Cruziohyla, FAIVOVICH & HADDAD & GARCIA & FROST & CAMPBELL & WHEELER, 2005

FAIVOVICH, JULIÁN, HADDAD, CÉLIO F. B., GARCIA, PAULO C. A., FROST, DARREL R., CAMPBELL, JONATHAN A. & WHEELER, WARD C., 2005, Systematic Review Of The Frog Family Hylidae, With Special Reference To Hylinae: Phylogenetic Analysis And Taxonomic Revision, Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History 2005 (294), pp. 1-240 : 113-114

Cruziohyla , new genus

TYPE SPECIES: Agalychnis calcarifer Boulenger, 1902 .

DIAGNOSIS: For the purposes of this paper we consider that the 171 transformations in nuclear and mitochondrial protein and ribosomal genes autapomorphic of Cruziohyla calcarifer are synapomorphies of this genus. See appendix 5 for a complete list of these molecular synapomorphies. Possible morphological synapomorphies include the extensive hand and foot webbing (but see comments for Agalychnis ) and the development of tadpoles in water­filled depressions on fallen trees. See comments below.

ETYMOLOGY: The name comes from the Latinization of Cruz, Cruzius 1 connecting ­ o 1 Hyla . We dedicate this new genus to our colleague and friend Carlos Alberto Gonçalves da Cruz, in recognition of his various contributions to our knowledge of Phyllomedusinae .

COMMENTS: Phrynomedusa , the only genus of Phyllomedusinae missing from our analysis, shares with Cruziohyla a bicolored iris, developed foot webbing (although more extensively developed in Cruziohyla ), and oral disc with complete marginal papillae in the larvae. However, they differ in that eggs of Phrynomedusa are laid in rock crevices (A. Lutz and B. Lutz, 1939; Weygoldt, 1991) or fallen trunk cavities above streams, from where tadpoles drop and develop. The larvae of Cruziohyla , unlike those of most other known Phyllomedusinae , develop in waterfiled depressions of fallen trees (Donnelly et al., 1987; Hoogmoed and Cadle, 1991; Caldwell, 1994; Block et al., 2003). Hoogmoed and Cadle (1991) reported two situations where tadpoles associated with Agalychnis craspedopus were found in small pools in the forest, without a clear indication of where the eggs were laid. This could be interpreted either as a polymorphic reproductive trait or as an indication that more than one species is involved.

The oral disc with marginal papillae as a morphological synapomorphy of Cruziohyla 1 Phrynomedusa should be taken cautiously because of our general ignorance of the internal topology of Pelodryadinae. Some Pelodryadinae also have an oral disc with complete marginal papillae (see Anstis, 2002), and further analysis could show that this is actually a plesiomorphy for Phyllomedusinae . The same problem holds for the presence of foot webbing.

Instead of creating Cruziohyla to include Agalychnis calcarifer and A. craspedopus , we could place both species in Phrynomedusa . Both alternatives imply taxonomic risks (in particular, that Cruziohyla could be shown to be nested within Phrynomedusa ). Taking into account our almost complete ignorance of the relationships of Pelodryadinae, and therefore character­state polarities at its base, and that Phrynomedusa could not be included in this analysis, we consider that at this stage it is more appropriate to create Cruziohyla than to enlarge Phrynomedusa , without being certain about character polarities at the base of Phyllomedusinae .

Agalychnis craspedopus could not be included in the analysis, but the close relationship between A. craspedopus and A. calcarifer seems uncontroversial, as both have been repeatedly associated by some authors (Duellman, 1970; Hoogmoed and Cadle, 1991; Duellman, 2001).

CONTENTS: Two species. Cruziohyla calcarifer (Boulenger, 1902) , new comb., Cru­ ziohyla craspedopus (Funkhouser, 1957) , new comb.