RANIDAE
|
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.5252/geodiversitas2020v42a22 |
|
publication LSID |
urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:07001ACA-EBDE-4256-BCB9-55E3159F81DC |
|
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4488512 |
|
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/CB2D87E1-2E35-FFC7-FEDA-44B3FC0AF98A |
|
treatment provided by |
Felipe |
|
scientific name |
RANIDAE |
| status |
|
Family “ RANIDAE View in CoL ” Batsch, 1796
Gen. et sp. indet. ( Figs 1 View FIG B-D; 2C-E)
LOCALITY AND AGE. — Sherullah 9, Khordkabul basin, Afghanistan, late Miocene, Late Vallesian-basal Turolian transition, MN10/11.
MATERIAL EXAMINED. — One coracoid (AFG 1652), 3 humeri (AFG 1653, 1654), 1 ilium (AFG 1655).
DESCRIPTION
The coracoid is represented by its ventro-medial part (pars epicoracoidalis; Špinar, 1972) and its “neck” (corpus coracoidalis); the lateral extremity (intumescencia glenoidalis) is broken off ( Figs 1C View FIG ; 2E View FIG ). The ventro-medial part expands as a broad plate (wider than in Bufonidae Gray, 1825 , Alytidae and Rhacophoridae Hoffman, 1932 ); unfortunately, its anterior and posterior extremities are lacking. The neck is cylindrical.
The diaphysis of the humeri is straight. The condyle is spherical, relatively small, and located in the prolongation of the diapophysial axis (in Alytidae , Bufonidae and Rhacophoridae , the condyle is radially shifted). The cubital fossa is small, crescentic, and well-limited laterally.The epicondyles are dissymmetrical, the radial one being reduced. A small radial crest is present. The ulnar crest extends laterally in two humeri ( Figs 1B View FIG ; 2C View FIG ) which probably represent male individuals; in the third one, the crest is small (female individual).
The ilium is incomplete, most of the acetabular area is broken away. A high dorsal crest is present on the ilial shaft (higher than in Discoglossinae and in most of the Rhacophoridae ) ( Figs 1D View FIG ; 2D View FIG ). A thickening of the posterior border of the crest forms the tuber superius. This tuber slopes steeply into the acetabular part (more steeply than in alytid Discoglossinae and Rhacophoridae ).
COMMENTS
The family “ Ranidae ” is in quotes to indicate its non-monophyly, until a consensus on its definition is reached (i.e Frost et al. 2006; Cannatella 2007 or Che et al. 2007). In this work, Rhacophoridae is considered as a family of the Ranoidea .
The morphology of these bones argues for referral to the “ Ranidae ”. More specifically, the morphologies of the ventromedial part of the coracoid and that of the tuber superius of the ilium clearly point to this family. But, the poor preservation of the specimens prevents identification within the family.
Today, the “ Ranidae ” are cosmopolitan; they are absent only in South America and most of Australia. The earliest representatives of the family were recovered from the late Eocene in Europe ( Rage 1984). In Asia, the earliest ranids were briefly reported from the middle Oligocene of Kazakhstan (Čkhikvadze 1985), but without a description or figure it is not possible to evaluate the reliability of this identification. In Asia, “ Ranidae ” have been found in the Early Eocene of the Vastan Lignite Mine ( Folie et al. 2013), in the Miocene of Anatolia, China, and Thailand, and in the Pliocene of Anatolia, Azerbaydzhan, India, and China ( Roček & Rage 2000; Rage et al. 2001). Finally, Syromyatnikova (2016) mentioned in the late earliest-early middle Miocene (MN5) of Tagay, the earliest record of the lineages of green and brown frogs (respectively Pelophylax Fitzinger, 1843 : Pelophylax sp., and Rana Linnaeus, 1758 : Rana sp.) in Asia.
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.