Geographical Variation in Morphological and Bioacoustic Traits of Pseudopaludicola mystacalis (Cope, 1887) and a Reassessment of the Taxonomic Status of Pseudopaludicola serrana Toledo, 2010 (Anura: Leptodactylidae: Leiuperinae)
Comparisons of advertisement calls of anurans can be used to determine intra- and interspecific differences or affinities. Described from midwestern Brazil, Pseudopaludicola mystacalis is widely distributed and abundant in major open Brazilian ecosystems. However, researchers frequently fail to determine the true taxonomic status of some of these populations and attribute them to unidentified or misidentified species. Herein, we employ morphological and bioacoustic data to reassess the distribution range and to evaluate intraspecific variation in P. mystacalis based on specimens from fifteen localities and seven Brazilian states. We also reassess the distribution and taxonomic status of Pseudopaludicola serrana, herein considered as a junior synonym of P. murundu based on morphology, bioacoustics, and molecular data. 1. Introduction Advertisement calls are important for mate recognition in anurans and hence contribute to premating isolation among sympatric species [1]. Comparison of advertisement calls can be used to determine differences and affinities among different anuran species and so to determine taxonomic identity and phylogenetic relationships [2, 3]. Such comparisons may be especially useful for situations in which the taxonomic identity of a species is uncertain or contested involving synonymies, redescriptions, and species resurrections. Indeed, in the absence of consistent morphological characters for interspecific distinctiveness, advertisement calls have proven to be of great help in revealing and supporting hypotheses of putative new species of Pseudopaludicola [4–9]. Described from midwestern Brazil (Chapada dos Guimar？es, Mato Grosso), Pseudopaludicola mystacalis is widely distributed and abundant in open environments along South American “diagonal of open formations” [8]. However, some populations along the species’ range are not recognized as belonging to this taxon, being rather attributed to other taxonomic entities, such as Pseudopaludicola aff. falcipes, Pseudopaludicola aff. mystacalis, and Pseudopaludicola sp. [10–14]. Therefore, an integrative taxonomic revision is needed to clarify the distribution range and variation in this species [9]. In spite of great morphological similarity among most of the 18 species of Pseudopaludicola currently recognized, three of them are readily distinguished from the others by having longer hindlimbs [4–6, 8, 9]: Pseudopaludicola saltica (Cope, 1887), Pseudopaludicola murundu Toledo, Siqueira, Duarte, Veiga-Menoncello, Recco-Pimentel, and Haddad, 2010, and Pseudopaludicola serrana Toledo, 2010.
References
[1]
K. D. Wells, The Ecology & Behavior of Amphibians, The University of Chicago, Chicago, Ill, USA, 2007.
[2]
M. Vences, M. Gehara, J. K？hler, and F. Glaw, “Description of a new Malagasy treefrog (Boophis) occurring syntopically with its sister species, and a plea for studies on non-allopatric spéciation in tropical amphibians,” Amphibia Reptilia, vol. 33, no. 3-4, pp. 503–520, 2012.
[3]
I. De La Riva, R. Márquez, and J. Bosch, “Description of the advertisement calls of some South American Hylidae (Amphibia, Anura): taxonomic and methodological consequences,” Bonner Zoologische Beitr？ge, vol. 47, pp. 175–185, 1997.
[4]
F. S. de Andrade and T. R. de Carvalho, “A new species of Pseudopaludicola Miranda-Ribeiro (Leiuperinae: Leptodactylidae: Anura) from the Cerrado of southeastern Brazil,” Zootaxa, vol. 3608, no. 5, pp. 389–397, 2013.
[5]
D. Cardozo and L. F. Toledo, “Taxonomic status of Pseudopaludicola riopiedadensis Mercadal de Barrio and Barrio, 1994 (Anura, Leptodactylidae, Leiuperinae),” Zootaxa, vol. 3734, pp. 571–582, 2013.
[6]
T. R. de Carvalho, “A new species of Pseudopaludicola Miranda-Ribeiro (Leiuperinae: Leptodactylidae: Anura) from the Cerrado of southeastern Brazil with a distinctive advertisement call pattern,” Zootaxa, no. 3328, pp. 47–54, 2012.
[7]
F. M. Magalh？es, D. Loebmann, M. N. C. Kokubum, C. F. B. Haddad, and A. A. Garda, “A new species of Pseudopaludicola (Anura: Leptodactylidae: Leiuperinae) from Northeastern Brazil,” Herpetologica, vol. 70, pp. 77–88, 2014.
[8]
A. Pansonato, C. Strüssmann, J. R. Mudrek, and I. A. Martins, “Morphometric and bioacoustic data on three species of Pseudopaludicola Miranda-Ribeiro, 1926 (Anura: Leptodactylidae: Leiuperinae) described from Chapada dos Guimar？es, Mato Grosso, Brazil, with the revalidation of Pseudopaludicola ameghini (Cope, 1887),” Zootaxa, vol. 3620, no. 1, pp. 147–162, 2013.
[9]
I. J. Roberto, D. Cardozo, and R. W. ávila, “A new species of Pseudopaludicola (Anura, Leiuperidae) from Western Piauí State, Northeast Brazil,” Zootaxa, vol. 3636, no. 2, pp. 348–360, 2013.
[10]
S. B. Barreto, M. S. Tinoco, D. Couto-Ferreira, and H. C. Browne-Ribeiro, “Distribui？？o de Pseudopaludicola aff. falcipes (Anura; Leiuperidae) na restinga do litoral norte da Bahia, Brasil,” Revista Latino-Americana de Conserva？？o, vol. 2, pp. 27–36, 2012.
[11]
E. R. Fávero, A. C. P. Veiga-Menoncello, D. C. Rossa-Feres et al., “Intrageneric karyotypic variation in Pseudopaludicola (Anura: Leiuperidae) and its taxonomic relatedness,” Zoological Studies, vol. 50, no. 6, pp. 826–836, 2011.
[12]
M. Jansen, R. Bloch, A. Schulze, and M. Pfenninger, “Integrative inventory of Bolivia's lowland anurans reveals hidden diversity,” Zoologica Scripta, vol. 40, no. 6, pp. 567–583, 2011.
[13]
C. P. D. Prado, M. Uetanabaro, and C. F. B. Haddad, “Breeding activity patterns, reproductive modes, and habitat use by anurans (Amphibia) in a seasonal environment in the Pantanal, Brazil,” Amphibia Reptilia, vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 211–221, 2005.
[14]
R. A. Silva, I. A. Martins, and D. C. Rossa-Feres, “Bioacústica e sítio de vocaliza？？o em taxocenoses de anfíbios de área aberta no Noroeste Paulista,” Biota Neotropica, vol. 8, pp. 123–134, 2008.
[15]
L. F. Toledo, “Description of a new species of Pseudopaludicola Miranda-Ribeiro, 1926 from the state of S？o Paulo, Southeastern Brazil (Anura, Leiuperidae),” Zootaxa, no. 2681, pp. 47–56, 2010.
[16]
L. F. Toledo, S. Siqueira, T. C. Duarte, A. C. P. Veiga-Menoncello, S. M. Recco-Pimentel, and C. F. B. Haddad, “Description of a new species of Pseudopaludicola Miranda-Ribeiro, 1926 from the state of S？o Paulo, Southeastern Brazil (Anura, Leiuperidae),” Zootaxa, no. 2496, pp. 38–48, 2010.
[17]
C. F. B. Haddad and A. J. Cardoso, “Taxonomia de três espécies de Pseudopaludicola (Anura, Leptodactylidae),” Papéis Avulsos de Zoologia, vol. 36, pp. 287–300, 1987.
[18]
T. C. Duarte, A. C. P. Veiga-Menoncello, J. F. R. Lima et al., “Chromosome analysis in Pseudopaludicola (Anura, Leiuperidae), with description of sex chromosomes XX/XY in P. saltica,” Hereditas, vol. 147, no. 2, pp. 43–52, 2010.
[19]
A. C. P. Veiga-Menoncello, L. B. Louren？o, C. Strüssmann et al., “A phylogenetic analysis of Pseudopaludicola (Anura) providing evidence of progressive chromosome reduction,” Zoologica Scripta, vol. 43, no. 3, pp. 261–272, 2014.
[20]
W. R. Heyer, A. S. Rand, C. A. G. Cruz, O. L. Peixoto, and C. E. Nelson, “Frogs of Boracéia,” Arquivos de Zoologia, vol. 31, pp. 231–410, 1990.
[21]
W. E. Duellman, The Hylid Frogs of Middle America, vol. 1 of Monograph of the Museum of Natural History of University of Kansas, 1970.
[22]
R Development Core Team, The R Project for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria, 2013, http://www.r-project.org.
[23]
P. E. Vanzolini, “Ecological and geographical distribution of lizards in Pernambuco, Northeastern Brasil (Sauria),” Papéis Avulsos de Zoologia, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 61–90, 1974.
[24]
J. M. Cei, “Amphibians of Argentina.,” Monitore Zoologico Italiano, Nuova Serie Monografia, vol. 2, pp. 1–609, 1980.
[25]
F. Brusquetti and E. O. Lavilla, “Lista comentada de los anfibios de Paraguay,” Cuadernos de Herpetología, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 3–79, 2006.
[26]
I. De La Riva, J. K？hler, S. L？tters, and S. Reichle, “Ten years of research on Bolivian amphibians: updated checklist, distribution, taxonomic problems, literature and iconography,” Revista Espa？ola Herpetologica, vol. 14, pp. 19–164, 2000.
