Hyla infulata Wied, 1824

Vanzolini, Paulo E. & Myers, Charles W., 2015, The Herpetological Collection Of Maximilian, Prince Of Wied (1782 - 1867), With Special Reference To Brazilian Materials, Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History 2015 (395), pp. 1-155 : 74-75

Hyla infulata Wied, 1824

Plate 49 (as ‘‘ Hyla punctata ’’)

1824 Isis : 671 (diagnosis).

1825 Beitra¨ge: 533, 605.

PRESENT STATUS: Hypsiboas infulatus (Wied, 1824) , new combination.

REMARKS: Wied referred to the Abbildungen on the first page of the Beitra¨ge account of Hyla infulata , which has to be the plate (pl. 49) originally labeled Hyla punctata (q.v.). Hyla infulata is Wied’s replacement name for the

39 Lutz was somewhat ambivalent—although she did not explicitly give species status to Hyla elegans , neither did she put the name in the list of synonyms in her appendix B. In discussing the holotype (AMNH 784), Lutz mentioned two speciesmen numbers, of which one is an error (‘‘Maximilian 219’’) and the other correct (Maximilian 298). There is also an old AMNH bird or mammal tag in the jar bearing the number ‘‘15,’’ probably an old card number predating the first amphibian book catalog.

preoccupied punctata , as discussed under that name above. Both names share identical authorship and year of publication, punctata from the 1824 Abbildungen plate, and infulata from the 1824 Isis .

In the Beitra¨ge, Wied noted that he had found Hyla infulata ‘‘Im Sertong der Capitanía da Bahía, ’’ but he did not give a precise locality there or in the earlier Isis , leading authors (e.g., Cochran, 1955: 164) to the conclusion that the ‘‘ type locality [was] not given.’’ However, the type locality is that given under the original name Hyla punctata (see above)—the vicinity of Fazenda von Vareda near the border of Minas Gerais. Bokermann (1957: 236) thought that the locality was about 30 km from the Barra de Vereda , and later (1966: 52) give it as ‘‘‘Fazenda da Vareda’ Inhobim, Bahia.’’

Hyla infulata subsequently was included with several other species in the nominal group Centrotelma Burmeister (1856: 97) . Gu¨ nther (1858: 98) synonymized Centrotelma with Hyla , and he questionably placed infulata under Hyla albomarginata Spix , where it resided for a long time (e.g., Boulenger, 1882: 356; Cochran, 1955: 164; Lutz, 1973: appendix; Duellman, 1977: 24, 26; Frost, 2002). However, Bokermann (1966a: 52) followed Gu¨ nther in placing the question mark before this assignment, which is indeed open to question, as is the default distribution: ‘‘Caribbean lowlands of Colombia to Guianas, lower Amazon Basin, and Atlantic forests of eastern Brazil from Pernambuco to Santa Catarina’’ (see further comment in Frost, 2014, accessed April 2014).

Wied’s illustration (pl. 49) and detailed color description of Hyla infulata in the Beitra¨ge seem adequate for determining the matter by anyone familiar with the variability of H. albomarginata in life. Wied’s figure looks nothing like the original illustration of Hyla albomarginata ( Spix, 1824a, 1824b: pl. 8, fig. 1 ), which, for that matter, bears no color resemblance to a photograph of a living frog identified as albomarginata ( Lutz, 1973: pl. 2).

Neither name, Hyla punctata nor Hyla infulata , appears in Wied’s manuscript catalog. There are, however, two specimens of Hyla albomarginata (AMNH A-498, 499) cataloged as from Rio de Janeiro and purportedly from the Maximilian collection; these seem to have never been identified even to genus (there is no sign of original catalog entry or subsequent erasure) until they were determined as H. albomarginata by Doris M. Cochran in 1942; they are in remarkably fine condition. One specimen is an adult 52 mm SVL. The other (AMNH A-499) is a juvenile 23.8 mm SVL, with a superficial resemblance to Wied’s Hyla punctata (pl. 49). Presumably green in life, AMNH R-499 has faded to whitish, with scattered black dots dorsally and with a narrow brownish interorbital bar and an isolated anterior spot of the same color between the nares. In addition to the incomplete head marking, it differs noticeably from Wied’s painting in (1) possessing a conspicuous pale dorsolateral fold extending from the eye and above the ear to the anterior flank (absent in the painting), and (2) having the canthus and loreal region uniformly pale like the rest of the body (vs. a dark canthal stripe in the painting). These differences and the cataloged locality remove the specimen from consideration as holotype, which probably no longer exists.

Furthermore, it seems unlikely that the aforesaid specimens of Hyla albomarginata (AMNH A-498, 499) were collected by Wied . Compared with the few surviving frogs that can definitely be associated with Wied’s Brazilian expedition, these two specimens seem much too well preserved. They were entered in volume 1 of the 1920 AMNH amphibian catalog, presumably from earlier card catalogs; several other amphibians on the same page are listed as having been collected at Rio de Janeiro by other collectors (L. Diguet, H.H. Rusby). We suspect that either there has been a cataloging error that can no longer be corrected, or that Wied acquired the specimens by purchase or exchange long after his expedition.

Figures

Fig. 1. Paulo E. Vanzolini. On Serra Tapeque´m (a tepui remnant), Roraima, NE Brazil (July 14,