Systematics and ecology of the caecilianCrotaphatrema lamottei(Nussbaum) (Amphibia: Gymnophiona: Scolecomorphidae)

A nine-family classification of caecilians (Amphibia: Gymnophiona)

“…We find the latter hypothesis sufficiently compelling to justify removing Scolecomorphidae from the synonymy of Caeciliidae. Monophyly of the family and of its two genera has never been seriously questioned and is supported by available morphological (Nussbaum, 1985) and molecular Doherty-Bone et al, 2011) data.…”

The Amphibians of Mount Oku, Cameroon: an updated species inventory and conservation review

“…For example, all firstly listed three peaks share species such as Astylosternus ranoides Amiet, 1977, Cardioglossa oreas Amiet, 1972 and the restricted range Astylosternus rheophilus Amiet, 1977. Oku and Bamboutos share Werneria bambutensis Amiet, 1972 and Wolterstorffina mirei Perret, 1971 (Perret 1972), while Oku and Tchabal Mbabo share very similar Crotaphatrema caecilian species, Crotaphatrema lamottei and Crotaphatrema tchabalmbamboensis Lawson, 2000 (Doherty-Bone et al 2011a), and two lineages of the Phrynobatrachus steindachneri species complex (Zimkus and Gvoždík 2013). An adequate, robust appraisal (such as an analysis of similarity indices across the range) of the biogeography of Oku’s amphibians is difficult due to: a) the absence of complete inventories at other localities around Cameroon and b) the turbulent taxonomy of Cameroon’s amphibians over the last decades.…”

“…230 km north-east. A recent study found these two species to have a very low genetic difference, suggesting they could be conspecific, possibly treated as different subspecies, but requires further examination of more specimens and molecular markers (Doherty-Bone et al 2011a). It is possible that this caecilian is more widespread over the mountains (probably including the Nigerian Mambilla Plateau and Gotel Mts) but overlooked.…”

“…This requires a concerted movement from sporadic surveys and preliminary appraisals of the human scale to taxonomic appraisals using modern methods, robust ecological and socio-economic study and active interventions (such as those listed in Smith and Sutherland 2014). Recent campaigns to collect better reference collections to enable molecular phylogenetic analysis to test taxonomic hypotheses have made significant advances (Zimkus 2009; Blackburn et al 2010b; Doherty-Bone et al 2011a; Zimkus and Gvoždík 2013). These have been coupled with engagement with the local communities raising awareness: public outreach meetings (Doherty-Bone 2011, 2015b), participation in traditional rituals to facilitate field surveys (Doherty-Bone et al 2011b) and even naming of new species using indigenous languages (Zimkus 2009; Blackburn et al 2010b; Zimkus and Gvoždík 2013; Evans et al 2015).…”

“…This was followed by the International Council for Bird Preservation (UK) expedition in 1984 (Stuart 1986), which made a preliminary conservation assessment of the herpetofauna of Oku and other mountains in Cameroon (Gartshore 1986). Other herpetologists have subsequently made contributions: an updated inventory was published by Wild (1994); for caecilians (Scolecomorphidae: Crotaphatrema ) (Nussbaum 1981; Doherty-Bone et al 2011a); Clawed Frogs (Pipidae; Xenopus ) (Loumont and Kobel 1991; Blackburn et al 2010a; Evans et al 2015); Wolterstorff toads (Bufonidae; Wolterstorffina ) (Perret 1972; Boistel and Amiet 2001); Squeaker Frogs and kin (Arthroleptidae; Arthroleptis , Cardioglossa ) (Blackburn 2008a, b; Blackburn et al 2010b); Puddle Frogs (Phrynobatrachidae; Phrynobatrachus ) (Zimkus 2009; Zimkus and Gvoždík 2013). …”