Kalophrynus sinensis Peters, 1867

Zug, George R., 2015, Morphology and Systematics of Kalophrynus interlineatus-pleurostigma Populations (Anura: Microhylidae: Kalophryninae) and a Taxonomy of the Genus Kalophrynus Tschudi, Asian Sticky Frogs, Proceedings of the California Academy of Sciences 62 (5), pp. 135-190 : 177-180

Kalophrynus sinensis Peters, 1867 Philippine Sticky Frog

Figure 11E .

Calophrynus pleurostigma var. Sinensis Peters, 1867 , Monatsberichte der Königlichen Preussichen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin 1867:33 [type locality: “Hongkong”; in errore; actually “Dapa, Siargao [ Island]”, 9°45´39.23˝N, 126°03´26.27˝E, Province Surigao del Norte, Philippines]. See Comment below .

Calophrynus acutirostris Boettger 1897, Zoologischer Anzeiger 20:165 [type locality: “ Philippinen, entwed- er von Culion oder von Samar ”] .

Kalophrynus stellatus Stejneger, 1908, Proceedings of the United States National Museum 33:575 [type locality: “ Basilan, Philippines Islands ”] .

TYPE MATERIAL.— HOLOTYPE: Museum für Naturkunde, Berlin 5696, see Comments on identity and assignment of holotype.

DESCRIPTION AND INTRAPOPULATIONAL VARIATION. The following characterization derives largely from my Bohol Island sample. Moderate-sized adults, sexually dimorphic with females averaging larger (42.4, 39.4–45. 7 mm SVL) than males (37.9, 34.9–41. 6 mm). These size differences are reflected in the other measurements: HeadL 12.0–14. 1 mm ♀♀ , 10.6–12. 6 mm ♂♂; HeadW 13.0–14.0 mm ♀♀, 10.6–13. 7 mm ♂♂; SnEye 4.8– 5.6 mm ♀♀ , 4.3–5.0 mm ♂♂; NarEye 2.7– 3.6 mm ♀♀ , 2.2–3. 2 mm ♂♂; EyeD 3.9– 4.8 mm ♀♀, 3.5–3.- 4.5 mm ♂♂; Tymp 2.3–4. 8 mm ♀♀ , 2.7– 3.9 mm ♂♂; ForarmL 10.2–13.0 mm ♀♀, 9.6–11. 5 mm ♂♂; HandL 10.2–11. 9 mm ♀♀, 8.8–10. 9 mm ♂♂; ThghL 14.8–21. 3 mm ♀♀, 15.1–19. 9 mm ♂♂; CrusL 16.0–19.0 mm ♀♀, 14.9–17. 8 mm ♂♂; TarsL 9.8–15. 2 mm ♀♀, 9.3–11. 4 mm ♂♂; HndfL 15.4–18. 2 mm ♀♀, 13.2–18. 6 mm ♂♂. Body proportions differences are not significantly different between adult females and males (all values are percent): HeadL/ SVL 28– 34 ♀♀ , 29– 32 ♂♂; HeadW/HeadL 98– 120 ♀♀, 96– 114 ♂♂; HeadW/ SVL 31– 35 ♀♀ , 30– 35 ♂♂; SnEye /HeadL 37– 45 ♀♀ , 37– 44 ♂♂; NarEye / SnEye 52– 69 ♀♀ , 47– 67 ♂♂; EyeD/HeadL 31– 36 ♀♀, o-o ♂♂; Tymp /EyeD 55– 104 ♀♀ , 68– 92 ♂♂; Forarm / SVL 24– 30 ♀♀ , 24– 32 ♂♂; Forarm /CrusL 63– 69 ♀♀ , 55– 77 ♂♂; HndlL/ SVL 142– 163 ♀♀ , 150– 170 ♂♂; CrusL/ SVL 38– 44 ♀♀ , 39– 46 ♂♂; CrusL/ThghL 77– 100 ♀♀, 88– 111 ♂♂; TarsL/ThghL 52– 73 ♀♀, 53– 74 ♂♂; HndfL/ SVL 36– 43 ♀♀ , 37– 51 ♂♂; HndfL/ThghL 80– 104 ♀♀, 79– 123 ♂♂.

Dorsal skin forms thick, glandular cloak from behind eyes to vent; dorsolateral ridge on trunk variously defined from smooth transition to sides to distinct ridge or fold from shoulder to inguina. Dorsal surface lightly rugose to granular rugose, latter rugosity especially evident on posterior third of trunk; no spiny tubercles although lightly pigmented dome-like tubercles common on posterior third of trunk. Ventrally surface is lightly rugose from chin to chest, abdomen large pebbly rugose; some females with numerous unpigmented short tubercles on base of neck and chest.

Vomerine teeth absent. Tongue is moderate to large, usually oblong, and posterior half to two-thirds free. Palatal fold morphology appears relatively uniform although these data are not quantified. Pair of low vomerine folds nearly in contact on midline, free edge, smooth edged and lightly undulatory; postorbital folds short, low and continuous across midline, composed of four to eight irregular width lobes; buccal fold long, medium height, continuous with 14 to 18 abutting rectangular lobes.

Fingers lack webbing. Both finger and toe tips are bluntly rounded. Subarticular tubercles are well developed on the digits; only third finger bears a subarticular tubercle on free portion of digit; all fingers have a tubercle at their base and another row between a large, circular to elliptical, nearly medial outer palmar tubercle. Second and third fingers bear asperities on dorsal surface of distal end of the metacarpal and first phalanx. For the hindfoot, each toe has a basal subarticular tubercle although often poorly developed and low on fourth toe, low or absent on fifth toe; third and fifth toes with addition tubercle on free portion of digit, two tubercles on free portion of fourth toe. Inner and outer metatarsal tubercles are present; inner is large, nearly circular to elliptical; outer small to nearly absent and circular. Toes modestly webbed WebIII2 median 2.5 (1.0–3.0), WebIV1 2.0 (1.0–3.0). Digit lengths nearly constant for fore- and hindfeet; finger formula 3>2≈1>4; toe formula 4>3>5>2>1.

Color pattern variation statistics for entire sample of juvenile and adults are (median and range): HeadMid 0 0–1, HeadPsag 0 0–2, DorsNap 1 0–2, DorsPsag 1 0–2, IngSpt 2 0–2, HndlBr 1 0–2, DlatSt 1 0–2, Loreal 1 0–2, LatTrnk 1 0–2, Chin 1 0–2, Chest 0 0–1. In preservatives, K. sinensis varies from dorsally uniformly colored to well-marked pattern of longitudinal stripes. Some striped individuals have a middorsal stripe extending from snout to neck, there bifurcating; most lack middorsal snout stripe, instead have pair of medially converging diagonal stripes or reverse triangle mark on rear of head; on rear of neck stripe of triangle bifurcates as pair of narrow (usually), diverging trunk stripes; latter stripes rarely fragmented although of variable sharpness; parasagittal trunk stripes regularly present although faded; narrow, light-colored dorsolateral trunk stripe usually present, regularly faded, and narrowly edged below from eye to mid trunk by dark brown border; inguinal ocelli rarely absent, occasionally with smaller ocellus (unilateral) to rear of main ocellus. Thigh banding evident in majority of individuals. Venter in majority is light brown or tan, uniform from chin to thighs, except most individual show pair of broad, dark, longitudinal stripes on throat (usually faded, but visible).

ETYMOLOGY.— Although a Philippine species, the original (holotype) was thought to derive from China . Peters designated the species as Chinese, hence sinensis derives from the Latin Sinae, the Chinese, and used broadly in English as the prefix Sino- in the sense of Chinese or of/from China.

DISTRIBUTION.— Kalophrynus sinensis occurs in the southern islands of Samar, Leyte, Dinagat, Siargao, Bohol, Camiguin, Mindanao, and Basilan.

NATURAL HISTORY.— This species is a forest floor and dry stream bed denizen, hiding under the leaf and other litter during the day and foraging on the surface at night. It also breeds in small, shallow pools of water.

COMMENTS.— Bauer et al. (1996) identified a single specimen in the Berlin collection as the syntype of K. sinensis and, based on W. Peters’ handwritten note in the ZMB catalog identifying the specimen as the type and corrected the locality to “Dapa, Siargao”. Ohler and Grosjean (2005) accepted the existence of two syntypes and identified the type locality as Mindanao, Philippines, based on a bottle label of a supposed syntype in the Vienna collection. I accept the interpretation of a single specimen, and it being the Berlin specimen. Either way, the correction of the syntypic locality makes sinensis the senior synonym for the Philippine populations. Inger (1954) noted that the type locality of C. acutirostris is most likely Samar.

This study does not examine the possibility of multiple species in the Philippine Islands. Inger (1954) noted differences in toe webbing of males in samples from Basilan and Mindanao; howev- er, a statistical test did not reveal the differences to be significant. Taylor (1921) accepted the specific status of the Basilian species stellatus (using his Mindanao sample for his detailed description) and Boettger’s description of the Samar species acutirostris . He noted: “It is not improbable that Kalophrynus stellatus and K. acutirostris are merely variations of the same species.”

Stejneger (1908) reported that the buccal fold was strong denticulate in his description of K. stellatus . My examination of the Basilan specimens available to him showed the lobes to be mostly blunt rectangular, occasionally with an irregular free edge.

Figures

FIGURE 11. Coloration of living representatives of pleurostigma-interlineatus group. (A) Dorsolateral view of a K. anya (USNM 520321) from the Chatthin Wildlife Sanctuary, Sagaing, Myanmar [photographer, C. Hansen]; (B) dorsolateral view of a K. anya (USNM 523966) from the Chatthin Wildlife Sanctuary, Sagaing, Myanmar [photographer, G.R. Zug]; (C) dorsolateral view of a K. interlineatus (CAS) from the Tanintharyi National Park, Tanintharyi, Myanmar [photograph- er, J.V. Vindum]; (D) dorsolateral view of a K. meizon (FMNH 242796) from Poring Station, Mt. Kinabulu Park, Ranua District, Sabah [photographer, R.F. Inger]; (E) dorsolateral view of a K. sinensis (UK 333148) from Agusan del Norte, Mindanao, Philippines [photographer, R.M. Brown]; (F) dorsolateral view of a K. pleurostigma (UK 333148) from Gunung Kunyit, Jambi, Sumatra [photographer, E.N. Smith].