Partition of the Australopapuan Microhylid Frog Genus Sphenophryne With Descriptions of New Species

At the lower size limit for tetrapods, two new species of the miniaturized frog genus Paedophryne (Anura, Microhylidae)

“…All measurements were made with an optical micrometer to the nearest 0.1 mm, except for toe disc width, measured to the nearest 0.03 mm; measurements, terminology, and abbreviations follow Zweifel (1985) and Kraus and Allison (2006): body length from snout−vent (SV); tibia length from heel to outer surface of flexed knee (TL); horizontal diameter of eye (EY); distance from anterior corner of eye to center of naris (EN); internarial distance, between centers of external nares (IN); distance from anterior corner of eye to tip of snout (SN); head width at widest point, typically at the level of the tympana (HW); head length, from tip of snout to posterior margin of tympanum (HL); horizontal tympanum diameter (TY); hand length, from proximal edge of palm to tip of 3 rd finger (HandL); foot length, from proximal edge of sole to tip of 4 th toe (FootL); width of the fourth toe disc (4thT). I determined sex by presence of vocal slits (males) or examination of gonads (females and males for which the vocal slits were not clearly discernible).…”

New genus of diminutive microhylid frogs from Papua New Guinea

“…Th is subfamily is largely endemic to the Papuan region (comprising New Guinea and satellite islands, the Ad-miralty and Bismarck Archipelagos, and the Solomon Islands), contains 250+ species, is monophyletic (Savage 1973, van Bocxlaer et al 2006, Frost et al 2006, Roelants et al 2007, van der Meijden et al 2007, and is relatively young: molecular evidence suggests the extant members of this clade arose within the past ~30 MY (van Bocxlaer et al 2006, Roelants et al 2007), approximately consistent with geological evidence for the origin of New Guinea (Davies et al 1996(Davies et al , 1997. Taxonomy within Asterophryinae has been fl uid, and the number of recognized genera has expanded from nine in the monograph of Parker (1934) to 20 at present (Günther 2009a, Frost 2010, mostly due to partitioning of recognized genera into more tractable, morphologically cohesive (e.g., Zweifel 2000) or monophyletic (Günther 2009a) groups. Nonetheless, additional partitioning is necessary to achieve a completely monophyletic taxonomy of Asterophryinae (Köhler and Günther 2008), and species diversity within this clade, though great, is severely underestimated (FK, unpubl.…”

Burrowing behavior of Dermatonotus muelleri (Anura, Microhylidae) with reference to the origin of the burrowing behavior of Anura

“…Microhylidae Davies (1984) Choerophryne Microhylidae Davies (1984) Oxydactyla stenodactyla Microhylidae Zweifel (2000) Oxydactyla alpestris Microhylidae Zweifel (2000) Oxydactyla coggeri Microhylidae Zweifel (2000) Myobatrachus goeldii Myobatrachidae Littlejohn et al (1993) A. rotunda Myobatrachidae Tyler (1989) Species and family names follow Frost et al (2006) H. marmoratus, a forelimbs-head-first burrower, whereas the burrowing speed of Gliphoglossus molossus, a hindlimbs-first burrower, was only 5.9 cm/min. Our analysis indicated that the hindlimbs-first burrowing behavior appears to be basal for anurans.…”