Microhyla peninsularis Trofimets, Dufresnes, Pawangkhanant, Bragin, Gorin, Hasan, Lalremsanga, Muin, Le, Nguyen, Suwannapoom & Poyarkov, 2024, sp. nov.
Year: 2024
Type: other
Abstract: Microhyla peninsularis sp. nov. Figures 6 G, H, 7 D, 16; Tables 2, 3, 6 Suggested common name. Peninsular narrow-mouthed frog. Chresonymy. Microhyla berdmorei — Berry (1975: 118–119, in part); Dring (1979: 194, in part); Manthey and Grossmann (1997: 60, in part); Das and Yaakob (2007: 68, in part); Grismer and Aun (2008: 277, in part); Chan et al. (2010: 203, in part); Matsui et al. (2011: 168, 171, 174, in part), Thong-aree et al. (2011: 99–106, in part); Sumarli et al. (2015: 8, in part); Firdaus et al (2018: 1–6, in part); Nguyen et al. (2019: 549–580, in part); Niyomwan et al. (2019: 222–223, in part); Gorin et al. (2020: 1–47, in part); Makchai et al. (2020: 116, in part); Eprilurahman et al. (2021: 456); Gorin et al. (2021: 97, in part); Poyarkov et al. (2021: 40, in part); Frost (2024, page “ Microhyla berdmorei ” in part). Holotype. ZMMU A-8016 (field number NAP-12747), an adult female from the Lam Plok Waterfall, Trang Province, Thailand (7.584 ° N, 99.799 ° E; elevation 200 m a. s. l.), collected on August 20, 2022, by Paratypes (n = 3). One adult female ZMMU A-8015 (field number NAP-12746), with collection data the same as for the holotype. Two adult males, ZMMU A-8017 (field number NAP-13182) and ZMMU A-8018 (field number NAP-13183), from Namtok Khao Chong, Trang Province, Thailand (7.649 ° N, 99.739 ° E; elevation 92 m a. s. l.) collected on August 24, 2021, by P. Pawangkhanant. Diagnosis. Microhyla peninsularis sp. nov. is characterized by the following combination of morphological features: (1) medium body size (SVL 22.1-22.2 mm in males, 30.9–33.2 mm in females), with moderately stocky and triangular body habitus; (2) head wider than long; (2) dorsal skin almost smooth; (3) snout short and bluntly rounded in dorsal, ventral, and lateral views; (4) first finger longer than half of the length of second finger; (5) finger tips weakly expanded into small disks with wide and deep dorsomedial grooves; (6) toes with distinct disks, each with wide and shallow dorsomedial groove separating the disk into a pair of scale-like pads; (7) tibiotarsal articulation of an adpressed limb extending far beyond the snout tip; (8) toe webbing reaching toe disks on all toes except the fourth and third toes; webbing formula: i 1-1 ii 1 - 2 iii 1 - 1 iv 2 - 1 v; (9) throat and chin gray in females, with dark-gray mottling in males; belly in life yellowish-white lacking dark markings; (10) dorsal surfaces of forelimbs without prominent dark crossbars, hindlimbs with 1–3 weak and indistinct brownish crossbars; (11) two dark-brown blotches above cloacal opening; (12) dorsum rusty-bronze with indistinct darker “ teddy-bear ” - pattern lacking clear borders and light edging; (13) dark spots and blotches on body flanks absent or scarce; (14) grayish-bronze lateral band with irregular edges extending from armpit to groin; (16) light postocular stripe absent; (17) reddish spots on dorsum and dorsal surfaces of hindlimbs absent; (18) iris with short black stripe below the pupil. Description of the holotype (Fig. 16). An adult male specimen in a very good state of preservation. Body size medium (SVL 30.9 mm; other measurements are presented in Table 2). Body habitus stocky, triangular, and slightly dorsoventrally flattened (Figs 7 D, 16 E). Head short, triangular in dorsal view; wider than long (HW / HL ratio 1.23). Snout very short (SL / HL ratio 0.43) and slightly protruding, bluntly rounded in dorsal and ventral views (Fig. 16 A, B), bluntly rounded in profile, and only slightly extending beyond the edge of the lower jaw (Fig. 16 E). Eyes comparatively small, slightly protruding in lateral view, not protruding in dorsal view (Fig. 16 A), eye length subequal to snout length (EL / SL ratio 0.99), and significantly larger than interorbital distance (IOD / EL ratio 0.74). Canthus rostralis indistinct; loreal area slightly concave. Nostrils oval-shaped, with lateral orientation, located closer to tip of snout than to eye. Interorbital distance slightly wider than internarial distance (IND / IOD ratio 0.95). Upper eyelid length less than interorbital distance (UEW / IOD ratio 0.86). Tympanum concealed, supratympanic fold indistinct (Fig. 16 E). Tongue slender, rounded, free for the posterior four-fifths of its length; vomerine teeth absent. Forelimbs short and slender (Fig. 16 A); lower arm elongated and thin (LAL / FLL 0.79), hand less than half of forelimb length (HAL / FLL 0.46). Fingers slender and elongated, webbing or skin fringes on fingers absent. First finger well-developed, notably longer than half of the second finger length (Fig. 16 D); the relative finger lengths as follows: I <II <IV <III. Fingertips rounded, weakly expanded into small disks, noticeably narrower than the basal phalanges of the respective fingers. Finger tips with peripheral grooves and a wide and deep dorsomedial notch present on the dorsal surface of each finger disk (Fig. 6 H). Finger disks almost equal in width, with the first finger disk being slightly narrower. Subarticular tubercles on fingers distinct, large, rounded, and protruding; edges of the distal subarticular tubercle on the fourth finger less distinct. The subarticular tubercle formula: 1, 1, 2, 2; nuptial pad absent (Fig. 16 D). Two metacarpal tubercles: inner metacarpal tubercle distinct, protruding, rounded in shape; outer metacarpal tubercle rounded, flattened, its diameter slightly exceeding the diameter of inner metacarpal tubercle (OPTL / IPTL ratio 1.18). Hindlimbs long, slender, almost four times longer than forelimbs (HLL / FLL ratio 4.21). Thighs robust and muscular (Fig. 16 B), shanks moderately elongated and slender, comprising approximately one-third the length of the hindlimb (TL / HLL ratio 0.36). When the limbs are held at the right angle to the body, the heels significantly overlap. Tibiotarsal articulation of the adpressed limb extends well beyond the tip of the snout. Foot length comprises more than one-third of the hindlimb length (FL / HLL ratio 0.23), being significantly shorter than the tibia (TL / FL ratio 1.34). The relative toe lengths as follows: I <II <V ≤ III
Authors: Trofimets, Alexei V., Dufresnes, Christophe, Pawangkhanant, Parinya, Bragin, Andrey M., Gorin, Vladislav A., Hasan, Mahmudul, Lalremsanga, Hmar Tlawmte, Muin, Mohd Abdul, Le, Dac Xuan, Nguyen, Tan Van, Suwannapoom, Chatmongkon, Poyarkov, Nikolay A.
Institutions: Lomonosov Moscow State University, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, École Pratique des Hautes Études, Nanjing Forestry University, Sorbonne Université, Institut de Systématique, Évolution, Biodiversité, Muséum national d'Histoire naturelle, University of Phayao, Joint Vietnam-Russia Tropical Science and Technology Research Center, Jamalpur Science and Technology University, Mizoram University, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Duy Tan University
Language: English
Subfield: Global and Planetary Change
Field: Environmental Science
Domain: Physical Sciences
Open Access status: green
OpenAlex ID: W6911827161
Cites:
Cited by:
Related to: