RANIDAE, ANURA, Fischer von Waldheim, 1813

Lapparent, France de, Bailon, Salvador, Augé, Marc Louis & Rage, Jean-Claude, 2020, Amphibians and reptiles from the Neogene of Afghanistan, Geodiversitas 42 (22), pp. 409-426: 411-412

publication ID

http://doi.org/ 10.5252/geodiversitas2020v42a22

publication LSID

lsid:zoobank.org:pub:urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:07001ACA-EBDE-4256-BCB9-55E3159F81DC

DOI

http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4488512

persistent identifier

http://treatment.plazi.org/id/CB2D87E1-2E35-FFC7-FEDA-44B3FC0AF98A

treatment provided by

Felipe

scientific name

RANIDAE ANURA
status

 

Family “ RANIDAE  ” Batsch, 1796

Gen. et sp. indet. ( Figs 1View 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 1CView FIG; 2EView 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 1BView FIG; 2CView 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 1DView FIG; 2DView 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.

ANURA  indet. sp. A

LOCALITY AND AGE. — Sherullah 9, Khordkabul basin, Afghanistan, late Miocene, late Vallesian-basal Turolian transition, MN10/11.

MATERIAL EXAMINED. — Five fragments of toothed maxillae (AFG 1656), 1 fragment of angulosplenial (AFG 1657), 1 fragment of atlas (AFG 1658), 5 amphicoelous presacral vertebrae (AFG 1659), 7 non-amphicoelous presacral vertebrae (AFG 1660), 5 opisthocoelous sacral vertebrae (AFG 1661), 2 procoelous sacral vertebrae (AFG 1662), 5 fragments of urostyles (AFG 1663), 34 ilia (AFG 1664), 3 fragmentary humeri (AFG 1665), 3 fragments of radioulna (AFG 1666), 1 fragment of femur (AFG 1667). 

DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS

Only the maxillae, vertebrae and ilia deserve comments. The other remains provide no information. The presence of teeth on the maxillae allows to rule out Bufonidae  , where these bones are toothless. The vertebrae are only represented by their centra. Five centra of presacral vertebrae are amphicoelous, deeply biconcave, whereas seven are non-amphicoelous (it is not possible to determine their condition, procoelous or opisthocoelous). Vertebrae of Alytidae  are opisthocoelous. In “ Ranidae  ”, the last presacral vertebra is amphicoelous whereas the seven others are procoelous. Consequently, within the set of presacral vertebrae from Sherullah 9, the ratio amphicoelous/ non-amphicoelous vertebrae is somewhat surprising. In a few anuran groups, all presacral vertebrae are amphicoelous: in the living Leiopelmatidae Mivart, 1869  ( New Zealand) and Ascaphidae Fejérváry, 1923  (Western North America) the centra are clearly amphicoelous; in the Megophryidae Bonaparte, 1850  (southern Asia) and various Myobatrachidae Schlegel, 1850  ( Australia) the intervertebral cartilages remain free in adults, therefore the vertebrae are amphicoelous but they are not deeply biconcave. Among extinct forms, Notobatrachus Reig, 1956  and likely Vieraella Reig, 1961  (both from the Jurassic of South America), as well as the Gobiatidae 

Roček & Nessov 1993 (Cretaceous of Central Asia) are amphicoelous ( Báez &Basso 1996; Roček & Nessov1993).But, comparisons between “amphicoelous taxa” and amphicoelous vertebrae from Sherullah 9 cannot be made because the latter specimens are known only by their centra.Based on the available specimens from Sherullah 9 a family assignment is not possible.

Sacral vertebrae, as presacral ones, are represented by centra. The posterior face of all centra is bicondylar. But, in five sacral vertebrae the anterior face is convex (opisthocoelous) while it is concave (procoelous) in two specimens. The opisthocoelous sacral vertebrae may belong to Alytidae  or “ Ranidae  ”. But procoelous sacral vertebrae represent another family that cannot be identified.

All ilia have a dorsal crest. This morphological feature is present in Discoglossinae  ( Alytidae  ), Pipidae Gray, 1825  , “ Ranidae  ”, Rhacophoridae  and various Leptodactylidae Werner, 1896  and Hylidae Rafinesque, 1815  . The morphology of the tuber superius and dorsal crest of the fossil leads to rule out Pipidae  , Rhacophoridae  , Leptodactylidae  and Hylidae  , but the poor preservation of these bones does not permit to refer them to either the Discoglossinae  ( Alytidae  ) or “ Ranidae  ”.

ANURA  indet. sp. A

LOCALITY AND AGE. — Sherullah 9, Khordkabul basin, Afghanistan, late Miocene, late Vallesian-basal Turolian transition, MN10/11.

MATERIAL EXAMINED. — Five fragments of toothed maxillae (AFG 1656), 1 fragment of angulosplenial (AFG 1657), 1 fragment of atlas (AFG 1658), 5 amphicoelous presacral vertebrae (AFG 1659), 7 non-amphicoelous presacral vertebrae (AFG 1660), 5 opisthocoelous sacral vertebrae (AFG 1661), 2 procoelous sacral vertebrae (AFG 1662), 5 fragments of urostyles (AFG 1663), 34 ilia (AFG 1664), 3 fragmentary humeri (AFG 1665), 3 fragments of radioulna (AFG 1666), 1 fragment of femur (AFG 1667). 

DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS

Only the maxillae, vertebrae and ilia deserve comments. The other remains provide no information. The presence of teeth on the maxillae allows to rule out Bufonidae  , where these bones are toothless. The vertebrae are only represented by their centra. Five centra of presacral vertebrae are amphicoelous, deeply biconcave, whereas seven are non-amphicoelous (it is not possible to determine their condition, procoelous or opisthocoelous). Vertebrae of Alytidae  are opisthocoelous. In “ Ranidae  ”, the last presacral vertebra is amphicoelous whereas the seven others are procoelous. Consequently, within the set of presacral vertebrae from Sherullah 9, the ratio amphicoelous/ non-amphicoelous vertebrae is somewhat surprising. In a few anuran groups, all presacral vertebrae are amphicoelous: in the living Leiopelmatidae Mivart, 1869  ( New Zealand) and Ascaphidae Fejérváry, 1923  (Western North America) the centra are clearly amphicoelous; in the Megophryidae Bonaparte, 1850  (southern Asia) and various Myobatrachidae Schlegel, 1850  ( Australia) the intervertebral cartilages remain free in adults, therefore the vertebrae are amphicoelous but they are not deeply biconcave. Among extinct forms, Notobatrachus Reig, 1956  and likely Vieraella Reig, 1961  (both from the Jurassic of South America), as well as the Gobiatidae 

Roček & Nessov 1993 (Cretaceous of Central Asia) are amphicoelous ( Báez &Basso 1996; Roček & Nessov1993).But, comparisons between “amphicoelous taxa” and amphicoelous vertebrae from Sherullah 9 cannot be made because the latter specimens are known only by their centra.Based on the available specimens from Sherullah 9 a family assignment is not possible.

Sacral vertebrae, as presacral ones, are represented by centra. The posterior face of all centra is bicondylar. But, in five sacral vertebrae the anterior face is convex (opisthocoelous) while it is concave (procoelous) in two specimens. The opisthocoelous sacral vertebrae may belong to Alytidae  or “ Ranidae  ”. But procoelous sacral vertebrae represent another family that cannot be identified.

All ilia have a dorsal crest. This morphological feature is present in Discoglossinae  ( Alytidae  ), Pipidae Gray, 1825  , “ Ranidae  ”, Rhacophoridae  and various Leptodactylidae Werner, 1896  and Hylidae Rafinesque, 1815  . The morphology of the tuber superius and dorsal crest of the fossil leads to rule out Pipidae  , Rhacophoridae  , Leptodactylidae  and Hylidae  , but the poor preservation of these bones does not permit to refer them to either the Discoglossinae  ( Alytidae  ) or “ Ranidae  ”.

Kingdom

Animalia

Phylum

Chordata

Class

Amphibia

Order

Anura

Family

Ranidae

Kingdom

Animalia

Phylum

Tracheophyta

Class

Magnoliopsida

Order

Anura