Philautus chalazodes, (GUNTHER, 1876)
|
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.1111/j.1096-3642.2008.00466.x |
|
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5492411 |
|
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03F5945F-FFB1-1E5D-FF09-F932FC87C5DB |
|
treatment provided by |
Felipe |
|
scientific name |
Philautus chalazodes |
| status |
|
PHILAUTUS CHALAZODES ( GÜNTHER, 1876) View in CoL
( FIGS 14C View Figure 14 , 17A–C View Figure 17 , 18 View Figure 18 , 19 View Figure 19 ; TABLE 2)
Type material: Holotype, BMNH 1947.2 .6.35 (ex BMNH 1874.4.29.267), an adult female, SVL 27.9 mm, from ‘ Travancore’ , Kerala, India.
Other material examined: none.
Identity: Philautus chalazodes was described by Günther in 1876 based on a single female specimen from ‘Travancore’, collected by Colonel Richard Henry Beddome. The ‘lead diagnostic’ characters that were used by Günther (1876: 574) are ‘tongue with a free, pointed papilla in the anterior part of the median line’ and ‘inguinal region there are several series of white, smooth tubercles; several smaller similar tubercles in the anal region and along the tarsus...’ We presume that Günther considered the ‘smooth tubercles’ as the lead diagnostic character, because he named the species ‘chalazodes’, derived from the Greek word chalaza meaning grain and odes for the derived adjective, and because of the white granulation (tubercle) of the body. Das & Dutta (1998) provided an English common name for this species: white-spotted bush frog.
Diagnosis: Philautus chalazodes can be distinguished from known congeners by the following combination of characters: (1) medium adult female size (SVL 27.9 mm); (2) snout rounded; (3) prominent supernumerary tubercles on both limbs; (4) ventral side of lower arm and tarsus prominently granular ( Fig. 17B View Figure 17 ); (5) dorsal coloration completely extended to forelimbs and hindlimbs.
The female holotype of P. chalazodes differs from P. beddomii (three females from Athirimala and two females from Munnar) by its rounded snout (vs. pointed to nearly oval), presence of a lingual papilla on the tongue (vs. absent), well-developed supernumerary tubercles on hands and toes (vs. absent or weakly developed), toe webbing moderate ( Figs 17C View Figure 17 , 19 View Figure 19 ), reaching just below the third subarticular tubercle of toe IV on the inside, and just above the third subarticular tubercle of toe IV on the outside (vs. reduced, reaching up to second subarticular tubercle on either side of toe IV, Fig. 19 View Figure 19 ), and foot length subequal to shank and thigh length, FOL 13.1 mm, ShL 13.3 mm, TL 13.2 mm, N = 1 (vs. shorter than shank and thigh length, FOL 9.5 ± 3.4 mm, ShL 11.8 ± 4.1 mm, TL 11.6 ± 4.1 mm, N = 5) .
Description of the holotype (all measurements in mm): Medium-sized frog (SVL 27.9) with a slender body; head length (HL 10.2) shorter than wide (HW 10.8; MN 9.3; MFE 7.1; MBE 3.4); outline of snout in dorsal and ventral views round, snout length (SL 4.1) equal to horizontal diameter of eye (EL 4.2) ( Fig. 17A View Figure 17 ); canthus rostralis indistinct, loreal region acutely concave; distance between posterior margins of eyes (IBE 9.5) 1.7 times the distance between anterior margins of eyes (IFE 5.5); tympanum rather indistinct, supratympanic fold rather indistinct ( Fig. 17A View Figure 17 ); tongue with lingual papilla.
Forelimb (FLL 6.6) shorter than hand (HAL 7.7; TFL 3.7); fingers with lateral dermal fringe, webbing absent; subarticular tubercles prominent, rounded, single, III2 and IV2 weakly developed; prepollex distinct; single palmar tubercle; supernumerary tubercles present ( Fig. 17B View Figure 17 ).
Hindlimbs moderately long, shank (ShL 13.3) almost equal to thigh (TL 13.2), longer than distance from base of inner metatarsal tubercle to tip of toe IV (FOL 13.1); webbing moderate ( Figs 17C View Figure 17 , 19 View Figure 19 ), reaching up to third subarticular tubercle just below on the inside and just above on the outside of toe IV; dermal fringe along toe V present.
Skin of snout, between eyes, upper eyelids, side of head, and anterior part of back shagreened, posterior part of back, dorsal part of forelimb, thigh, shank, and tarsus shagreened; throat shagreened, chest, belly, and posterior surface of thighs granular, ventral side of lower arm and tarsus prominently granular.
Colour of holotype in preservation: Dorsum uniform bluish grey, scattered white tubercles on posterior half of dorsum, loreal and tympanic regions bluish grey, forelimbs and hindlimbs bluish grey with white tubercles ( Fig. 18 View Figure 18 ); ventral side greyish.
Distribution: The original description of this species mentioned ‘Travancore’ without a precise locality ( Fig. 14C View Figure 14 ). No reliable observations have been made available for this species since its original description.
No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.