanic fold absent. N. not protuberant.

5-6.9 1.13 1.67 0.7 10.4 1.82 1.2010 .NOTES ON THE TAXONOMIC STATUS OF ELACHISTOCLEIS OVALIS. mainly on the chest.6 1..96 0. rounded. IND 2.52 Arms moderately robust.75 0. producing a coarse marbled pattern. dorsum uniformly dark gray with no light mid-dorsal stripe or pattern.9 (n = 3) ¯ x 35.9 9. ED 1.1 6. throat grayish.45 1.9 6.1 1.. robust.25 0. Relative lengths of toes.5-3.56 RANGE 32. Rio de Janeiro. knee and heel with a weak transversal skinfold.0 (n = 6) ¯ x 28.85. venter grayish. tip of fingers not flattened or expanded.8-11. (n = number of specimens).2-1. no light longitudinal stripe on superior surfaces of tibiae and posterior surfaces of tarsus.9-14. for his contribution to the knowledge of the neotropical anurans.2 7.4.20 0. ago.9. Heel of adpressed legs failing to reach axilla.2 2. thigh length 34. a light cream.1 6.19 0.59 0. TL 11. no paraanal tubercles..1-30.7-2.8 1. Mus.5. large light cream spots on axillae.8-7. FL 15.9 SD 2.UEW 1. IOD 3.23 0.5 7.7% of SVL. rounded. nuptial pads or asperities absent.6.0 1. heels touching when flexed legs held at right angle to body. anal opening not modified.5 2.4 5.8 13. HL 7.6-2. groin.2-1.8 13.4-8. p.4 3. no tibial or tarsal ridges.18 0.2 SD 3. irregular stripe on posterior surfaces of thighs.6% of SVL. END 2.49 0.. In preservative. Toes slender. 1<2<4<3.1. Sum of thigh and tibia lengths 70.35 10.86 0.8 10.4 2. N.7-7. Prepollex not evident. Relative lengths of fingers.45-15.1-2.6 7.1-16.2 15.22 0.2. especially the microhylid frogs.0-12.95 13. Thigh length slightly shorter than tibia length and shorter than foot lengths. Bol. fingers slender. and posterior surfaces of tibiae. knee and elbow widely separated when limbs laid along the sides. twice as large as the thenar tubercle.0.9 1. Antenor Leitão de Carvalho (MNRJ). plantar tubercles absent. THL 11. Measurements of holotype in mm – SVL 31. with large anastomosed whitish blotches.4 11. mean (x ).0 1.1 14. terminal grooves absent.0 8.527.4.6 1. ventrolateral region with large whitish blotches.4-1. broad.65 1.27 0. no tubercles or crests on forearm. C HARAC TERS SVL HL HW IND END ED UEW IOD HAL THL TL FL RANGE 24. Legs short. Etymology – The species is named after the late Prof.8 12.85-3. Range (mm).4 1.6-8. HW 8. tips of toes not flattened or expanded.nov.27 0.9 2. palmar tubercle large.3-8.9% of tibia length.7-3. Skin smooth above and beneath. divided longitudinally. supranumerary tubercles absent.28 0.95 6.85 6. n.S. not fringed. free. thigh length 97.HAL6.0-37. an small oval inner but no outer metatarsal tubercle.2. Zool.7 2. free.2 7.9-14.9% of SVL.9 5.92 1.70 0.10 0. with subarticular tubercles developed.9-2.65. tibia length 35. supranumerary tubercles absent. terminal grooves absent.0-31. subarticular tubercles developed. 15 TABLE 3. 1<2<5<3<4.0.2 3.1 11. Nac.5 2.. and standard deviation (SD) of the measurements of the type ¯ specimens of Elachistocleis carvalhoi sp.22 0.5 3.

E. E. TOLEDO. erythrogaster.1mm SVL.2010 . Size ranges from 24. Remarks – In specimens recently preserved it is possible to observe that the color in life is dark gray to black on dorsum.16 U. the blotches on axillae. producing a salt-and-pepper pattern (venter grayish with large anastomosed yellow or whitish yellow blotches. 24m altitude). cesarii. Comparisons with other species – The species with some kind of ventral color pattern are E. chest yellow with gray marks and belly white or yellow with gray marks Bol. 2003. producing a salt-and-pepper pattern.7mm in males. producing a coarse marbled pattern. light spots on axillae. magnus. ago.Canedo. the description of the holotype stands for the male specimens examined. (Fig. KWET & DI BERNARDO. irregular stripe on posterior surfaces of thighs. dorsum dark gray or black with an evident light vertebral stripe in E. erythrogaster. Geographical distribution – Northern Brazil.9mm SVL in males. blue. groin. in preservative. Rio de Janeiro.6). collected by I. 1969. UHE Ponta da Madeira. SD = 6. N.527. E. without spots nor light middorsal stripe. and TOLEDO et al. adult . carvalhoi.CARAMASCHI Variation – Except for minor details in corporal proportions. carvalhoi. piauiensis. Zool. n. The females are bigger than males. Elachistocleis bumbameuboi sp.8-43. dorsum dark gray marbled with black. and the stripe on posterior surfaces of thighs are red orange. in northwestern State of Tocantins and southeastern State of Pará (Fig.0-31. postcommisural gland developed. extending to the ventrolateral region. groin. thin. carvalhoi. 2010). Diagnosis – A medium sized species (SVL 26. throat gray.S. E. Few specimens have the marbled pattern on venter and the spots on concealed surfaces slightly coarser or thinner than the holotype. 44o18’W. 1983.4) Holotype – BRAZIL: MARANHÃO: São Luís (02o32’S. p.. no light longitudinal stripe on superior surfaces of tibiae and posterior surfaces of tarsus. characterized by the head length shorter than the head width. Paratypes – Collected with the holotype: MNRJ 53201-53205.. mainly in the chest area in E. piauiensis.Nunes and C. 2010. E. a light. 32..6). surinamensis. skotogaster. 2010.33.. and dorsum dark gray with small irregular clear gray spots in E. Mus. 1998. Nac.R. surinamensis.Carvalho and others.7mm in females). HL about 81% of HW (x¯ = 81. with minute anastomosed whitish blotches.nov. magnus.1-30. dorsum slightly rugose. dorsum uniformly gray with scarce minute irregular bright dots in E. and posterior surfaces of tibiae. MNRJ 53200 (Fig. LAVILLA et al. 02-08/V/2008. n = 5). dorsum uniform dark grayish with scarce minute brighter dots in the outer boundaries in E.9-27. IV/2008. skotogaster. their size ranging from 32. Type locality. and superior surfaces of feet absent. and E. dorsum dark brown mottled with black and white spots in E. posterior surfaces of tibiae. E. venter gray. surumu. the spots on venter are pale yellow on gray background. dorsal surfaces dark gray with small white dots in E. dorsum uniformly dark gray.. surumu. MNRJ 53378.0-37. by the venter gray with minute anastomosed whitish spots. dorsum orange marbled with black and blue in females of E. CARAMASCHI & JIM. NUNES et al. cesarii. collected by R. The new species is distinguished from these species by the dorsum uniformly dark gray or black without marks (dorsum uniformly brown or dark gray without marks in E. and some orange in males.. color in figures and/or described in KENNY.

nov. marbled.S. The new species is readily distinguished from these species by having venter gray with minute anastomosed whitish spots. Zool. producing a salt-and-pepper pattern and an undefined color transition between the dorsal and ventral regions. skotogaster. venter dull white or light yellow. and E. piauiensis. n. Mus.Elachistocleis bumbameuboi sp. with hindlimbs largely black mottled in bright blue in E. venter dark gray or black with large yellow and small white spots in E. p. matogrosso. bicolor. Rio de Janeiro. cesarii. Bol. Fig. and head profile. E.1-30.. venter gray..9mm). magnus. erythrogaster. venter red orange. heavily grayish spotted. holotype (MNRJ 53200.2010 . mottled with dark brown in E. surinamensis. N.NOTES ON THE TAXONOMIC STATUS OF ELACHISTOCLEIS OVALIS. mainly on the belly and ventral surfaces of legs. ago. and venter and throat gray with many irregular yellow spots regularly distributed in E... dorsal and ventral views of body. Nac. helianneae. SVL 26. in E.4. The three species with immaculate venter and a sharp color limit between the dorsal and ventral regions are E.527. in E. venter gray with minute scattered white spots.. surumu). 17 and reticulations in E..

trilobed anterior margin. free.18 U. and musical instruments. only slightly protruding. internarial distance smaller than the eye to nostril and interorbital distances. characters. not fringed. head width 26. Etymology – The name of the species. Vocal sac subgular. Relative lengths of fingers. dorsolateral. Tympanum concealed.4. without spots nor light mid-dorsal stripe. IND 1. no tubercles or crests on forearm. directed laterally. tibia length 37. terminal grooves absent. supranumerary tubercles absent. THL 10. instigates the participants to take part in the play. choreographies. knee and heel with a weak transversal skinfold. Premaxillary. supranumerary tubercles absent.6% of SVL. rounded. not expanded externally. plantar tubercles absent. and vomerine odontophores absent. head small. Measurements of holotype in mm – SVL 26. thigh length 99. which can be “played” through several ways. 1<2<5<3<4. UEW 1.1. triangular.7. Prepollex not evident.7. extending to the ventrolateral region. fingers slender.1-30. anal opening not modified. Bol. Postcommisural gland developed. Zool. FL 11. broader than long.8. Skin smooth above and beneath. Interorbital space slightly convex. and superior surfaces of feet absent.. thin.1. Tongue large. No cranial crests. not protuberant. A well defined transversal skinfold across back of the head. twice as large as the thenar tubercle. a strong dorsolateral skin fold from the scapular region to the groin.4% of SVL. n. groin. A skinfold crossing the chest between axillae. a noun in apposition. terminal grooves absent. is allusive to the most popular feasts occurring in June at São Luís. subcircular. ago.2% of SVL. Snout rounded in dorsal view. Vocal slits present. Arms moderately robust. robust. END 2. small dermal spines scattered mainly on dorsolateral region. venter gray. p. HAL 5.3% of tibia length. Choanae large. nuptial pads or asperities absent. Sum of thigh and tibia lengths 75. lips not flared. Legs short. no tibial or tarsal ridges. dorsum uniformly dark gray. almost two and half times the upper eyelid width. sloping abruptly to the upper lip. maxillary. bending down and backwards slightly behind the eyes to the shoulder. 1<2<4<3. posterior surfaces of tibiae. widely separated. Eyes small. clothes. palmar tubercle large. Nostrils small. TL 10. These festivities narrate the adventures of a cowboy and the death and resurrection of an ox. IOD 2. Toes slender. heels touching when flexed legs are held at right angle to body. irregular stripe on posterior surfaces of thighs. with subarticular tubercles developed. producing a salt-and-pepper pattern. protruding in profile.1.8% of SVL. Heel of adpressed legs failing to reach axilla.527.1. Relative lengths of toes.9. supratympanic fold absent. the “Bumba-meu-boi”.CARAMASCHI Description of holotype – Body ovoid.S. with minute anastomosed whitish blotches. loreal region flat. closer to tip of snout than to eye. knee and elbow widely separated when limbs laid along the sides. ED 1. and larger than the eye diameter and upper eyelid width. subarticular tubercles developed. HL 5. rounded. through its dance. Maranhão. no para-anal tubercles. Mus. divided longitudinally... N.4% of SVL. Lower jaw with truncate. In preservative. light spots on axillae. tips of toes not flattened or expanded.2. no light longitudinal stripe on superior surfaces of tibiae and posterior surfaces of tarsus. oval. throat gray. HW 7. without a notch on posterior border. head length 80. with distinct characteristics of rhythms. thigh length 37. Tibia length slightly longer than thigh and shorter than foot length. an small oval inner but no outer metatarsal tubercle. Canthus rostralis rounded. free. a light.0% of head width and 21. Rio de Janeiro.6. A suite follows the “ox” that.9. tip of fingers not flattened or expanded. Nac.2010 .

11 0.9 7.65 1.54 0.0 12.1-1.6 2. Caucaia.5 2. Alto Paraguai (14o30’S. the description of the holotype stands for the male specimens examined. and standard deviation (SD) of the measurements of the type ¯ specimens of Elachistocleis bumbameuboi sp. (Fig.12 0.7 10. 56o29’W..0 5. (n = 3) C HARACTERS SVL HL HW IND END ED UEW IOD HAL THL TL FL RANGE 26.7 6. and Viçosa do Ceará. p.4-1. Size ranges from 26.5 3..1-11.8-6.7 2. (2010).07 1. 56o06’W. n.54 0.nov..8 1.2010 .nov.06 0.25-14.2 8.3 2.1-2.1 11. 03/X/1987. Dorsum uniformly dark gray.4-1.527. MNRJ 43841.1-9.07 1.17 0.3 13.7mm SVL. venter gray with small clear gray small spots producing a salt-andpepper pattern.80 32.8 5. ago.19 0.3-16.95-14.19 0.7 1. (n = number of specimens). Rio de Janeiro.7 SD 5.79 0.8 1.4 1. MNRJ 6994.5) Holotype – BRAZIL: MATO GROSSO: Cuiabá (15o36’S. collected by Ulisses Caramaschi. northeastern Brazil (Fig.6 2.15 0.50 RANGE (n = 3) ¯ x 37.3 8.8 ¯ x 27. piauiensis.7-2. A few specimens have the venter pattern slightly coarser than the holotype. TABLE 4.25 1.7 Elachistocleis matogrosso sp.85 2.1 1.9 14. adult .0-9.NOTES ON THE TAXONOMIC STATUS OF ELACHISTOCLEIS OVALIS. MNRJ 4812. piauiensis based on recordings made at Pacatuba..6 1.51 0.2 12. spots on groin and line on posterior surfaces of thighs orange red.4 11. Brazil.4 SD 0. MNRJ 4813.1 1. in a note added in the proof of the paper. Geographical distribution – Known from two localities. iris brown with dense black vermiculations.7-6.0 1. in the State of Maranhão.8 5. no date.4 7.1-8.4mm SVL in males.9-12. Paratypes – BRAZIL: MATO GROSSO: Collected with the holotype.25 2. Campus of the Universidade Federal do Mato Grosso. 221m altitude).9-28. bank of the Cuiabá river.15 0.3-3. treated as E.1-8.96 0.23 1. their size ranging from 32.6). in life.3 7. Remarks – A good color picture of Elachistocleis bumbameuboi sp.1-2. without marks. Primavera. no collector.1 10. 04/II/1986.6 7. 04/II/1986.22 0. MNRJ 6977.5 1.17 1. no collector. 19 Variation – Except for minor details in corporal proportions.9 10. (2010) for E. Barão de Melgaço (16o12’S.6-1.4 2.Langone.37 0. mean ( x ). CHUNB 47526. Mus. no date. Cuiabá.19 0.5 11.9-27. The females are bigger than males. collected by J.2-11.8-43.S.7 13. Nac. Bol. is presented by NUNES et al.39 1. 177m altitude).nov. Cuiabá.6-3. State of Ceará. Zool..1-30. The advertisement call is described and.8-43. collected by LPP. the authors pointed out differences between the call they described and that described by TOLEDO et al.8 2. Range (mm). extending to the ventrolateral region.0 7.6 12. N.6 6.9-3.

p. collected by C. ¯ in preservative.0. a broad irregular line on the posterior surface of the thighs. internarial distance smaller than the eye to nostril and interorbital distances. Tympanum concealed. more than twice the upper eyelid width. 56o37’W. helianneae.Oliveira. sloping abruptly to the upper lip. mid-dorsal stripe from the tip of snout to vent in E. venter immaculate. palmar tubercle large. but absent on the head. 15/X/1999. No cranial crests. uniformly grayish brown. bicolor and E. helianneae). and larger than the eye diameter and the upper eyelid width.1% of SVL.. protruding in profile. a large light spot on the proximal internal surface of tibiae. helianneae). a thin middle longitudinal light stripe.CARAMASCHI 55 o58’W. limit between the dorsal and ventral regions poorly defined. Tongue large. Snout sub-elliptical in dorsal view.2010 . only slightly protruding.8% of head width and 22. collected by B. Comparisons with other species – The two species with immaculate venters are E. characterized by the head length shorter than the head width. head length 92. Vocal sac subgular. head width 23. Choanae large. Canthus rostralis rounded.6mm in males. Premaxillary. Vocal slits present. Rio de Janeiro. Poconé. 29.nov. dorsum smooth.8% of SVL. a narrow light stripe surrounding the knees and reaching the middle of the tarsus. supratympanic fold absent. subcircular.0% of HW (x = 92.S. loreal region flat. All other species in the genus Elachistocleis present some type of ventral color pattern (venter immaculate in E. closer to tip of snout than to eye. Eyes small.F. MNRJ 32880-32882.527. irregular (thin. bicolor by the longer head (HL about 92% of HW in H.) Description of holotype – Body ovoid. The new species is readily distinguished from E.nov..49.1-30. n. trilobed anterior margin.20 U.. no tubercles or crests on forearm. helianneae). Lower jaw with truncate. not expanded externally. widely separated. by the absence of minute light spots on dorsum and dorsal surfaces of members (present in E.IBAMA. bicolor). helianneae). n = 8). dorsolateral. Fazenda Ipiranga.A. HL about 92. by the presence of the mid-dorsal stripe from the post-cephalic dermal fold to vent (mid-dorsal stripe absent in E. Nac.Duar. bending downwards slightly behind the eyes to the shoulder. lips not flared. Diagnosis – A small sized species (SVL 21. N. from the post-cephalic transverse skinfold to the vent. well defined in E. but smaller than in E.2mm in females). helianneae (HL above 94% of HW in E. 14/VII/2001. HL below 90% of HW in E. directed anterolaterally. maxillary. Arms moderately robust. and vomerine odontophores absent.. Mus. Zool. 156m altitude). Nostrils small.Caetano and L. SD = 5. oval. slightly broader than long. RPPN Sesc Pantanal. head small. postcommisural gland poorly developed. light spots on axillae or groin present. a poorly defined skinfold through dorsolateral region from the axilla to the groin. Poconé (16o15’S. ago. CHUNB 47531. bicolor and in E. triangular. Interorbital space slightly convex. bicolor. not protuberant. matogrosso sp. A weak skinfold crossing the chest between axillae.0-33. bicolor and in E. no collector. 142m altitude). no date. by the dorsal gray color of dorsum of the snout invading the loreal region almost to the upper lip border (loreal region conspicuously white in E. Base de Pesquisas do Pantanal . Postcommisural gland poorly developed. helianneae). matogrosso sp.5-24. Bol. without a notch on posterior border. MHNCI 661. A poorly defined transversal skinfold across back of the head.B. and by the stripe on the posterior surface of thighs broad.

nov. terminal grooves absent. holotype (MNRJ 4812. Rio de Janeiro. Zool. 1<2<5<3<4. p. free. Relative lengths of fingers.9% of tibia length. dorsal and ventral views of body. knee and elbow widely separated when limbs laid along the sides. Toes slender. Thigh length shorter than tibia and foot lengths. Sum of thigh and tibia lengths 67. rounded. SVL 33. 1<2<4<3. free. heels touching when flexed legs held at right angle to body.. thigh length 90.NOTES ON THE TAXONOMIC STATUS OF ELACHISTOCLEIS OVALIS. thigh length 32. Relative lengths of toes. smooth beneath. Heel of adpressed legs not reaching axilla. weakly fringed. supranumerary tubercles absent. terminal grooves absent. Fig.S. tips of toes not flattened or expanded.. tip of fingers not flattened or expanded. knee and heel with a transversal skinfold. robust. with subarticular tubercles developed... fingers slender. ago. and head profile. Prepollex not evident.. nuptial pads or asperities absent.15% of SVL. tibia length 35.527. N. plantar tubercles absent.5% of SVL.4% of SVL. Bol. no tibial or tarsal ridges. n.Elachistocleis matogrosso sp. anal opening not modified. subarticular tubercles developed. twice as large than thenar tubercle. supranumerary tubercles absent.5. 21 divided longitudinally. Skin on dorsum slightly rugose. Legs short. no para-anal tubercles. Mus.1-30. rounded.2mm). an oval inner but no outer metatarsal tubercle.2010 .. Nac.

21 0.9 (n = 3) ¯ x 30.75 5. matogrosso are presented in Table 5.9 8.06 0. and standard deviation of the measurements of the type specimens of E.8-11. the descripton of the holotype stands for females of the species.1-2.3-1.1 2. a noun in apposition. FL 13. mean (x ).31 1. Etymology – The specific name. The males are smaller than females. and standard deviation (SD) of the measurements of the type ¯ specimens of Elachistocleis matogrosso sp.8-11.1-6. Rio de Janeiro.36 0.0-6.06 0.25 0.60 0.98 1.2. Variation – Except for minor details in corporal proportions.2mm SVL and the intensity of the color of the throat can vary.2 9. few.7-10.55-6..5-3.4 4.3 1.3-2.1.23 0.5-1.9.2.1 1.1 5. ago. p.4-2.6 1.6).3 6.8 1.6 2.5 10.1 2.60 0.8 (n = 5) ¯ x 23. IOD 3.9-2.5 8.6 1. an irregular broad light cream stripe on the posterior surface of thighs.6. TL 11. Zool.7 11.65 12.nov. a large irregular. C HARACTERS SVL HL HW IND END ED UEW IOD HAL THL TL FL RANGE 21.5 0.9.4 2. Mus.4 1.13 0.6.2 2.3-7. (n = number of specimens).3-1.8-1.5 to 24.12 0. where the species occurs. IND 2. N.14 0.4 2.9 1.0-33.2 6. Measurements of holotype in mm – SVL 33.0 to 33.527. throat grayish..6 SD 2.3 6. HW 7.5 6.7 9.85 8. in southwestern State of Mato Grosso and northwestern State of Mato Grosso do Sul (Fig.18 Bol.41 0. HL 7. a middorsal longitudinal light cream stripe. honors both states of Mato Grosso and Mato Grosso do Sul.22 U.9 10. light cream spot on the proximal internal surface of tibiae.5-5. a poorly defined color limit between the dorsal and ventral regions.4 1.13 RANGE 29.51 0.46 0. TABLE 5. ED 1. venter immaculate clear cream.7.6 1. Range.2 10.6mm SVL. a light cream stripe surrounding the knees and reaching the middle of the tarsus.0 5.1-30. END 2.6 6.2010 .48 0.0.27 0.3-9.78 0.4. THL 10. n.19 0.4 8.05 1.0 5.6 1. mean.6 5.11 0.7 4.S.5-24. Size ranges from 29.CARAMASCHI In preservative.8 2. from the post-cephalic dermal fold to vent. In a few specimens the mid-dorsal stripe can be interrupted or almost absent. Range (mm).2-7. Brazil. Nac. size ranging from 21.3. Geographical distribution – Central Brazil. HAL 6.9-9.1 1.6-13.7.66 1..15-1. small spots on axillae and groin.65 7. dorsum and dorsal surfaces of limbs uniformly grayish brown. UEW 1.2 SD 1.

527...2010 .. Nac.. Zool..1-30. Mus.6. p.NOTES ON THE TAXONOMIC STATUS OF ELACHISTOCLEIS OVALIS.S. N. n. 23 Fig.Geographic distribution of species of Elachistocleis. Rio de Janeiro. Bol. ago.

1-30. Elachistocleis cesarii was revalidated and well characterized by TOLEDO et al. Uruguay (for detailed distribution see NÚÑEZ et al. in the states of Minas Gerais. who reported the geographical distribution for the species from a few localities in the states of São Paulo. and MURPHY (1997). and Goiás.6) comprises southwestern and southern Brazil.9-31. Argentina. RIVERO et al. (2003) considered that it would be represented by those frogs that fit the characters that describe the genus Elachistocleis. have a spotted ventral coloration. and Bahia. p. Rio de Janeiro. surinamensis. The remaining species. excluding Bol. and Tocantins (see map in NUNES et al. surinamensis. ago. and northern Surinam.. Sergipe. in the states of Mato Grosso do Sul.6) involves northeastern Brazil.527.. Elachistocleis bicolor is characterized by the medium size (SVL 22. will not affect the taxonomical composition of the genus until its actual status can be settled. Brazil. The geographical distribution (Fig. As an operative framework for a necessary revision of this species complex represented by E. central Brazil. a thin. de Bèze and probably originally deposited in the Museum Nationalle d’Histoire Naturelle de Paris. Paraná. 2004).5mm in males. was summarized by LAVILLA et al. venter immaculate yellow or greenish yellow. filling the characters that describe the genus Elachistocleis. (2003) to Buenos Aires.. well defined line on the posterior surface of the thighs. LAVILLA et al.24 U. and northern Argentina. a broad geographical concept during the XVIII-XIX centuries according to LAVILLA et al. N.. northern Venezuela. 27. CARCERELLI (1992). The authors.2010 . mottled with gray. Elachistocleis piauiensis is distributed in the states of Piauí. however. It is possible that more than one species is involved. and Rio Grande do Sul. and Federal District. head wider than long (head length below 90% of head width). Maranhão. Nac. (2003) added the presence of an evident light vertebral stripe. stated that frogs with this set of characters form a complex of species and their presented decision constituted an operative framework for a necessary revision (LAVILLA et al. Elachistocleis ovalis. LAVILLA et al. namely Trinidad. The type locality was originally stated as “Surinam”. cesarii (Fig. Mus. a sharp color limit between the dorsal and ventral regions. and a narrow light stripe surrounding the knees and reaching the middle of the tarsus. E.S. The species. no spots on axillae or groin. which was also reported by KENNY (1969). Santa Catarina. RODRIGUES et al. Elachistocleis bicolor had its type locality convincingly restricted by LAVILLA et al. (2003)... the three oldest species currently in the genus Elachistocleis. and precise type localities. 2003). defined name bearing types. n. in their conception. 2010. Paraguay (for detailed distribution see BUSQUETTI & LAVILLA. (2003). including those described herein. 2003). have modern descriptions. in the states of Ceará. presently considered a species inquirenda.CARAMASCHI DISCUSSION The confusion involving the taxonomy of Elachistocleis ovalis. dorsum smooth. the geographical distribution of E. 2006). southern São Paulo.. bicolor. and inhabit the northern portion of the generic range. Minas Gerais. uniformly grayish brown.5mm in females. Goiás. (1986). and southeastern Brazil. is currently lost. a specimen donated to Daudin by M. Elachistocleis surinamensis was originally characterized by DAUDIN (1802) as having a brown belly. Espírito Santo. had an immaculate venter and would occupy the southern part of the generic range. Zool. and E. the name bearing type. without light spots nor a distinctive middle longitudinal light stripe. (2010). but at first not discriminated by the used characters.2-35. Ceará. would encompasses frogs that. Actually. and São Paulo. in the states of Mato Grosso. Rio de Janeiro.

genus Elachistocleis (Amphibia. CAJADE. N. Bol.. 20(2):3-79. Nascimento (MCNAM). ovalis. Microhylidae.J. pour servir de base a l’Histoire Naturelle des Animaux et Introduction a l’Anatomie Comparée.6). U. Los Toldos. Trinidad. REFERENCES BUSQUETTI. Fig.. Ronald Heyer (USNM). CARAMASCHI. 1927. all in the Provincia Salta.63) from El Manteco. The present observations and descriptions contribute to a better undertanding of the composition of Elachistocleis.. Napoli (UFBA). F..2010 . Belém (PA):124. DE LA RIVA et al. D. Bolivia. The geographic distributions of the new species are treated in the respective accounts. Check List.. Revisão taxonômica do gênero Elachistocleis Parker. Herpetologica. plate XIIIb) from Trinidad.A. 800m altitude.1-30. Paris: Bertrandet. W. Marcelo F. Guarino R. Ronald Heyer (USNM) critically read the manuscript. all identified as E. DAUDIN. southern Brazil.6). Santa Cruz. J. 2009. only as examples.. and from one locality near to Isla de Cañas. p. E. Amphibia. Helianne de Niemeyer photographed the holotypes. Paris: Déterville et Crochard Libraires. 2006. Serra Geral.527. Zool. and Oswaldo Luiz Peixoto (EI) for allowing examination of specimens under their care and for data access on related species.6). Hussam Zaher and Carolina Mello (MZUSP). Rio de Janeiro. Mus. Elachistocleis skotogaster: Map of geographic distribution. n.S. the pictures of the species.. as can be seen. The Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq) provided financial support. fig.B. p. A new microhylid frog. 350 and 450m altitude. and Fig. ago. al. 25 the locality record for São Luís.NOTES ON THE TAXONOMIC STATUS OF ELACHISTOCLEIS OVALIS. Nac. S. Elachistocleis erythrogaster is restricted to the southeastern border of the Planalto das Araucárias.. R. plate 50) from Manzanilla-Cocos Bay. and LESCURE & MARTY (2001. & LAVILLA. xv + 406p. Departamento Iruya. 2010) (Fig. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I deeply acknowledge Ana Maria Costa Prudente (MPEG). Elachistocleis skotogaster is known from the type locality.272) from Guyane. Departamento Santa Victoria (LAVILLA et. and Mato Grosso (present data. State of Maranhão). 2009. Célio F. Anura. Brazil (Fig. Histoire Naturelle des Rainettes. presented by KENNY (1969. Júlio César Moura Leite (MHNCI). GORZULA & SEÑARIS (1999. XII Congreso Latino-Americano de Zoologia e XIX Congresso Brasileiro de Zoologia. 1100m altitude.C.. at 900-1200m of altitude (FROST.. des Grenouilles et des Crapauds. 108p. northern Argentina (see map in CAJADE et al. & NENDA. Colli (CHUNB). L. 1829. distribution extension. CUVIER. 1992. Resumos.M. 5(2):418-421. Haddad (CFBH). the actual diversity encompassed by this genus is far from known. Venezuelan Guayana. from Northeastern Brasil. BARRASSO. 1983. State of Rio Grande do Sul. Renato N. CARCERELLI..6). and two localities in the Departamento Orán. and new altitudinal records. Notwithstanding. Anura).. F. Le Règne Animal Distribué d’Après son Organisation. Elachistocleis magnus is known from three localities in the State of Rondônia. Cruz (MNRJ) and W. Lista comentada de los anfibios de Paraguay. Cuadernos de Herpetología. (2000) from Rio Seco. 39(4):390-394.. 2003). Luciana B. B. Feio (MZUFV). 1802 (An XI). MURPHY (1997. & JIM. Carlos Alberto G..O.

Accessed: 24/IV/2010. MAGNUSSON. Sumptibus Auctoris. Revista Española de Herptologia.CARAMASCHI DE LA RIVA.. RODRIGUES. Versuch eines System der Amphibien (Tentamen Systematis Amphibiorum). KLAPPENBACH. W. J.... Amazônia Central – Guide to the Frogs of Reserva Adolpho Ducke. USA. 2000. G. 1820. Marburg: J..org/vz/herpetology/ amphibia/. C. Paris: Patrimoines Naturels 45. I. & LANGONE. RAND. & NELSON.. J. Central Amazonia. CRUZ. S... Neue Classification der Reptilien nach ihren Natürlichen Verwandtschaften. KELLER. GRONOVIUS..2010 . 1826.T..C.. 2 pls.4 (8 April 2010).M. Ranas y sapos del Uruguay (reconocimiento y aspectos biológicos). A. descripsit. Anales del Museo Nacional de Historia Natural de Montevideo. J. con comentarios y notas sobre su distribución.K. distribution. MERREM.C. Nebst einer Verwandtschafts-Tafel und einem Verzeichnisse der ReptilienSammlung des K. 168p. xxx + 306p. LESCURE.. Guia de Sapos da Reserva Adolpho Ducke. 1992. Malabar: Krieger Bol. Zoologischen Museum’s zu Wien. taxonomic problems. 1999 [1998]. 12:281-288. ICZN – International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature. J. Rio de Janeiro. KWET.amnh. 8:163-222.. E. 1998. A. The Amphibia of Trinidad. W.E.S. M. PEIXOTO. xviii + 270p. FITZINGER. Os engystomatideos do Museu Paulista (com um gênero e três espécies novos). 2006.O. Larrañaga.E.S. M. LÖTTERS. 14(2000):19-164..A. Erpétologie Générale ou Histoire Naturelle Complète des Reptiles. Contributions to the herpetofauna of the Venezuelan Guayana. Arquivos de Zoologia. bicolor controversy. Heubner. 2010. M.S. D. systematice disposuit. MENIN.. GORZULA. 8. Frogs of Boracéia. D. W. International Code of Zoological Nomenclature. London: International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature. & SEÑARIS. 1999. Wien: J. Amphibia atque Pisces quae in Museo suo adservat. & DI BERNARDO. 1995. KÖHLER. Atlas des Amphibiens de Guyane. Eletronic Database accessible at: http://research. L. 31(4):231-410. & MARTY. A. FROST.. 66p. C. HEYER. ii + 792p. 29:1-78. I.. J. 390p.G. 1969.G. 129pls. & FERRARI. Museo A. LAVILLA. American Museum of Natural History.C. M. S. & REICHLE. Fasciculus Primus exhibens Animalia Quadrupedia.. New York. LANGONE.A. literature and iconography..R. Elachistocleis erythrogaster.26 U. 1920. Zoophylacii Gronoviani. Lugduni Batavorum.. O. L. C. MURPHY. L. p. N. KENNY. 2003. Tome 8. Revista do Museu Paulista. Studies on the Neotropical Fauna and Environment.J. 1763. A. L. LIMA. & BIBRON. DUMÉRIL. Amphibians and Reptiles of Trinidad and Tobago. A new species of Elachistocleis (Anura: Microhylidae) from the Andean Yungas of Argentina. 1990. B. 1pl.. Studies on the Fauna of Curaçao and Other Caribbean Islands. A data base.A. a new microhylid species from Rio Grande do Sul. Zool.C. ago. Ten years of research on Bolivian amphibians: updated checklist. Paris: Librairie Encyclopédique de Roret.R. 1841.527.. J... Lista sistematica y sinonimica de los anfibios del Uruguay. S. C. xv pls. A. 1997. 24(3):269-284. ERDTMANN.. Amphibia-Reptilia. Krieger.. J. Mus. VAIRA.A. Amphibian Species of the World: an Online Reference. K. Caracas: Scientia Guayanae.. rite examinavit. Série Divulgación.D.1-30... 33:7-18. n. 5:1-123.J.. with comments on the Elachistocleis ovalis – E. & HÖDL. Manaus: Áttema Design Editorial. MIRANDA-RIBEIRO. Version 5..P. atque iconibus ilustravit. Nac. Brazil. 2001 [2000].L. 4th Edition.

. Publishing Company. SEBA. LOEBMANN. L. South American Journal of Herpetology. A.. Mus.. 4010).. Zootaxa. Três Lagoas (CFBH 1360813610). Historiae Amphibiorum Naturalis et Literariae. Novo Horizonte (MZUSP 35445-35449). 2004. LANGONE. 36501-36502). Ponta Porã.F. Tomus II.J. Florianópolis (MNRJ 13975-13977).R.. Gramado (MZUSP 16032-16036). 36384. Severiano de Almeida. 1920) (Anura: Microhylidae). Advertisement call and geographic distribution of Elachistocleis piauiensis Caramaschi & Jim. 1799. Salamandras et Hydros in Genera et Species Descriptos Notisque Suis Distinctos. NÚÑEZ. 2496:63-68. 93(4):365-371. Nac. London: T. with notes on the presence of post-commisural gland in the genus.. 27 NUNES. i-xiii + 264p. SHAW. CANEDO. Porto Alegre. Smith. São Bento do Sul (MZUSP 55933). Brasil. Nullum par Exstitit. Vila Florida. con la descripción de una nueva especie de Colostethus (Dendrobatidae). & PRIGIONI. & JanssonioWaesbergios. per Universsam Physices Historiam. 11(157):1-15. Digessit. Torres (AL-MN 549). Revalidation and redescription of Elachistocleis cesarii (Miranda-Ribeiro. & DE SÁ.. 1986. in hoc Rerum Genere. Microhylidae). Viamão (MZUSP 64753). J. Amstelaedami: J.. 2010. Bom Jesus (CFBH 18199). RIO GRANDE DO SUL: (MNRJ 2087). J. Itapúa (USNM 253509. Bituruna.B. PARANÁ: Bituruna (MNRJ 2745. TOLEDO.. Distribución geográfica de la fauna de anfíbios del Uruguay.M. Bufones. MZUSP 21724-21726). São Francisco de Paula (MNRJ 3654. Maracaju (EI 4010-4013). 1802. São Domingos (CFBH 3841. 253510- Bol. & HADDAD. Rio de Janeiro. Descripsit. R. Porto Alegre (MNRJ 3658. Zootaxa.A. 3859. et Depingendum Curavit. 2003. Iheringia.. J.527. PARAGUAY: AMAMBAY (USNM 253204-253205).. Lagoa (MZUSP 12527-12528. TOLEDO. RIVERO. Fartura (UFBA 7956-7958).. D. 6973. n. 2418:50-60. Rio Guaíba (MZUSP 16055). General Zoology or Systematic Natural History.. Smithsonian Information Herpetological Service (134):1-34. Cerro do Meio Dia (MNRJ 4518-4520). Wetstenium. Venezuela. C.S. 2010.. et Iconibus Artificiosissimis Expressio. SÃO PAULO: Castilho (MZUSP 36500. Tabapuã (CFBH 4225). C. G.S & UETANABARO. 1983 (Amphibia.G.. J.F. Opus. R. 3909. Mananciais da Serra (MHNCI 1181). Padrão reprodutivo de Elachistocleis bicolor (Anura.2010 . 80km from União da Vitória (MNRJ 48154817). & CARVALHO JR. Comunicaciones Zoologicas del Museo de Historia Natural de Montevideo. MANEYRO. Bonito (CHUNB 49299). Piraquara. Calamitas. 3:1-615. EI 756). 6932-6947. xiii + 245p. Jena: Friederici Frommanni. Ex Toto Terrarum Orbe Collegit. A new species of Elachistocleis (Anura. Curitiba (MZUSP 13659-13661). APPENDIX ADDITIONAL SPECIMENS EXAMINED Elachistocleis bicolor – BRAZIL: MATO GROSSO DO SUL: Bela Vista (EI 1400-1418). Represa Santa Laura (MNRJ 48298). Emboaba (EI 5614).b). Santo Augusto (MNRJ 6984). F. R. 1735. 2010. D. Jaguariaíva (MNRJ 66159). L. Locupletissimi Rerum Naturalium Thesauri Accurata Descriptio. Itaqui (MZUSP 0511). Osório (MZUSP 21727).O. Fasciculus Primus Continens Ranas. Faxinal dos Guedes. C. 3717. N. Pedreira (MNRJ 30404. Inhuverá (MNRJ 6955). LOPES.. Série Zoologia. Microhylidae) from the Brazilian Amazon.. SANTA CATARINA: (MHNCI 1181a.F.NOTES ON THE TAXONOMIC STATUS OF ELACHISTOCLEIS OVALIS. 17135-17137).. Mato Grosso do Sul. D. p. Piraju. LANGONE.. cui. Davidson. M. Anfibios anuros colectados por la espedición del Museo Nacional de Historia Natural de Montevideo al Rio Caura.66897-66902). I.1-30. SCHNEIDER. Zool. Estado Bolivar.. & Gul. 5(1):30-34.A. ago.. Microhylidae) na Serra da Bodoquena. 36385). RODRIGUES.

3153).527. Juazeiro (UFBA 6776). Mocambinho (MNRJ 40589. 5851-5853. Km 217 (MNRJ 66896). Pontalina. 66029). 12490-12491). 50171. 3186). 253519. Grão Mogol/Berilo. Paracatu/Pirapora. Rio Verde (CHUNB 49435). Brumadinho. 8981). Serra do Cipó (MNRJ 45346). Mineiros (CHUNB 28126-28127). Carangola (MZUFV 3782. São Desidério (CHUNB 51010-51012). Inhotim (MCNAM 13040-13044). 253522-253523. Santa Tereza (MNRJ 53149-53150). UHE Espora (MNRJ 41395-41396). 6971-6972). URUGUAY: ARTIGAS: Barra del Arroio Yacuí (MNRJ 6982-6983). MZUFV 2838-2839). Serra do Caraça. Goiânia (MNRJ 6682. 66850). 47527-47528. Alto Caparaó (CHUNB 46259). Nac. Guaraciaba. Rio São Miguel (MNRJ 2772). Itacolomi (MCNAM 11767. MZUFV 4839-4840). São João da Aliança. Colinas do Sul (CHUNB 48336. Jaboticatubas. Lagoa Bonita (MNRJ 18330-18331). Aporé. 35568-35576. Água Limpa (MNRJ 69606961. UHE Queimados (MCNAM 2894. Brejo de Ipuã. n. TUCUMÁN: Tucumán (MNRJ 3462. 2762. CHUNB 25365-25445. UHE Serra da Mesa (MNRJ 20203-20207. Fazenda São João. 51551). Brumadinho (MNRJ 27503). 253525). Conceição do Mato Dentro. Fazenda Lagoa Grande (MNRJ 32396-32398). Três Ranchos (CHUNB 44730). 253518. Elachistocleis cesarii .2010 . 9854-9859). Mocambinho. ARGENTINA: CHACO: Resistencia (MZUSP 36386). 51092. 51013-51014). 253524. Diamantino. Rio Areões (MNRJ 66856). Botumirim. 9325-9329. 51649-51656). João Pinheiro. Jaíba (MZUFV 2838-2839. Zool. Serra do Ouro Branco (MZUFV 7102). Jaborandi (CHUNB 51009. Camaçari. Rio de Janeiro. 12189. Araponga (MZUFV 8279-8280). Taboleiro (MCNAM 3115). Aruanã (CHUNB 42710). 9819). 2732. Serra da Calçada (MCNAM 3684). 6633. Esmeraldas (MCNAM 2375. Catalão (CHUNB 50334). SERGIPE: Brejo Grande. Correntina (CHUNB 4754747548. Ouro Branco. São Domingos (CHUNB 32223-32224. GOIÁS: Alvorada do Norte (CHUNB 38038-38043). Pains (MCNAM 7434-7435). Januária. CAAGUAZU: Ruta Ciudad del Este-Assunción. p. Catas Altas. PARNA Serra do Cipó (MCNAM 2697-2698. Conceição do Mato Dentro. Manga. DISTRITO FEDERAL: Brasília (MNRJ 7018-7019). 50333). Km 200 da BR 163 (MNRJ 49659-49660). 4001-4004. Fazenda Veredas (MNRJ 38813). Marliéria. Paracatu (MCNAM 10593. Serra do Caraça (MNRJ 44708. MCNAM 2047. 60489-60493.. Araguari. Elachistocleis carvalhoi . Entre Independencia y Villarica. 4824). MZUFV 1713).S. Arembepe (UFBA 6233-6235). Betim (MNRJ 66849. Mucuripe (MNRJ 6956-6959). Itambé do Mato Dentro (MCNAM 5670). Samitri (MZUFV 578-583). ago. Palmital.. Pontalina (MNRJ 66853. Faria Lemos. Planaltina. UHE Irapé (MCNAM 3840. Mariana. Catas Altas. 25485-25500. near Nueva Italia (MNRJ 66903). CFBH 3768). Campinho (MNRJ 56303). UHE Formoso (MNRJ 13891). Riachão das Neves (CHUNB 47552).BRAZIL: PARÁ: Carajás (CHUNB 47529). Brumadinho. Fazenda Fruta Danta (MNRJ 5070550707). Buritizeiro (CHUNB 44628). 47530). 47550).BRAZIL: MARANHÃO: Carolina (CHUNB 51588-51590. Parque Estadual do Rio Doce (MNRJ 13980.28 U. Fazenda Capivara (MNRJ 49529. 49532-49536). Mus. N. Catas Altas (MCNAM 12884-12885). 50146. Linha de Transmissão (MCNAM 11012-11013). Nova Era (MCNAM 1112). Conselheiro Mata (MCNAM 605. Puerto Bertoni (USNM 94101). Fortaleza. Porangatu (MNRJ 53151-53152).1-30. CORRIENTES: Ituzaingó. Itumirim (MCNAM 3559).. Belmiro Braga. Bol. 26915). Arroio Ytá (MNRJ 6975-6976). Parque Ecológico Gafanhoto (MCNAM 9546-9547). RPPN Porto Cajueiro (MCNAM 13425-13427). 3029). Porto Seguro (UFBA 9199-9200). BAHIA: Barreiras (UFBA 8635-8646. PCH Jurumirim (MZUFV 5545). Triunfo (MCNAM 6542). Capim Branco (MCNAM 6307). Cocos (CHUNB 50142. 12114-12115. MZUFV 427). 13060). João Pinheiro. MPEG 8944-8948. Andrequicé. Brumadinho (MNRJ 12495). Flores de Goiás (CHUNB 38421-38428). 253517. 25447-25483. MATO GROSSO: Barra do Tapirapé (MNRJ 7021-7037).BRAZIL: CEARÁ: Caucaia. Fazenda Todos os Santos (MNRJ 41599-41601). Minaçu. Caeté (MCNAM 11468. Fazenda Cuiabá (MZUFV 2973). Juiz de Fora.CARAMASCHI 253516. Divinópolis. Guanhães (MCNAM 1092-1095. 51093. MINAS GERAIS: Abre Campo. Pontes e Lacerda (MZUSP 61219). 13240). CHUNB 07137-07138). Jatobazinho (MNRJ 6974). MATO GROSSO DO SUL: Xavantina. Astolfo Dutra. Chapada Gaúcha (CHUNB 34082-34090). Veredas de Botumirim (MCNAM 5671). Pires do Rio (CHUNB 38686). Fazenda Cachoeira Alegre (MNRJ 43302-43306). Elachistocleis bumbameuboi . 253520-253521. Estação Ecológica do Pecém (MNRJ 55891). Santa Tecla (MNRJ 39940-39942).

MZUSP 1113. lectotype. Botucatu. 36473). Tocantins (MZUFV 7591-7592). ESPÍRITO SANTO: Itaperuna (MNRJ 60299). Elachistocleis erythrogaster – RIO GRANDE DO SUL: São Francisco de Paula. Pompéu/Curvelo. 13842-13843). Porto Velho (MNRJ 3656. Campinas. Botucatu. Souzas (MNRJ 34698). Fazenda Edgardia (MNRJ 66860). 4233-4237. 66859). São Carlos (MZUSP 56902-56903). 2023. 842). Fazenda Monjolão (MNRJ 66869). São Paulo (CHUNB 47543).11767). Campus de Pesquisa do MPEG (MPEG 6353. Lagoa da Serra Negra (MCNAM 1131). MNRJ 66851). 10391. Viçosa. MATO GROSSO: Cuiabá. Botucatu. Urucuia (MNRJ 734). 16564-16578. paralectotypes). n. São José do Mantimento/Durandé. 407. MZUSP 41. Periquito. Itamonte. 6934. Cubatão. 10419).S. PARAGUAY: Assunción (MNRJ 6949) [in error]. 16580-16619). PARÁ: Ananindeua (MPEG 3726-3728). Pedro de Toledo (MNRJ 7020).NOTES ON THE TAXONOMIC STATUS OF ELACHISTOCLEIS OVALIS. São João da Barra (MNRJ 6968-6970). SÃO PAULO: Angatuba (CFBH 23136). RPPN Serra do Caraça (MCNAM 5796).. Botucatu (EI 4403). Campus Bol. RIO DE JANEIRO: Atafona (MNRJ 7978-6981).. Fazenda Bonaparte (MCNAM 2540). PCH Mato Limpo (MCNAM 2304). 6930-6931. MZUSP 264). 16633-16639. Fazenda Lageado (MNRJ 66858. São Gonçalo do Rio Abaixo (MCNAM 13725-13732). MZUSP 58869-58870). Fazenda Dinucci (MNRJ 61116.527. Piquete (MZUSP 529. Rubião Júnior (MNRJ 49643. Três Pontas (MCNAM 7871). Castelo do Piauí (MPEG 19823). Mata da Roda d’Água (MCNAM 13820. 8044). Elachistocleis piauiensis – BRAZIL: PIAUÍ: Brejo do Piauí (MNRJ 42073). 66868-66869). 16519-16562.. Mus. two syntypes of Engystoma ovale concolor).. MPEG 16103. Itirapina (CFBH 4997). MATO GROSSO: Santa Maria (MNRJ 2918). Km 312 (MNRJ 66848. Itaperuna (MNRJ 54366). Santana do Riacho. paratypes ex-JJ 6025-6026). two syntypes of Engystoma ovale lineata). UFV-Piscicultura (MZUFV 640. 66855. Planalto do Itatiaia (MNRJ 13978-13979). 4256-4257. 2458. 264. Raiz da Serra (MZUSP 2. Rio Preto.1-30. paralectotype). 49639-49642). Foz do Jamari (MZUSP 56904). 2024-2027. holotype ex-JJ 6024. MNRJ 66854. Serra do Cipó (MCNAM 1851-1854. 32185-32186. Botucatu. Peçanha. São Simão (EI 1396-1397). 4147-4148. 6955). 42. Belém (MPEG 1767. São Paulo. Puruzinho (MZUSP 56900). Campo Belo (AL-MN 075. Sítio do Fiúza (MZUFV 5309). BR 316. Patrocínio. Fazenda Santa Maria do Araquá (MNRJ 66862-66865). paralectotypes). 60086. paratype. Elachistocleis helianneae – BOLIVIA: BENI: Guayaramerim (USNM 123964). 6939. 16642-16649. 814. Botucatu. Taubaté (EI 12341236). Paranapiacaba. Zool. Santo André (EI 1398). Urucânia (MCNAM 8364). MZUSP 16622-16628. 4230-4231. Centro de Pesquisas e Conservação da Natureza Pró-Mata (MNRJ 39098. Estação Experimental de São Manoel (MNRJ 66857). Perús (MZUSP 36. Viçosa. Belém (MZUSP 38. Pirapora (MNRJ 12493-12494). ex-MCP 3142).2779. São Gonçalo do Rio Preto (MCNAM 8563-8564). Lídice (MNRJ 66675). ago. 16630-16631. 29 2763. PCH Varginha e Várzea Alegre (MCNAM 11218). 6575-6578). UHE Retiro Baixo (MCNAM 1038510386. São João Nepomuceno (MNRJ 30488. São Manuel. p. Rio Claro (CFBH 4132-4137. Ipiranga (MZUSP 33. 66866-66867. Picos. 6929. 10389. Nac. Ubatuba (CFBH 10907). 405. Santa Rita de Jacutinga (MCNAM 2060). 20566). MNRJ 14253. Viçosa. Cubatão (MZUSP 37. SANTA CRUZ: Cercado (USNM 142132-142133). UFV-Mata do Paraíso (MZUFV 2525. BRAZIL: AMAZONAS: Manaus (MNRJ 7796. São José do Goiabal (MCNAM 12843). 2531. São Paulo. N. 6875. paralectotypes. Alto da Serra (MZUSP 715. 6138). Rio de Janeiro. paralectotype). Belém.. Tombos (MZUFV 53205321). RONDÔNIA: Calama (MZUSP 56901). 4209.2010 . Sacramento (CHUNB 49400).

Elachistocleis matogrosso – BRAZIL: MATO GROSSO: Mato Grosso (MZUSP 52105).. 7936). p. Corumbá. Pacaraima. 7850. Chapada dos Veadeiros (MNRJ 722. Zool. 7858. MNRJ 4821). 7801. 7927. Corumbá. Salobra (MNRJ 6950-6954). 7712. Cuiabá (MNRJ 4814). Elachistocleis magnus – BRAZIL: RONDÔNIA: Costa Marques (CHUNB 29202-29203). Base de Estudos do Pantanal (MNRJ 4953049531). TOCANTINS: Porto Alegre do Tocantins (MNRJ 41397-41398). 6924-6931). 1292). Coxim (MZUSP 61040-61041). 6964.2010 .CARAMASCHI da UFMT (MHNCI 610). Pimenteiras do Oeste (CHUNB 58882). Estrada para o PARNA Chapada dos Veadeiros (MNRJ 27742). 6965-6967. Elachistocleis sp.527. GOIÁS: Alto Paraíso de Goiás. Nac. 7849. ago. Mus. 7926. 7785. Fazenda Nhumirim (MNRJ 33045). 7660. Rio de Janeiro. Passo do Lontra.. Nioaque (EI 4014). “Planalto de Goiás” (MNRJ 6948). 7929. Taunay (MNRJ 6962-6963). Elachistocleis surumu – BRAZIL: RORAIMA: (MPEG 7637.S. 7634). MZUSP 65107-65155). Vila Surumu (MNRJ 27316). 1269-1272. Miranda (MNRJ 1858.1-30. Veadeiros (MNRJ 720).30 U. Bol. MATO GROSSO DO SUL: Aquidauana (MNRJ 2372). Corumbá (MCNAM 7404. BOLIVIA: COCHABAMBA: Chapare (USNM 146599). – BRAZIL: AMAZONAS: Humaitá (JJ 6671-6672. 7673. n. Boa Vista. Fazenda Bom Intento (MPEG 1265-1267. N.. 7895.

.

David G. Ciro Alexandre Ávila. Miguel Trefaut Rodrigues (Universidade de São Paulo). Maria Dulce Barcellos Gaspar de Oliveira. J.Reino Unido). RJ.Portugal).Argentina). Vânia Gonçalves Lourenço Esteves Conselho Editorial – André Pierre Prous-Poirier (Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais). DeBlasis (Universidade de São Paulo). D. Periodica. Philippe Taquet (Museum National d’Histoire Naturelle França). NISC Colorado. Maria Marta Cigliano (Universidad Nacional La Plata . Jorge Carlos Della Favera (Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro). John G. Marcelo de Araújo Carvalho.br MUSEU NACIONAL Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro Quinta da Boa Vista.ufrj. NOVA SÉRIE. ISI – Thomson Scientific. International Tiragem – 600 exemplares Disponível em: <http://www.EUA).B. Suzanne K.Argentina).br> Biblioteca/MN. Fish (University of Arizona .França).EUA). e-mail: mnbib@acd. Miriam Lemle (Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro). Fábio Lang da Silveira (Universidade de São Paulo). Van Remsen (Louisiana State University . François M. Maria Antonieta da Conceição Rodrigues (Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro). Débora de Oliveira Pires. Catzeflis (Institut des Sciences de l’Évolution . Maisey (Americam Museun of Natural History . Izabel Cristina Alves Dias. Claudia Petean Bove. João Wagner de Alencar Castro. Marcos Raposo. Paulo A. São Cristóvão 20940-040 – Rio de Janeiro. C. Gustavo Gabriel Politis (Universidad Nacional del Centro .A. ZOOLOGIA ISSN 0080-312X Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro Reitor – Aloísio Teixeira Museu Nacional Diretora – Claudia Rodrigues Ferreira de Carvalho Editores – Miguel Angel Monné Barrios. David John Nicholas Hind (Royal Botanic Gardens .Reino Unido).BOLETIM DO MUSEU NACIONAL. Zoological Record. Maria Carlota Amaral Paixão Rosa (Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro). Rosana Moreira da Rocha (Universidade Federal do Paraná). Maria Helena Paiva Henriques (Universidade de Coimbra . Ronald Heyer (Smithsonian Institution . Guilherme Ramos da Silva Muricy.EUA). João Alves de Oliveira. Marília Lopes da Costa Facó Soares. Rita Scheel Ybert. RJ . Marcela Laura Monné Freire.ufrj.EUA) Normalização – Edson Vargas da Silva Diagramação e arte-final – Lia Ribeiro Indexação – Biological Abstracts. W. Ulrich’s International Periodicals Directory. Brasil Impressão: SERMOGRAF Artes Gráficas e Editora Ltda Petrópolis. Ulisses Caramaschi Editores de Área – Adriano Brilhante Kury.publicacao.museunacional. Reid (The Natural History Museum .