Hemiphractus panamensis Duellman 1970

Hemiphractus panamensis (FIgS. 3, 4, 6, 7, 9) Cerathyla panamensis Stejneger 1917. Holotype: USNM 55320. Type locality: Signal Loma (Loma Peak) on the north coast of Panama, three miles [4.8 km] south of Santa Isabel, Prov. Col��n, Panama. Hemiphractus fasciatus Trueb 1974 [in part; for reference to specimens from Chagres Highlands, Panama]; Duellman, 2001 [in part; for reference to specimens from Chagres Highlands, Panama]; Crawford et al. 2012 [in part, for samples from Cerro Brewster, Prov. Panama, Panama]; Castroviejo-Fisher et al. 2015 [in part, for samples from Cerro Bruja and Cerro Brewster, Prov. Panama, Panama]; K��hler, 2011 [figs. 472, 473; in part; for map showing isolated populations in the Chagres Highlands, Panama]. Re-description of the Holotype. MEDIUM-SIzED ADULT FEMALE, SVL 59.3 MM (NOT INCLUDINg PROBOSCIS); TIBIA LENgTh 31.2 MM (NOT INCLUDINg CALCAR); FOOT LENgTh 27.3 MM; hEAD LENgTh 26.6 MM (NOT INCLUDINg PROBOSCIS); hEAD wIDTh 31.4 MM; SNOUT���PARAOCCIPITAL PROCESS LENgTh 25.8 MM; TYMPANUM OVOID, 5.2 MM hIgh X 2.6 MM wIDE; EYE DIAMETER 7.4 MM; INTERORBITAL DISTANCE 12.0 MM; EYE���TYMPANUM DISTANCE 3.3 MM; BODY MODERATE; hEAD LARgE, wIDER ThAN BODY, gREATEST wIDTh AT LEVEL OF PARS ARTICULARIS, BEARINg PROMINENT PARAOCCIPITAL PROCESSES; PARAOCCIPITAL PROCESSES PROjECTINg POSTEROLATERALLY IN DORSAL VIEw, EXTENDINg POSTERIOR TO LEVEL OF PARS ARTICULARIS; SkIN CO-OSSIFIED OVER DORSAL SURFACE OF SkULL; OCCIPITAL RIDgES INDISTINCT, PARAOCCIPITAL RIDgES PRESENT, wEAkLY DEVELOPED; SUPRAORBITAL AND CANThAL RIDgES SLIghTLY DEVELOPED; zYgOMATIC AND PREORBITAL RIDgES ABSENT; CANThUS ROSTRALIS INDISTINCT; LOREAL REgION FLAT; PROBOSCIS ShORT, FLEShY, POINTED, TRIANgULAR IN CROSS SECTION; SNOUT ANgLINg POSTERIORLY AT APPROXIMATELY 45o FROM hORIzONTAL; NOSTRILS OVOID, SLIghTLY PROTUBERANT, PROjECTINg DORSALLY, SLIghTLY LATERALLY; LIPS NOT FLARED. TOP OF hEAD RELATIVELY FLAT; INTERORBITAL REgION 38 % hEAD wIDTh; EYE DIAMETER 24 % hEAD wIDTh; gREATEST DIAMETER 70 % TIMES EYE DIAMETER; wIDTh OF TYMPANUM 84 % TIMES EYE���TYMPANUM DISTANCE; UPPER EYELID APPEARINg TO BEAR ONLY A SINgLE ENLARgED POINTED PROjECTION, SCATTERED SMALLER TUBERCLES ABSENT; INTERORBITAL, POSTORBITAL TUBERCLES ABSENT; SkIN OVER POSTERIOR SURFACE OF PARS ARTICULARIS BEARINg ONE LARgE, FLEShY TUBERCLE. TONgUE LARgE, OVOID; MANDIBLE BEARINg SERRATIONS ALONg ENTIRE LENgTh OF LOwER jAw, wITh TwO PROMINENT, TUSk-LIkE ODONTOIDS PROjECTINg FROM MENTOMECkELIAN BONES. AXILLARY MEMBRANE ABSENT; ThORACIC FOLD ABSENT; DERMAL FOLDS ON wRISTS ABSENT; FINgERS LONg, SLENDER, BEARINg SLIghTLY ENLARgED DISTAL PADS; INNER OUTER METACARPAL TUBERCLES PRESENT, BUT CONDITION OF SPECIMEN DOES NOw ALLOw FOR ACCURATE DESCRIPTION; RELATIVE LENgThS OF FINgERS: III> IV> II> I; LATERAL FLANgES APPEAR TO BE ABSENT ON FINgERS; CONDITION OF SPECIMEN DOES NOT PERMIT DESCRIPTION, OR DETERMINATION OF PRESENCE/ ABSENCES OF TUBERCLES ON FOREARMS; wEBBINg ON hANDS ABSENT. HEELS OF ADPRESSED hIND LIMBS OVERLAP; TIBIOTARSAL ARTICULATION NOT EXTENDINg TO SNOUT whEN hINDLIMB EXTENDED; CONDITION OF SPECIMEN DOES NOT PERMIT DESCRIPTION OF TARSAL FOLDS; TIBIA LENgTh 53 % SVL; FOOT LENgTh 46 % SVL; INNER AND OUTER METATARSAL TUBERCLES PRESENT, BUT CONDITION IS UNCLEAR; PRESENCE OF CONDITION OF LATERAL FRINgE ON TOES UNCLEAR; CALCAR PRESENT, SMALL; RELATIVE LENgThS OF TOES: IV> V> III> II> I; wEBBINg BASAL. CLOACAL OPENINg DIRECTED POSTEROVENTRALLY AT MIDLEVEL OF ThIgh. TEXTURE AND COLORATION OF ThE SkIN, AS wELL AS ThE FINER DETAILS OF ThE hANDS AND FEET ARE UNCLEAR, AS ThE TYPE SPECIMEN IS qUITE DESICCATED. SIMILARLY, ThE DESICCATED NATURE OF ThE hOLOTYPE MAkES IT UNCLEAR ThE LEVEL TO whICh ThE TRANSVERSE PROCESSES OF ThE VERTEBRAE ARE CO-OSSIFIED wITh ThE SkIN. ThE PUPIL IS NOT VISIBLE. IN ALL MAjOR MORPhOLOgICAL FEATURES AND MEASUREMENTS, STEjNEgER���S (1917) DESCRIPTION CLOSELY MATChES ThE CURRENT CONDITION OF ThE hOLOTYPE (USNM 55330). EXCEPTIONS INCLUDE COLORATION NOTES AND TEXTURAL DETAILS OF ThE SkIN, VARIOUS TUBERCLES, AND DIgITAL PADS (STEjNEgER 1917: 32), ALL OF whICh ARE NOw FADED OR PhYSICALLY DISTORTED���EVIDENTLY AS A RESULT OF DESICCATION AT SOME POINT IN ITS hISTORY. LIkEwISE, ThE INDENTATIONS OF EggS ON ThE DORSAL SURFACE OF ThIS FEMALE ThAT STEjNEgER (1917: 33) DESCRIBED NO LONgER ARE EVIDENT. Diagnosis. Hemiphractus panamensis MAY BE DISTINgUIShED FROM ALL SPECIES OF Hemiphractus EXCEPT H. elioti, H. fasciatus, H. kaylockae, AND H. scutatus BY NOT hAVINg A POSTORBITAL INDENTATION (PRESENT IN OThER SPECIES). Hemiphractus panamensis MAY BE DISTINgUIShED FROM H. scutatus, AN AMAzONIAN SPECIES NOT OCCURRINg IN PANAMA, BY ITS SMALLER SIzE (MAXIMUM SVL IN MALES 52.5 VS. 57.4, FEMALES 64.7 VS. 80.5; DATA FOR H. scutatus FROM TRUEB 1974), AND BY hAVINg SMALL EXPANDED PADS ON ThE FINgERS AND TOES (ABSENT IN H. scutatus). Hemiphractus panamensis DIFFERS FROM H. elioti AND H. kaylockae BY hAVINg NEOPALATINE AND VOMERINE ODONTOIDS wIDELY SEPARATED (VS. IN CONTACT IN H. elioti AND NARROwLY SEPARATED IN H. kaylockae; FIg. 6). Hemiphractus panamensis APPEARS TO hAVE ONLY ABOUT TwO ODONTOIDS ON EACh VOMER, whEREAS H. elioti AND H. kaylockae BOTh hAVE ABOUT SEVEN (CONDITION UNkNOwN IN H. scutatus; FIg. 6). Hemiphractus panamensis MAY BE DISTINgUIShED FROM H. kaylockae BY hAVINg A STRAIghT LATERAL MARgIN OF ThE PARAOCCIPITAL hORNS (FIgS. 2, 9); SUPRAORBITAL RIDgES EVIDENT, wEAkLY DEVELOPED (ABSENT OR wEAkLY DEVELOPED IN H. elioti AND H. kaylockae; FIgS. 2, 9); CANThAL RIDgES EVIDENT, DISTINCT (ABSENT OR wEAkLY DEVELOPED IN H. elioti; FIgS. 2, 9). Hemiphractus panamensis hAS A VERY LARgE SUBTEMPORAL FENESTRA APPROXIMATELY 1.5 X SIzE OF ThE ORBIT IN FEMALES (MALES UNkNOwN), SUBTEMPORAL FENESTRA APPROXIMATELY ONE-ThIRD DIAMETER OF ThE ORBIT IN BOTh MALES AND FEMALES IN H. kaylockae, APPROXIMATELY ONE-hALF DIAMETER OF ORBIT IN FEMALES OF H. elioti (VERY SMALL IN MALES), APPROXIMATELY ONE-hALF DIAMETER OF ThE ORBIT IN FEMALES OF H. fasciatus (MALES UNkNOwN); LATERAL MARgINS OF ThE qUADRATOjUgAL EXTENDINg FAR BEYOND ThE PROFILE OF ThE PARAOCCIPITAL hORNS IN DORSAL VIEw (ABOUT TO LEVEL OF PARAOCCIPITAL hORNS, OR SLIghTLY BEYOND, H. elioti, H. fasciatus, AND H. kaylockae). Distribution and ecology. Hemiphractus panamensis IS kNOwN FROM SPECIMENS COLLECTED FROM CENTRAL PANAMA IN ThE PROVINCES OF COLON AND SAN BLAS wIThIN OR IN PROXIMITY TO whAT IS NOw ThE ChAgRES NATIONAL PARk (FIg. 5). SPECIMENS hAVE BEEN COLLECTED AT ~750 M ELEVATION IN LOwER MONTANE FORESTS wITh hIgh RAINFALL (MYERS 1966). TRUEB (1974) REPORTED A LARgE SPECIMEN (KU 93503) ThAT CONTAINED ������AN UNIDENTIFIED gASTROPOD, A LIzARD (Ptychoglossus), AND A DENDROBATID FROg (Colostethus) IN ThE STOMACh. MYERS (1966) REPORTED H. panamensis TO DISPLAY MOUTh gAPINg BEhAVIOR AND BITINg whEN ACCOSTED (FIg. 3B). AN INDIVIDUAL COLLECTED BY MYERS IN 1964 AT ALTOS DE PACORA (PANAMA PROVINCE) wAS ���ON A STICk LYINg ON BARE SOIL, IN A ROADSIDE DITCh AT NIghT. TwO LIVE SPECIMENS OBSERVED AT NIghT BY T. HERMAN AND COLLEAgUES (PERS. COMM.) AT CERRO BREwSTER (PANAM PROVINCE) wERE OBSERVED ON VEgETATION Remarks. WhILE OSTEOLOgICAL ChARACTERS OF ThE SkULL wOULD NOT SEEM TO BE USEFUL DIAgNOSTIC ChARACTERS IN ThE ABSENCE OF SkELETAL SPECIMENS OR RADIOgRAPhY, wE NOTE ThAT ThE DISTINCTLY ENLARgED SUBTEMPORAL FENESTRA OF H. panamensis CAN BE DETECTED BY MANUAL PALPATION AND IS ALSO VISIBLE EVEN IN PhOTOgRAPhS OF LIVINg SPECIMENS. DESPITE ThE RELATIVE PROXIMITY OF ThE RANgE OF ThIS SPECIES TO PANAMA CITY, AND INFRASTRUCTURAL DEVELOPMENTS SUCh AS ThE PANAMA CANAL AND VARIOUS SMIThSONIAN FIELD STATIONS, RELATIVELY FEw SPECIMENS OF ThIS SPECIES APPEAR TO EXIST IN MUSEUM COLLECTIONS. AS A RESULT, DATA REgARDINg VARIATION IN COLORATION AND MORPhOMETRY ARE UNAVAILABLE.
Published as part of Hill, Robert L., Martin, Kathryn G., Stanley, Edward & Mendelson Iii, Joseph R., 2018, A taxonomic review of the genus Hemiphractus (Anura: Hemiphractidae) in Panama: Description of Two New Species, Resurrection of Hemiphractus panamensis (Stejneger, 1917), and Discussion of Hemiphractus fasciatus Peters, 1862, pp. 495-512 in Zootaxa 4429 (3) on pages 506-509, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4429.3.3, http://zenodo.org/record/1285044
{"references":["Stejneger, L. (1917) A new species of horned tree-toad from Panama. Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington, 301, 31 - 34.","Trueb, L. (1974) Systematic relationships of Neotropical horned frogs, genus Hemiphractus (Anura: Hylidae). Occasional Papers of the Museum of Natural History, University of Kansas, 29, 1 - 60. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. part. 11750","Duellman, W. (2001) The Hylid Frogs of Middle America. Vol. 2. Society for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles Contributions in Herpetology, Ithaca, New York, 1170 pp.","Crawford, A., Cruz, C., Griffith, E., Ross, H., Ibanez, R., Lips, K. & Crump, P. (2012) DNA barcoding applied to ex situ tropical amphibian conservation programme reveals cryptic diversity in captive populations. Molecular Ecology Resources, 13, 1005 - 1018.","Castroviejo-Fisher, S., Padial, J., de La Riva, I., Pombal Junior, J., da Silva, H., Rojas-Runjaic, F. J. M., Medina-Mendez, E. & Frost, D. (2015) Phylogenetic systematics of egg-brooding frogs (Anura: Hemiphractidae) and the evolution of direct development. Zootaxa, 4004 (1), 1 - 75. https: // doi. org / 10.11646 / zootaxa. 4004.1.1","Myers, C. (1966) The distribution and behavior of a tropical horned frog Cerathyla panamensis Stejneger. Herpetologica, 22, 68 - 71."]}