Search

Family Microhylidae Günther, 1858 The only species of the genus Elachistocleis known to occur in the state of Amapá is Elachistocleis helianneae Caramaschi, 2010 (Jowers et al. 2021). We considered the record of Elachistocleis sp. from Pereira-Júnior et al. (2013) to be E. helianneae based on the distribution and the overall morphology of the specimens (Costa-Campos, pers. obs.) and calls (Marinho et al. 2018). Fouquet et al. (2021b) showed in their integrative study that Otophryne pyburni is probably restricted to the western portion of the Guiana Shield, and that the populations of Otophryne inhabiting French Guiana and the Brazilian states of Amapá and Pará belong to an unconfirmed candidate species related to Otophryne robusta Boulenger, 1900. Therefore, we chose to consider the records of O. pyburni in Amapá as O. cf. robusta until more studies arise to evaluate its taxonomic status, confirming or contradicting this candidate species. Synapturanus zombie Fouquet, Leblanc, Fabre, Rodrigues, Menin, Courtois, Dewynter, Hölting, Ernst, Peloso & Kok, 2021 was recently described from French Guiana with one population recorded in the municipality of Oiapoque, northern Amapá (locality 46, Fig. 10) and a second potential population in the upper Rio Calçoene (2.3734° N, 51.3782° W; Fouquet et al. 2021a). We did not add this locality to the map because of the uncertainty on the population identity according to the original publication. We have found records of Synapturanus mirandaribeiroi Nelson & Lescure, 1975 from three localities in the Tumucumaque Mountains National Park (localities 5–7; Lima 2008). The two species have previously been confused with each other and have close distribution ranges, with one of the records from Tumucumaque (locality 5) very close to the Mitaraka massif, French Guiana, one of the localities with known populations of S. mirandaribeiroi (Fouquet et al. 2021). We then consider the records from the Tumucumaque Park (Lima 2008) as S. mirandaribeiroi, but we are aware that some of these records may actually be S. zombie Fouquet, Leblanc, Fabre, Rodrigues, Menin, Courtois, Dewynter, Hölting, Ernst, Peloso & Kok, 2021. Finally, we have an unvouchered record of S. zombie from the municipality of Serra do Navio, with only a picture (Fig. 9G). Although the picture is slightly out of focus, it is possible to see one important diagnostic character distinguishing this species from S. mirandaribeiroi: the dorsum with numerous orange spots and blotches (dorsum with diffuse mottled pattern in S. mirandaribeiroi). Therefore, we consider the photograph-based record of S. zombie in Serra do Navio, extending the distribution of this species to the central portion of Amapá, more than 250 km southeast from its type locality (Itoupé, French Guiana; 3.0230° N, 53.0955° W)., Published as part of Taucce, Pedro P. G., Costa-Campos, Carlos Eduardo, Carvalho, Thiago R. & Michalski, Fernanda, 2022, Anurans (Amphibia: Anura) of the Brazilian state of Amapá, eastern Amazonia: species diversity and knowledge gaps, pp. 96-130 in European Journal of Taxonomy 836 on page 118, DOI: 10.5852/ejt.2022.836.1919, http://zenodo.org/record/7061668, {"references":["Jowers M. J., Othman S. N., Borzee A., Rivas G. A., Sanchez-Ramirez S., Auguste R. J., Downie J. R., Read M. & Murphy J. C. 2021. Unraveling unique island colonization events in Elachistocleis frogs: phylogeography, cryptic divergence, and taxonomical implications. Organisms Diversity and Evolution 21 (1): 189 - 206. https: // doi. org / 10.1007 / s 13127 - 021 - 00487 - y","Marinho P., Carvalho T. R., Bang D. L., Teixeira B. F. V., Azarak P. A., Costa-Campos C. E. & Giaretta A. A. 2018. Advertisement calls, intraspecific variation and species diagnosis of six Brazilian species of Elachistocleis (Anura: Microhylidae: Gastrophryninae). Zootaxa 4521 (3): 357 - 375. https: // doi. org / 10.11646 / zootaxa. 4521.3.3","Fouquet A., Leblanc K., Framit M., Rejaud A., Rodrigues M. T., Castroviejo-Fisher S., Pelos P. L. V., Prates I., Manzi S., Suescun U., Baroni S., Moraes L. J. C. L., Recoder R., Souza S. M., Dal Vecchio F., Camacho A., Ghellere J. M., Rojas-Runjaic F. J. M., Gagliardi-Urrutia G., De Carvalho V. T., Gordo M., Menin M., Kok P. J. R., Hrbek T., Werneck F. P., Crawford A. J., Ron S. R., Mueses-Cisneros J. J., Rojas Zamora R. R., Pavan D., Ivo Simoes P., Ernst R. & Fabre A. - C. 2021 b. Species diversity and biogeography of an ancient frog clade from the Guiana Shield (Anura: Microhylidae: Adelastes, Otophryne, Synapturanus) exhibiting spectacular phenotypic diversification. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 132: 233 - 256. https: // doi. org / 10.1093 / biolinnean / blaa 204","Fouquet A., Leblanc K., Fabre A. C., Rodrigues M. T., Menin M., Courtois E. A., Dewynter M., Holting M., Ernst R., Peloso P. & Kok P. J. R. 2021 a. Comparative osteology of the fossorial frogs of the genus Synapturanus (Anura, Microhylidae) with the description of three new species from the Eastern Guiana Shield. Zoologischer Anzeiger 293: 46 - 73. https: // doi. org / 10.1016 / j. jcz. 2021.05.003","Lima J. D. 2008. A herpetofauna do Parque Nacional do Montanhas do Tumucumaque, Amapa, Brasil, Expedicoes I a V. In: Bernhard E. (ed.) Inventarios Biologicos Rapidos no Parque Nacional Montanhas do Tumucumaque, Amapa, Brasil.: 38 - 50."]}

Family Leptodactylidae Werner, 1896 Leptodactylus bolivianus Boulenger, 1898 is distributed in the western and central portions of the Amazon Basin in Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Peru and Venezuela (Heyer & de Sá 2011), whereas Leptodactylus guianensis Heyer & de Sá, 2011 is distributed across the Guiana Shield. These two species are morphologically quite similar to each other and, before the description of L. guianensis in 2011, it was commonly confused with L. bolivianus in the literature (Heyer & de Sá 2011). We consider the record of L. cf. bolivianus from Lima (2006b) to be L. guianensis. Gazoni et al. (2021) recently revisited the systematics of the group of L. melanonotus using an integrative approach. One of the taxonomic results was the revalidation of L. intermedius, previously a junior synonym of Leptodactylus petersii Steindachner, 1864. Besides L. petersii, there are records of two other species of the group of L. melanonotus in Amapá: L. wagneri (Lima 2006) and Leptodactylus podicipinus Cope, 1862 (PereiraJúnior et al. 2013; Araújo & Costa 2015; Lima 2018; Costa-Campos & Freire 2019). All records previously associated with L. podicipinus in Amapá should be assigned to L. intermedius. Leptodactylus wagneri is distributed in western Amazonia and the records in eastern Amazonia correspond either to L. intermedius (see Gazoni et al. 2021) or to unnamed species, treated here as Leptodactylus sp., endemic to the Eastern Guiana Shield (Carvalho et al. in press). Leptodactylus leptodactyloides (Andersson, 1945) is widely distributed in Amazonia but reported in Amapá for the first time in this study. The species was confirmed to occur at one location (Comunidade Ariri), within the municipality of Macapá, based on DNA-barcoded individuals (Carvalho et al. in press)., Published as part of Taucce, Pedro P. G., Costa-Campos, Carlos Eduardo, Carvalho, Thiago R. & Michalski, Fernanda, 2022, Anurans (Amphibia: Anura) of the Brazilian state of Amapá, eastern Amazonia: species diversity and knowledge gaps, pp. 96-130 in European Journal of Taxonomy 836 on page 118, DOI: 10.5852/ejt.2022.836.1919, http://zenodo.org/record/7061668, {"references":["Heyer W. R. & de Sa R. O. 2011. Variation, Systematics, and Relationships of the Leptodactylus bolivianus Complex (Amphibia: Anura: Leptodactylidae). Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology 635: 1 - 58. https: // doi. org / 10.5479 / si. 00810282.635.1","Lima J. D. 2006 b. Inventarios Biologicos da Herpetofauna na Floresta Nacional do Amapa - Expedicoes I e II. In: Bernard E. (ed.) Inventarios Biologicos na Floresta Nacional do Amapa - Expedicoes I e II: 57 - 77. Macapa, Amapa.","Gazoni T., Lyra M. L., Ron S. R., Strussmann C., Baldo D., Narimatsu H., Pansonato A., Schneider R. G., Giaretta A. A., Haddad C. F. B., Parise-Maltempi P. P. & Carvalho T. R. 2021. Revisiting the systematics of the Leptodactylus melanonotus group (Anura: Leptodactylidae): Redescription of L. petersii and revalidation of its junior synonyms. Zoologischer Anzeiger 290: 117 - 134. https: // doi. org / 10.1016 / j. jcz. 2020.12.002","Lima J. D. 2018. Relatorio final do programa de monitoramento de herpetofauna da area de influencia da UHE Cachoeira Caldeirao.","Costa-Campos C. E. & Freire E. M. X. 2019. Richness and composition of anuran assemblages from an Amazonian savanna. ZooKeys 2019 (843): 149 - 169. https: // doi. org / 10.3897 / zookeys. 843.33365"]}

Family Aromobatidae Grant, Frost, Caldwell, Gagliardo, Haddad, Kok, Mittel, Noonan, Schargel & Wheeler, 2006 Anomaloglossus baeobatrachus (Boistel & Massary, 1999) is found throughout French Guiana and the state of Amapá, and may be a species complex (Fouquet et al. 2019 a, 2019b). The specimens from Amapá are recovered in a different clade in comparison with the clade formed by specimens from the type locality (Saint Eugène, French Guiana). Moreover, what is called An. baeobatrachus in the literature has two markedly different phenotypes, one with endotrophic (as observed from topotypes) and the other one with exotrophic tadpoles, morphologically indistinguishable from each other (Fouquet et al. 2019 a, 2019b). The populations with exotrophic tadpoles have signs of past hybridization and more investigation is necessary to clarify their taxonomic status (Fouquet et al. 2019a). Although both phenotypes occur in Amapá (Fouquet et al. 2019a), we chose to consider all the records under the name An. baeobatrachus until the situation is clarified. Two problematic species appeared among the records, namely Anomaloglossus beebei (Noble, 1923) and Allobates marchesianus (Melin, 1941). Anomaloglossus beebei is an endangered species with a restricted distribution, known only from the Pakaraima region, western Guyana (Cole et al. 2013; IUCN 2022). There are records of An. beebei from seven localities in central and northeastern Amapá (localities 5, 7–8, 11–12, 14–15; Lima 2006a, 2006b, 2008; Queiroz et al. 2011). Allobates marchesianus is probably a species complex distributed in Colombia, Peru, Venezuela, and the Brazilian state of Amazonas (Caldwell et al. 2002). There are also records of Al. marchesianus from central and northeastern Amapá, from five localities (6–8, 14–15; Lima 2006a, 2006b, 2008). According to recent thorough molecular surveys (Fouquet et al. 2019b; Rejaud et al. 2020; Vacher et al. 2020) none of these species occur in the state of Amapá. Besides, we did not have access to any of the vouchers and, due to the complex taxonomic history of the two species (see Caldwell et al. 2002; Kok et al. 2006), we cannot assign these records undoubtedly to a single species and we chose to remove the records from the list. Nonetheless, it is important to note that An. beebei has long been mistaken for Allobates granti Kok, MacCulloch, Gaucher, Poelman, Bourne, Lathrop & Lenglet, 2006 (Kok et al. 2006) and, although there is no record of Al. granti in Amapá, the species is known to inhabit several localities throughout the western border of French Guiana. Thus, at least some of the records of An. beebei may actually correspond to Al. granti., Published as part of Taucce, Pedro P. G., Costa-Campos, Carlos Eduardo, Carvalho, Thiago R. & Michalski, Fernanda, 2022, Anurans (Amphibia: Anura) of the Brazilian state of Amapá, eastern Amazonia: species diversity and knowledge gaps, pp. 96-130 in European Journal of Taxonomy 836 on pages 100-101, DOI: 10.5852/ejt.2022.836.1919, http://zenodo.org/record/7061668, {"references":["Fouquet A., Ferrier B., Salmona J., Tirera S., Vacher J. - P., Courtois E. A., Gaucher P., Lima J. D., Nunes P. M. S., De Souza S. M., Rodrigues M. T., Noonan B. & De Thoisy B. 2019 a. Phenotypic and life-history diversification in Amazonian frogs despite past introgressions. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 130: 169 - 180. https: // doi. org / 10.1016 / j. ympev. 2018.09.010","Fouquet A., Vacher J. - P., Courtois E. A., Deschamps C., Ouboter P., Jairam R., Gaucher P., Dubois A. & Kok P. J. R. 2019 b. A new species of Anomaloglossus (Anura: Aromobatidae) of the stepheni group with the redescription of A. baeobatrachus (Boistel and de Massary, 1999), and an amended definition of A. leopardus Ouboter and Jairam, 2012. Zootaxa 4576: 439 - 460. https: // doi. org / 10.11646 / zootaxa. 4576.3.2","Cole C. J., Townsend C. R., Reynolds R. P., MacCulloch R. D. & Lathrop A. 2013. Amphibians and reptiles of Guyana, South America: illustrated keys, annotated species accounts, and a biogeographic synopsis. Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington 125: 317 - 578.","IUCN 2022. The IUCN red list of threatened species. Available from https: // www. iucnredlist. org [accessed 1 Sep. 2022].","Lima J. D. 2006 a. Projeto de Pesquisa para Inventarios da Fauna e Plantas Superiores da Reserva de Desenvolvimento Sustentavel - Rio Iratapuru, Amapa. Macapa, Amapa.","Lima J. D. 2006 b. Inventarios Biologicos da Herpetofauna na Floresta Nacional do Amapa - Expedicoes I e II. In: Bernard E. (ed.) Inventarios Biologicos na Floresta Nacional do Amapa - Expedicoes I e II: 57 - 77. Macapa, Amapa.","Lima J. D. 2008. A herpetofauna do Parque Nacional do Montanhas do Tumucumaque, Amapa, Brasil, Expedicoes I a V. In: Bernhard E. (ed.) Inventarios Biologicos Rapidos no Parque Nacional Montanhas do Tumucumaque, Amapa, Brasil.: 38 - 50.","Queiroz S. S., Silva A. R., Reis F. M., Lima J. D. & Lima J. R. F. 2011. Anfibios de uma area de castanhal da Reserva Extrativista do Rio Cajari, Amapa. Biota Amazonia 1 (1): 1 - 18. https: // doi. org / 10.18561 / 2179 - 5746 / biotaamazonia. v 1 n 1 p 1 - 18","Caldwell J. P., Lima A. P. & Keller C. 2002. Redescription of Colostethus marchesianus from its type locality. Copeia 2002: 157 - 165.","Vacher J. P., Chave J., Ficetola F. G., Sommeria-Klein G., Tao S., Thebaud C., Blanc M., Camacho A., Cassimiro J., Colston T. J., Dewynter M., Ernst R., Gaucher P., Gomes J. O., Jairam R., Kok P. J. R., Lima J. D., Martinez Q., Marty C., Noonan B. P., Nunes P. M. S., Ouboter P., Recoder R., Rodrigues M. T., Snyder A., Marques-Souza S. & Fouquet A. 2020. Large-scale DNA-based survey of frogs in Amazonia suggests a vast underestimation of species richness and endemism. Journal of Biogeography 47 (8): 1781 - 1791. https: // doi. org / 10.1111 / jbi. 13847","Kok P. J. R., Macculloch R. D., Gaucher P., Poelman E. H., Bourne G. R., Lathrop A. & Lenglet G. L. (2006). A new species of Colostethus (Anura, Dendrobatidae) from French Guiana with a redescription of Colostethus beebei (Noble, 1923) from its type locality. Phyllomedusa: Journal of Herpetology 5: 43 - 66. https: // doi. org / 10.11606 / issn. 2316 - 9079. v 5 i 1 p 43 - 66"]}

Family Craugastoridae Hedges, Duellman & Heinicke, 2008 Pristimantis marmoratus (Boulenger, 1900) is currently distributed in the western portion of the Guiana Shield, through Venezuela and Guyana, and its sister clade has a more eastern distribution, occurring in French Guiana and Amapá (Kok et al. 2018). Fouquet et al. (2022b) recently described this clade as Pristimantis crepitaculus Fouquet, Peloso, Jairam, Lima, Mônico, Ernst & Kok, 2022. We considered four out of our five records of P. marmoratus (Lima 2008; 2018; Queiroz et al. 2011; Benício & Lima 2017) as P. crepitaculus. Pristimantis ockendeni (Boulenger 1912) was once thought to occur all over the upper Amazon basin, from southern Peru to Colombia, but it is currently thought to be a species complex with the nominal P. ockendeni currently known only from the type locality, in Peru (Elmer et al. 2007; Elmer & Canatella 2008). Silva e Silva & Costa-Campos (2018) recorded a species with overall morphology similar to P. ockendeni which they identified as P. cf. ockendeni , but they also recorded P. marmoratus. Besides P. crepitaculus, Fouquet et al. (2022b) also mention P. grandoculis from the state of Amapá, a species they revalidated in their study. The main morphological difference between these two species is the tympanum, which is present in the first species and absent in the latter. Thus, we consider the records of Silva e Silva & Costa-Campos (2018) as P. crepitaculus (their P. cf. ockendeni) and P. grandoculis (their P. marmoratus).

Family Bufonidae Gray, 1825 A recent study revealed high levels of species diversity within the bufonid genus Amazophrynella (Rojas et al. 2018), and described a new species for Suriname, French Guiana, and Amapá: Amazophrynella teko Rojas, Fouquet, Ron, Hernández-Ruz, Melo-Sampaio, Chaparro, Vogt, Carvalho, Pinheiro, Ávila, Farias, Gordo & Hrbek, 2018. According to their study, it is the only species distributed in Amapá. Vacher et al. (2020) also found only one species of Amazophrynella in their molecular survey, but they identified it as A. manaos Rojas-Zamora, Carvalho, Gordo, Ávila, Farias & Hrbek, 2014 or A. aff. manaos. We assume that the entries A. manaos and A. aff. manaos in their supplemental material is likely an inconsistent nomenclatural update throughout their species list. Both applied names (A. manaos and A. aff. manaos) of Vacher et al. (2020) are undoubtedly conspecific with A. teko. In this context, we treated the records of A. minuta and Amazophrynella sp. 1 from the Amapá National Forest as conspecific with A. teko as well. For more than30 years, Atelopus hoogmoedi was considered a subspecies of Atelopus pulcher (Boulenger, 1882) (Lescure 1974, 1976) or Atelopus spumarius Cope, 1871 (Lescure et al. 1980; Lescure & Marty 2000; Lötters et al. 2002). However, Lötters & Schulte (2005) elevated the taxon to full species level and Noonan & Gaucher (2005) provided molecular support for their decision. The populations from Brazil distributed north of the Amazon River, including Amapá, are currently assigned to A. hoogmoedi (Costa-Campos & Carvalho 2018; Jorge et al. 2020; Silva et al. 2020). Thus, we considered the records of Atelopus barbotini Lescure, 1981 from Lima (2006a, 2006b) and A. spumarius from Queiroz et al. (2011) and Lima (2018) as A. hoogmoedi. According to Vacher et al. (2020), Atelopus flavescens Duméril & Bibron, 1841 is also expected to occur in Amapá. However, since the taxonomic status of the populations from Amapá remains partly ambiguous, we adopted only one of the names in our list (A. hoogmoedi). Although it is probable that A. flavescens occurs indeed in the state of Amapá, further taxonomic studies should clarify this matter. Regarding the genus Rhinella, there are two species of the group of R. granulosa registered in Amapá: Rhinella granulosa (Spix, 1824) (Pereira-Júnior et al. 2013; Ferreira-Lima et al. 2017; Missassi et al. 2017; Lima 2018) and R. major (Costa-Campos & Freire 2019). However, Amapá is contained only within the distribution range of R. major, thus we considered records of R. granulosa to be R. major. Within the group of R. margaritifera, Rhinella martyi Fouquet, Gaucher, Blanc & Vélez- Rodriguez, 2007 is currently considered a junior synonym of Rhinella margaritifera (Laurenti, 1768) (Pereyra et al. 2021), and we considered the records of R. martyi (Silva-e-Silva & Costa-Campos 2018; Pedroso-Santos et al. 2019) as R. margaritifera. We then considered the records of R. margaritifera as Rhinella dapsilis (Myers & Carvalho, 1945), following the same study. Pereyra et al. (2021) recovered Rhinella castaneotica (Caldwell, 1991) paraphyletic, with the specimen from French Guiana more related to Rhinella proboscidea Spix, 1824 than to the probable R. castaneotica sensu stricto from the Brazilian state of Pará. Ferrão et al. (2022) analyzed specimens from both French Guiana and Amapá, recovering them monophyletic and as the sister group of R. castaneotica and Rhinella teotoniensis Ferrão, Souza, Hanken & Lima, 2022. We agree with their conclusions and consider the species from Amapá an unnamed species, which we treat as R. aff. castaneotica., Published as part of Taucce, Pedro P. G., Costa-Campos, Carlos Eduardo, Carvalho, Thiago R. & Michalski, Fernanda, 2022, Anurans (Amphibia: Anura) of the Brazilian state of Amapá, eastern Amazonia: species diversity and knowledge gaps, pp. 96-130 in European Journal of Taxonomy 836 on pages 101-105, DOI: 10.5852/ejt.2022.836.1919, http://zenodo.org/record/7061668, {"references":["Rojas R. R., Fouquet A., Ron S. R., Hernandez-Ruz E. J., Melo-Sampaio P. R., Chaparro J. C., Vogt R. C., Carvalho V. T. de, Pinheiro L. C., Avila R. W., Farias I. P., Gordo M. & Hrbek T. 2018. A Pan-Amazonian species delimitation: High species diversity within the genus Amazophrynella (Anura: Bufonidae). PeerJ 2018 (7). https: // doi. org / 10.7717 / peerj. 4941","Vacher J. P., Chave J., Ficetola F. G., Sommeria-Klein G., Tao S., Thebaud C., Blanc M., Camacho A., Cassimiro J., Colston T. J., Dewynter M., Ernst R., Gaucher P., Gomes J. O., Jairam R., Kok P. J. R., Lima J. D., Martinez Q., Marty C., Noonan B. P., Nunes P. M. S., Ouboter P., Recoder R., Rodrigues M. T., Snyder A., Marques-Souza S. & Fouquet A. 2020. Large-scale DNA-based survey of frogs in Amazonia suggests a vast underestimation of species richness and endemism. Journal of Biogeography 47 (8): 1781 - 1791. https: // doi. org / 10.1111 / jbi. 13847","Lescure J. 1974. Presence d'une sous-espece d' Atelopus pulcher (Amphibien, Anoure) dans les Guyanes: Atelopus pulcher hoogmoedi. Bulletin du Museum national d'histoire naturelle, Paris. Serie 3, Zoologie 144: 997 - 1005.","Lescure J. 1976. Contribution a l'etude des amphibiens de Guyane Francaise. VI. Liste preliminaire des anoures. Bulletin du Museum national d'histoire naturelle, Paris. Serie 3, Zoologie 377: 475 - 524.","Lescure J., Grenand F. & Grenand P. 1980. Les Amphibiens dans l'univers wayapi. Journal d'Agriculture traditionnelle et de Botanique appliquee 27 (3): 247 - 261. https: // doi. org / 10.3406 / jatba. 1980.3826","Lescure J. & Marty C. 2000. Atlas des amphibiens de Guyane. Museum national d'histoire naturelle, Paris.","Lotters S., Haas W., Schick S. & Bohme W. 2002. On the systematics of the harlequin frogs (Amphibia: Bufonidae: Atelopus) from Amazonia. II: Redescription of Atelopus pulcher (Boulenger, 1882) from the eastern Andean versant in Peru. Salamandra 38 (3): 165 - 184.","Lotters S. & Schulte R. 2005. Atelopus pulcher. In: Rueda-Almonacid J. V., Rodriguez-Machecha J. V., Lotters S., la Marca E., Kahn T. R. & Angulo A. (eds) Ranas Arlequines: 104. Conservacion Internacional, Bogota.","Noonan B. P. & Gaucher P. 2005. Phylogeography and demography of Guianan harlequin toads (Atelopus): Diversification within a refuge. Molecular Ecology 14 (10): 3017 - 3031. https: // doi. org / 10.1111 / j. 1365 - 294 X. 2005.02624. x","Costa-Campos C. E. & Carvalho T. R. 2018. The advertisement call of the Hoogmoed's harlequin toad Atelopus hoogmoedi Lescure, 1974 from northern Brazil (Anura, Bufonidae). Zootaxa 4521 (1): 141 - 144. https: // doi. org / 10.11646 / zootaxa. 4521.1.11","Jorge R. F., Ferrao M. & Lima A. P. 2020. Out of bound: A new threatened Harlequin toad (Bufonidae, Atelopus) from the outer borders of the Guiana shield in Central Amazonia described through integrative taxonomy. Diversity 12 (8). https: // doi. org / 10.3390 / D 12080310","Silva G. W. B., Cornelio G. S., de Oliveira E. A., Trindade N. G. P., Franca I. & Ruz E. J. H. 2020. A candidate species currently classified as Atelopus hoogmoedi (Anura: Bufonidae) in the Eastern Amazon, Para, Brazil. Genetics and Molecular Research 19 (1): 1 - 10. https: // doi. org / 10.4238 / GMR 18392","Lima J. D. 2006 a. Projeto de Pesquisa para Inventarios da Fauna e Plantas Superiores da Reserva de Desenvolvimento Sustentavel - Rio Iratapuru, Amapa. Macapa, Amapa.","Lima J. D. 2006 b. Inventarios Biologicos da Herpetofauna na Floresta Nacional do Amapa - Expedicoes I e II. In: Bernard E. (ed.) Inventarios Biologicos na Floresta Nacional do Amapa - Expedicoes I e II: 57 - 77. Macapa, Amapa.","Queiroz S. S., Silva A. R., Reis F. M., Lima J. D. & Lima J. R. F. 2011. Anfibios de uma area de castanhal da Reserva Extrativista do Rio Cajari, Amapa. Biota Amazonia 1 (1): 1 - 18. https: // doi. org / 10.18561 / 2179 - 5746 / biotaamazonia. v 1 n 1 p 1 - 18","Lima J. D. 2018. Relatorio final do programa de monitoramento de herpetofauna da area de influencia da UHE Cachoeira Caldeirao.","Bokermann W. C. A. 1967. Nova especie de Hyla do Amapa. Revista Brasileira de Biologia 27: 109 - 111.","Fouquet A., Martinez Q., Zeidler L., Courtois E. A., Gaucher P., Blanc M., Lima J. D., Souza S. M., Rodrigues M. T. & Kok P. J. R. 2016. Cryptic diversity in the Hypsiboas semilineatus species group (Amphibia, Anura) with the description of a new species from the eastern Guiana Shield. Zootaxa 4084 (1): 79 - 104. https: // doi. org / 10.11646 / zootaxa. 4084.1.3","Heyer W. R. & de Sa R. O. 2011. Variation, Systematics, and Relationships of the Leptodactylus bolivianus Complex (Amphibia: Anura: Leptodactylidae). Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology 635: 1 - 58. https: // doi. org / 10.5479 / si. 00810282.635.1","Ferreira-Lima J. R., Lima J. D., Lima S. D., Silva R. B. L. & Andrade G. V. 2017. Amphibians found in the Amazonian Savanna of the Rio Curiau Environmental. Biota Neotropica, Inventory 17 (2): e 20160252. https: // doi. org / 10.1590 / 1676 - 0611 - BN- 2016 - 0252","Missassi A. F. R., Costa-Campos C. E., Lima J. D. & Lambertini C. 2017. Range extension of the poorly know tree frog Dendropsophus haraldschultzi (Bokermann, 1962) (Amphibia, Anura, Hylidae): first records for two Brazilian Amazon states. Herpetology Notes 10: 703 - 707.","Costa-Campos C. E. & Freire E. M. X. 2019. Richness and composition of anuran assemblages from an Amazonian savanna. ZooKeys 2019 (843): 149 - 169. https: // doi. org / 10.3897 / zookeys. 843.33365","Pereyra M. O., Blotto B. L., Baldo D., Chaparro J. C., Ron S. R., Elias-Costa A. J., Iglesias P. P., Venegas P. J., Maria M. T., Ospina-Sarria J. J., Maciel N. M., Rada M., Kolenc F., Borteiro C., Rivera-Correa M., Rojas-Runjaic F. J. M., Moravec J., de La Riva I., Wheeler W. C., Castroviejo-Fisher S., Grant T., Haddad C. F. B. & Faivovich J. 2021. Evolution in the Genus Rhinella: A total evidence phylogenetic analysis of Neotropical true toads (Anura: Bufonidae). Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History 447 (1): 1 - 156. https: // doi. org / 10.1206 / 0003 - 0090.447.1.1","Pedroso-Santos F., Sanches P. R. & Costa-Campos C. E. 2019. Anurans and reptiles of the Reserva Extrativista Beija-Flor Brilho de Fogo, Amapa State, Eastern Amazon. Herpetology Notes 12 (July): 799 - 807.","Ferrao M., de Souza R. A., Colatreli O. P., Hanken J. & Lima A. P. 2022. Hidden in the litter: cryptic diversity of the leaf-litter toad Rhinella castaneotica - proboscidea complex revealed through integrative taxonomy, with description of a new species from south-western Amazonia. Systematics and Biodiversity 20: 1 - 24. https: // doi. org / 10.1080 / 14772000.2022.2039317"]}

Family Eleutherodactylidae Lutz, 1954 Silva e Silva & Costa-Campos (2018) and Pedroso-Santos et al. (2019) recorded Adelophryne gutturosa Hoogmoed & Lescure, 1984 at Cancão Municipal Natural Park, municipality of Serra do Navio, and Reserva Extrativista Beija-Flor-Brilho-de-Fogo, municipality of Pedra Branca do Amapari, respectively. These records belong to the recently described A. amapaensis., Published as part of Taucce, Pedro P. G., Costa-Campos, Carlos Eduardo, Carvalho, Thiago R. & Michalski, Fernanda, 2022, Anurans (Amphibia: Anura) of the Brazilian state of Amapá, eastern Amazonia: species diversity and knowledge gaps, pp. 96-130 in European Journal of Taxonomy 836 on page 112, DOI: 10.5852/ejt.2022.836.1919, http://zenodo.org/record/7061668, {"references":["Silva e Silva Y. B. & Costa-Campos C. E. 2018. Anuran species composition of Cancao municipal natural park, municipality of Serra do Navio, Amapa state, Brazil. ZooKeys 2018 (762): 131 - 148. https: // doi. org / 10.3897 / zookeys. 762.22634","Pedroso-Santos F., Sanches P. R. & Costa-Campos C. E. 2019. Anurans and reptiles of the Reserva Extrativista Beija-Flor Brilho de Fogo, Amapa State, Eastern Amazon. Herpetology Notes 12 (July): 799 - 807."]}

Family Dendrobatidae Cope, 1865 Ranitomeya populations in Amapá have been registered with two different names, Ranitomeya amazonica (Schulte, 1999) (Lima 2018) and Ranitomeya ventrimaculata (Shreve, 1935) (Lima 2006a, 2006b; Queiroz et al. 2011). However, R. amazonica is a species known for decades prior to its description, and has been erroneously identified as several other species, including R. ventrimaculata (for a complete taxonomic history see Brown et al. 2011). Currently, R. ventrimaculata is restricted to Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, and the western portion of the Brazilian state of Amazonas, and until recently the populations of Ranitomeya from eastern Amazonia were assigned to R. amazonica (Brown et al. 2011). Nevertheless, Muell et al. (2022) recovered R. amazonica nested within R. variabilis (Zimmermann & Zimmermann, 1988) and specifically populations from eastern Amazonia were recovered as R. variabilis. Thus, we agree with them and consider Amapá records to be R. variabilis., Published as part of Taucce, Pedro P. G., Costa-Campos, Carlos Eduardo, Carvalho, Thiago R. & Michalski, Fernanda, 2022, Anurans (Amphibia: Anura) of the Brazilian state of Amapá, eastern Amazonia: species diversity and knowledge gaps, pp. 96-130 in European Journal of Taxonomy 836 on page 108, DOI: 10.5852/ejt.2022.836.1919, http://zenodo.org/record/7061668, {"references":["Lima J. D. 2018. Relatorio final do programa de monitoramento de herpetofauna da area de influencia da UHE Cachoeira Caldeirao.","Shreve B. 1935. On a new teiid and Amphibia from Panama, Ecuador, and Paraguay. Occasional papers of the Boston Society of Natural History 8: 209 - 218.","Lima J. D. 2006 a. Projeto de Pesquisa para Inventarios da Fauna e Plantas Superiores da Reserva de Desenvolvimento Sustentavel - Rio Iratapuru, Amapa. Macapa, Amapa.","Lima J. D. 2006 b. Inventarios Biologicos da Herpetofauna na Floresta Nacional do Amapa - Expedicoes I e II. In: Bernard E. (ed.) Inventarios Biologicos na Floresta Nacional do Amapa - Expedicoes I e II: 57 - 77. Macapa, Amapa.","Queiroz S. S., Silva A. R., Reis F. M., Lima J. D. & Lima J. R. F. 2011. Anfibios de uma area de castanhal da Reserva Extrativista do Rio Cajari, Amapa. Biota Amazonia 1 (1): 1 - 18. https: // doi. org / 10.18561 / 2179 - 5746 / biotaamazonia. v 1 n 1 p 1 - 18","Brown J. L., Twomey E., Amezquita A., Souza M. B., Caldwell J. P., Lotters S., von May R., MeloSampaio P. R., Mejia-Vargas D., Perez-Pena P., Pepper M., Poelman E. H., Sanchez-Rodriguez M. & Summers K. 2011. A taxonomic revision of the Neotropical poison frog genus Ranitomeya (Amphibia: Dendrobatidae). Zootaxa 3083 (1): 1 - 120. https: // doi. org / 10.11646 / zootaxa. 3083.1.1","Muell M. R., Chavez G., Prates I., Guillory W. X., Kahn T. R., Twomey E. M., Rodrigues M. T. & Brown J. L. 2022. Phylogenomic analysis of evolutionary relationships in Ranitomeya poison frogs (Family Dendrobatidae) using ultraconserved elements. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 168: 107389. https: // doi. org / 10.1016 / j. ympev. 2022.107389"]}

Family Hylidae Rafinesque, 1815 The population previously identified as Boana multifasciata (Günther, 1859) from the Guiana Shield is currently known to be an unnamed candidate species, inhabiting the Guianas and the Brazilian states of Roraima, Pará and Amapá (Fouquet et al. 2021c) based only on molecular data. We added the molecularbased records from Vacher et al. (2020) and Fouquet et al. (2021c) corresponding to this taxon, as well as the literature records with overall morphology more similar to B. multifasciata. We decided to keep using this name for Amapá populations until more studies clarify their taxonomic status. In the species group of B. semilineata, two species are known to occur in Amapá, Boana diabolica Fouquet, Martinez, Zeidler, Courtois, Gaucher, Blanc, Lima, Souza, Rodrigues & Kok, 2016 and an unnamed species, B. aff. semilineata (Fouquet et al. 2016). Besides these two names, records in Amapá have also been identified as Boana geographica (Spix, 1824) (Lima 2008; Pereira-Júnior et al. 2013; Benício & Lima 2017; Ferreira-Lima et al. 2017) and B. aff. geographica (Lima 2006b). These records could belong either to B. diabolica or B. aff. semilineata, so we chose to consider in our list only the molecular confirmed records (Fouquet et al. 2016; Vacher et al. 2020). Dendropsophus counani Fouquet, Orrico, Ernst, Blanc, Martinez, Vacher, Rodrigues, Ouboter, Jairam & Ron, 2015 has long been confused with Dendropsophus brevifrons (Duellman & Crump, 1974) (Fouquet et al. 2015), and we consider the record of D. brevifrons (Benício & Lima 2017) to be D. counani. Dendropsophus minusculus (Rivero, 1971) is morphologically similar to Dendropsophus branneri (Cochran, 1948), with which D. minusculus has been historically confused (Zina et al. 2014). Dendropsophus minusculus is distributed in northern Brazil and the Guiana Shield, mainly within Amazonia, with some sparse records in northeastern Brazil in the states of Maranhão, Piauí, Ceará, and an isolated record from Bahia, whereas D. branneri inhabits the Atlantic Forest of southeastern and northeastern Brazil (Zina et al. 2014; Frost 2022). Both species seem to have a contact zone in northeastern Brazil, but the state of Amapá is within the distribution range of D. minusculus. Thus, we consider the records of D. branneri (Lima 2006a, 2006b) to be D. minusculus. Orrico et al. (2021) has recently defined the populations with the overall morphology like D. minutus (Peters, 1872) in the Guiana Shield as D. amicorum, and we agreed with them regarding the records of Amapá. It is important to note that, even though the IUCN status of the species is Critically Endangered (CR, IUCN 2022), it was evaluated when it was known only from the type localiy, and the conservation status of D. amicorum is likely to change during next evaluations. Dendropsophus walfordi (Bokermann, 1962) and Dendropsophus nanus (Boulenger, 1889) are also very similar to each other, being even considered as representing a single species (Lutz 1973). Despite being currently considered as separate species (Langone & Basso 1987), these are morphologically and genetically closely related to each other, with D. walfordi being frequently recovered within D. nanus, leaving it paraphyletic (Fouquet et al. 2011; Medeiros et al. 2013; Orrico et al. 2021). Recently, Seger et al. (2021) evaluated the D. nanus - D. walfordi complex with a broad molecular study and defined that D. nanus is the lineage inhabiting Paraguay, northeastern Argentina, and southern Brazil, whereas D. walfordi is the single lineage inhabiting Amazonia. Thus, we decided to adopt the name D. walfordi to records from both species within the state of Amapá. Benício & Lima (2017) recorded Dendropsophus microcephalus (Cope, 1886) and Dendropsophus parviceps (Boulanger, 1882) in the Amapá National Forest. The first species is distributed from southern Mexico to northern South America (Frost 2022) but, although the specimens east of Venezuela have been called D. microcephalus due to morphological similarities, they probably correspond to other species, such as D. minusculus or even Dendropsophus gaucheri (Lescure & Marty, 2000) (V.G.D. Orrico, pers. comm.). Although Benício & Lima (2017) cited both D. minusculus and D. microcephalus, there are no voucher specimens cited in their study. Thus, we decided to remove the record of D. microcephalus from the list until more data from the Amapá National Forest is available to help clarifying the taxonomic status of this population. Moreover, we considered the record of D. microcephalus from Queiroz et al. (2011) as D. minusculus. Dendropsophus parviceps is currently known from Ecuador, Colombia, and the Brazilian state of Amazonas, with related populations from Brazilian states of Acre and Rondônia being recently described as Dendropsophus kamagarini Rivadeneira, Venegas & Ron, 2018 (Rivadeneira et al. 2018). Besides D. parviceps, Benício & Lima (2017) found another species from the group of D. parviceps (sensu Orrico et al. 2021) in the Amapá National Forest, D. brevifrons (that we consider D. counani, see above). As in the previous case concerning D. microcephalus and D. minusculus, we also decided to remove D. parviceps from our list and consider the record as D. counani until additional data is available. The record of Lysapsus laevis (Parker, 1935) from Araújo & Costa-Campos (2015) (as Pseudis laevis) is actually Lysapsus bolivianus (Gallardo, 1961) (Costa-Campos, pers. comm.). There are two species of the group of Osteocephalus buckleyi (sensu Jüngfer et al. 2013) cited for Amapá, O. buckleyi (Boulenger, 1882) (Lima 2008; Queiroz et al. 2011) and O. cabrerai (Cochran & Goin, 1970) (Lima 2006b, 2008; Pedroso-Santos et al. 2019). Dewynter et al. (2019) also found two species of the group of O. buckleyi in French Guiana, both reaching the border with Amapá: O. cabrerai and Osteocephalus helenae (Ruthven, 1919). Vacher et al. (2020) also adopted these two species names in their molecular survey for populations of Osteocephalus from Amapá and French Guiana. Even though the two species were recovered as a single taxonomic entity in their species delimitation analysis, they applied both names to the clade formed by two lineages of Osteocephalus that appear to be morphologically diagnosable to each other and coexist in the Eastern Guiana Shield (see Dewynter et al. 2016). Thus, we consider both O. cabrerai and O. helenae in our list. We did not have access to the voucher specimens of most studies and most of the known previous records do not provide photographs of species of Osteocephalus. As such, we could not be precise about the locations where each of the two species occurs in Amapá. One exception is at Reserva Extrativista Municipal Beija-Flor-Brilho-deFogo, central part of Amapá, from where Pedroso-Santos et al. provided a picture of what they identified as O. cabrerai (Pedroso-Santos et al. 2019: 801, fig. 1.11) and it corresponds to the same morphotype Dewynter et al. (2016) consider O. cabrerai. Scinax garbei (Miranda-Ribeiro, 1926) is a widespread species of the group of S. rostratus distributed throughout the middle and upper Amazon Basin in Venezuela, Ecuador, Colombia, Peru, Bolivia and Brazil (Faivovich et al. 2005; Frost 2022). Although there are records of S. garbei from Amapá (FerreiraLima et al. 2017; Lima 2018; Silva e Silva & Costa-Campos 2018), there is molecular evidence of only Scinax jolyi Lescure & Marty, 2000 inhabiting Amapá (Vacher et al. 2020). Due to the taxonomic complexity of S. garbei (Ron et al. 2018) and the overall morphological similarity between the two species, we consider more plausible that the records of S. garbei in Amapá are indeed S. jolyi. Scinax cruentomma (Duelmann, 1972) is mainly distributed in western Amazonia, but there are a few additional records in other Amazonian regions (Carvalho et al. 2015: fig. 3). Those authors conducted acoustic comparisons between populations from the type locality (Santa Cecilia, Ecuador), the upper Negro River (Amazonas, Brazil), and French Guiana (data derived from Lescure & Marty 2000) and found that the high variation in some of the analyzed call traits indicate that the French Guiana population could represent another, potentially unnamed, species. Therefore, we provisionally assign the Amapá population to S. cf. cruentomma until the taxonomic status of the populations of Scinax bearing a horizontal red streak on the iris from the Eastern Guiana Shield is addressed., Published as part of Taucce, Pedro P. G., Costa-Campos, Carlos Eduardo, Carvalho, Thiago R. & Michalski, Fernanda, 2022, Anurans (Amphibia: Anura) of the Brazilian state of Amapá, eastern Amazonia: species diversity and knowledge gaps, pp. 96-130 in European Journal of Taxonomy 836 on pages 112-114, DOI: 10.5852/ejt.2022.836.1919, http://zenodo.org/record/7061668, {"references":["Fouquet A., Marinho P., Rejaud A., Carvalho T. R., Caminer M. A., Jansen M., Rainha R. N., Rodrigues M. T., Werneck F. P., Lima A. P., Hrbek T., Giaretta A. A., Venegas P. J., Chavez G. & Ron S. 2021 c. Systematics and biogeography of the Boana albopunctata species group (Anura, Hylidae), with the description of two new species from Amazonia. Systematics and Biodiversity 19 (4): 375 - 399. https: // doi. org / 10.1080 / 14772000.2021.1873869","Vacher J. P., Chave J., Ficetola F. G., Sommeria-Klein G., Tao S., Thebaud C., Blanc M., Camacho A., Cassimiro J., Colston T. J., Dewynter M., Ernst R., Gaucher P., Gomes J. O., Jairam R., Kok P. J. R., Lima J. D., Martinez Q., Marty C., Noonan B. P., Nunes P. M. S., Ouboter P., Recoder R., Rodrigues M. T., Snyder A., Marques-Souza S. & Fouquet A. 2020. Large-scale DNA-based survey of frogs in Amazonia suggests a vast underestimation of species richness and endemism. Journal of Biogeography 47 (8): 1781 - 1791. https: // doi. org / 10.1111 / jbi. 13847","Fouquet A., Martinez Q., Zeidler L., Courtois E. A., Gaucher P., Blanc M., Lima J. D., Souza S. M., Rodrigues M. T. & Kok P. J. R. 2016. Cryptic diversity in the Hypsiboas semilineatus species group (Amphibia, Anura) with the description of a new species from the eastern Guiana Shield. Zootaxa 4084 (1): 79 - 104. https: // doi. org / 10.11646 / zootaxa. 4084.1.3","Lima J. D. 2008. A herpetofauna do Parque Nacional do Montanhas do Tumucumaque, Amapa, Brasil, Expedicoes I a V. In: Bernhard E. (ed.) Inventarios Biologicos Rapidos no Parque Nacional Montanhas do Tumucumaque, Amapa, Brasil.: 38 - 50.","Benicio R. A. & Lima J. D. 2017. Anurans of Amapa National Forest, Eastern Amazonia, Brazil. Herpetology Notes 10: 627 - 633.","Ferreira-Lima J. R., Lima J. D., Lima S. D., Silva R. B. L. & Andrade G. V. 2017. Amphibians found in the Amazonian Savanna of the Rio Curiau Environmental. Biota Neotropica, Inventory 17 (2): e 20160252. https: // doi. org / 10.1590 / 1676 - 0611 - BN- 2016 - 0252","Lima J. D. 2006 b. Inventarios Biologicos da Herpetofauna na Floresta Nacional do Amapa - Expedicoes I e II. In: Bernard E. (ed.) Inventarios Biologicos na Floresta Nacional do Amapa - Expedicoes I e II: 57 - 77. Macapa, Amapa.","Zina J., Silva G. R., Loebmann D. & Orrico V. G. D. 2014. The recognition of Dendropsophus minusculus (Rivero, 1971) (Hylidae, Dendropsophini) as a highly polymorphic, multi-domain distributed species. Brazilian Journal of Biology 74 (3): 146 - 153. https: // doi. org / 10.1590 / 1519 - 6984.22912","Frost D. R. 2022. Amphibian Species of the World: an Online Reference. Available from http: // research. amnh. org / herpetology / amphibia / index. html [accessed 11 Apr. 2022].","Lima J. D. 2006 a. Projeto de Pesquisa para Inventarios da Fauna e Plantas Superiores da Reserva de Desenvolvimento Sustentavel - Rio Iratapuru, Amapa. Macapa, Amapa.","Orrico V. G. D., Grant T., Faivovich J., Rivera-Correa M., Rada M. A., Lyra M. L., Cassini C. S., Valdujo P. H., Schargel W. E., Machado D. J., Wheeler W. C., Barrio-Amoros C., Loebmann D., Moravec J., Zina J., Sole M., Sturaro M. J., Peloso P. L. V., Suarez P. & Haddad C. F. B. 2021. The phylogeny of Dendropsophini (Anura: Hylidae: Hylinae). Cladistics 37 (1): 73 - 105. https: // doi. org / 10.1111 / cla. 12429","IUCN 2022. The IUCN red list of threatened species. Available from https: // www. iucnredlist. org [accessed 1 Sep. 2022].","Lutz B. 1973. Brazilian species of Hyla. University of Texas Press, Austin.","Langone J. A. & Basso N. G. 1987. Distribucion geografica y sinonimia de Hyla nana Boulenger, 1889 y de Hyla sanborni Schmidt, 1944 (Anura, Hylidae) y observaciones sobre formas afines. Comunicaciones Zoologicas del Museo de Historia Natural de Montevideo 11: 1 - 17.","Fouquet A., Noonan B. P., Michel Blanc & Dill Orrico V. G. 2011. Phylogenetic position of Dendropsophus gaucheri (Lescure & Marty, 2000) highlights the need for an in-depth investigation of the phylogenetic relationships of Dendropsophus (Anura: Hylidae). Zootaxa 3035: 59 - 67. https: // doi. org / 10.11646 / zootaxa. 3035.1.3","Medeiros L. R., Lourenco L. B., Rossa-Feres D. C., Lima A. P., Andrade G. V., Giaretta A. A., Egito G. T. B. T. & Recco-Pimentel S. M. 2013. Comparative cytogenetic analysis of some species of the Dendropsophus microcephalus group (Anura, Hylidae) in the light of phylogenetic inferences. BMC Genetics 14. https: // doi. org / 10.1186 / 1471 - 2156 - 14 - 59","Seger K. R., Teixeira B. F. V., Annibale F. S., Rossa-Feres D. D. C., Lima A. P., Andrade G. V., Giaretta A. A. & Lourenco L. B. 2021. Five independent lineages revealed by integrative taxonomy in the Dendropsophus nanus - Dendropsophus walfordi species complex. Diversity 13 (11): 522. https: // doi. org / 10.3390 / d 13110522","Lescure J. & Marty C. 2000. Atlas des amphibiens de Guyane. Museum national d'histoire naturelle, Paris.","Queiroz S. S., Silva A. R., Reis F. M., Lima J. D. & Lima J. R. F. 2011. Anfibios de uma area de castanhal da Reserva Extrativista do Rio Cajari, Amapa. Biota Amazonia 1 (1): 1 - 18. https: // doi. org / 10.18561 / 2179 - 5746 / biotaamazonia. v 1 n 1 p 1 - 18","Rivadeneira D., Venegas P. & Ron S. R. 2018. Species limits within the widespread Amazonian treefrog Dendropsophus parviceps with descriptions of two new species (Anura, Hylidae). ZooKeys 726: 25 - 77. https: // doi. org / 10.3897 / zookeys. 726.13864","Jungfer K. - H., Faivovich J., Padial J. M., Castroviejo-Fisher S., Lyra M. L., Berneck B. von M., Iglesias P. P., Kok P. J. R., MacCulloch R. D., Rodrigues M. T., Verdade V. K., Torres-Gastello C. P., Chaparro J. C., Valdujo P. H., Reichle S., Moravec J., Gvozdik V., Gagliardi-Urrutia L. A. G., Ernst R., De la Riva I., Means D. B., Lima A. P., Senaris J. C., Wheeler W. C., and Haddad C. F. B. 2013. Systematics of spinybacked treefrogs (Hylidae: Osteocephalus): an Amazonian puzzle. Zoologica Scripta 42: 351 - 380.","Pedroso-Santos F., Sanches P. R. & Costa-Campos C. E. 2019. Anurans and reptiles of the Reserva Extrativista Beija-Flor Brilho de Fogo, Amapa State, Eastern Amazon. Herpetology Notes 12 (July): 799 - 807.","Dewynter M. & Chaline O. 2016. Inventaire herpetologique de la Borne n ° 4. Les Cahiers scientifiques du Parc amazonien de Guyane 2 (1): 281 - 302.","Faivovich J., Haddad C. F. B., Garcia P. C. A., Frost D. R., Campbell J. A. & Wheeler W. 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 294: 1 - 240.","Lima J. D. 2018. Relatorio final do programa de monitoramento de herpetofauna da area de influencia da UHE Cachoeira Caldeirao.","Silva e Silva Y. B. & Costa-Campos C. E. 2018. Anuran species composition of Cancao municipal natural park, municipality of Serra do Navio, Amapa state, Brazil. ZooKeys 2018 (762): 131 - 148. https: // doi. org / 10.3897 / zookeys. 762.22634","Ron S. R., Duellman W. E., Caminer M. A. & Pazmino D. 2018. Advertisement calls and DNA sequences reveal a new species of Scinax (Anura: Hylidae) on the Pacific lowlands of Ecuador. PLoS ONE 13: e 0203169. https: // doi. org / 10.1371 / journal. pone. 0203169","Carvalho T. R., Teixeira B. F. V., Duellman W. E. & Giaretta A. A. 2015. Scinax cruentommus (Anura: Hylidae) in the upper Rio Negro drainage, Amazonas state, Brazil, with the redescription of its advertisement call. Phyllomedusa 14 (2): 139 - 146. https: // doi. org / 10.11606 / issn. 2316 - 9079. v 14 i 2 p 139 - 146"]}

Family Centrolenidae Taylor, 1951 Vitreorana ritae (Lutz, 1952) is currently a senior synonym of V. oyampiensis (Lescure, 1975) (Cisneros- Heredita 2013). Despite some authors state that this synonymy remains dubious due to the lack of acoustic and molecular data from the type locality (headwaters of the Caiwama River, Amazonas, Colombia) (Fouquet et al. 2019c), we consider the records of V. oyampiensis (as Cochranella oyampiensis; Lima 2006b; 2008) equivalent to V. ritae., Published as part of Taucce, Pedro P. G., Costa-Campos, Carlos Eduardo, Carvalho, Thiago R. & Michalski, Fernanda, 2022, Anurans (Amphibia: Anura) of the Brazilian state of Amapá, eastern Amazonia: species diversity and knowledge gaps, pp. 96-130 in European Journal of Taxonomy 836 on page 108, DOI: 10.5852/ejt.2022.836.1919, http://zenodo.org/record/7061668, {"references":["Fouquet A., Vidal N. & Dewynter M. 2019 c. The amphibians of the Mitaraka massif, French Guiana. Zoosystema 41 (sp 1): 359 - 374. https: // doi. org / 10.5252 / zoosystema 2019 v 41 a 19","Lima J. D. 2006 b. Inventarios Biologicos da Herpetofauna na Floresta Nacional do Amapa - Expedicoes I e II. In: Bernard E. (ed.) Inventarios Biologicos na Floresta Nacional do Amapa - Expedicoes I e II: 57 - 77. Macapa, Amapa.","Lima J. D. 2008. A herpetofauna do Parque Nacional do Montanhas do Tumucumaque, Amapa, Brasil, Expedicoes I a V. In: Bernhard E. (ed.) Inventarios Biologicos Rapidos no Parque Nacional Montanhas do Tumucumaque, Amapa, Brasil.: 38 - 50."]}