Journal of Threatened
Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 February 2023 | 15(2): 22623–22631
ISSN 0974-7907
(Online) | ISSN 0974-7893 (Print)
https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.8096.15.2.22623-22631
#8096 | Received 09
July 2022 | Final received 04 January 2023 | Finally accepted 27 January 2023
Tadpole morphology of Jerdon’s Narrow-mouthed Frog Uperodon
montanus (Jerdon, 1853)
with a range and elevation extension report from Western Ghats, India
Amit Hegde 1, Girish Kadadevaru 2 &
K.P. Dinesh 3
1,2 Breeding behaviour
and Bioacoustics Lab, Department of Zoology, Karnatak
University, Dharwad, Karnataka 580003, India.
3 Zoological Survey of India (ZSI), Western Regional Centre
(WRC), Pune, Maharashtra 411044, India.
1 amithegdevargasara@gmail.com, 2
kadadevarug@gmail.com (corresponding author), 3 kpdinesh.zsi@gmail.com
Abstract: The study discusses about the new
data on larval description, morphological features, larval ecology of stage
25–40 of the Jerdon’s Narrow-mouthed Frog Uperodon montanus (Jerdon, 1853). Tadpoles were identified up to family and
genus level based on the historical literature and the species level
confirmation was done with molecular studies. We also present a new northern
limit record of this species from the Pushpagiri hill
ranges in Karnataka (12.669 N, 75.717 E)
and a new highest elevation record of 1,916 m at Vaguvarai,
Idukki, Kerala which are outside its currently known distribution and elevation
ranges. As per the present work, the distribution range of U. montanus has extended northwards by 130 km and upwards by
216 m. Additionally, the IUCN Red List status for the species is also discussed
based on the area of occupancy and extent of occurrence redone considering the
new range envelope.
Keywords: Anura, Gosner
stage 25, larval stages, montane endemism, Western Ghats.
Editor: S.R. Ganesh,
Chennai Snake Park, Chennai, India. Date
of publication: 26 February 2023 (online & print)
Citation: Hegde, A., G. Kadadevaru & K.P. Dinesh (2023). Tadpole morphology of Jerdon’s Narrow-mouthed Frog Uperodon
montanus (Jerdon, 1853)
with a range and elevation extension report from Western Ghats, India. Journal of Threatened Taxa 15(2): 22623–22631. https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.8096.15.2.22623-22631
Copyright: © Hegde et al. 2023. Creative Commons Attribution
4.0 International License. JoTT allows unrestricted use, reproduction, and
distribution of this article in any medium by providing adequate credit to the
author(s) and the source of publication.
Funding: University Research Studentship (URS),UGC SAP II Grant, DBT and
SERB (SR/FR/LS-88/210/09.05.2012) fellowship,
Critical Ecosystem
Partnership Fund (Western Ghats) project.
Competing interests: The authors
declare no competing interests.
Author details: Amit Hegde is currently
pursuing PhD at Breeding Behaviour
and Bioacoustics Laboratory, Karnatak University, Dharwad. His interest lies in the
study of amphibians and their morphology,
vocal behaviour, distribution patterns, breeding ecology and conservation especially from peninsular India. Girish Kadadevaru is working
as an asociate professor in
PG Department of Studies Zoology,
Karnatak University. He has 33 years
of teaching and research experience.
His research interest is in breeding behaviour and bioacoustics
of anurans, avian diversity and hydrobiology.
K.P. Dinesh
is a scientist working at Zoological Survey of India under the Ministry of Environment Forests and Climate
Change, Government of India with
a primary study interest on
taxonomy of amphibians of
India and their systematics and phylogenetics.
Author contributions:
AH carried
out field observation, data collection,
analysis, interpretation, wrote
draft, critical review and revision at different stages; GK has played
a crucial role in
monitoring and guiding the work; KPD helped in writing paper, generation of sequences, phylogenetics and field data collection.
Acknowledgements: Authors are indebted to P.
Deepak, Mt. Carmel College for the support in molecular studies and generation
of maps. The authors would like to place special thanks to the forest
departments of Tamil Nadu, Kerala and Karnataka for their support in field studies.
AH would like to thank Bose Madappa for the help in
the field studies; Sunita Rao, Land and Lens India, Batt Anderson, Tom, Amila-Lupé Ellena Aguilar, Dinesh
Kumar, KV Gururaja & Preeti
Gururaja for the gadgets support and grateful to all
Lab mates and Karnatak University for the URS
(University Research Studentship) funding support. KPD is grateful to Karthik Shanker, CES, IISc Bangalore for the support; S.P.
Vijayakumar and other team members of the Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund
(Western Ghats) project for the support in the field studies; DBT and SERB
(SR/FR/LS-88/210/09.05.2012) for the fellowship and assistance to conduct part
of this work; the Director, ZSI, Kolkata and the Officer-in-Charge, ZSI, WRC,
Pune for the support. GGK is thankful for the UGC SAP project.
INTRODUCTION
Jerdon’s Narrow-mouthed Frog Uperodon montanus (Jerdon, 1853) is endemic to the Western Ghats where it is
distributed from near Wyanad south across the Palghat
and the Shencottah gaps to the Agasthyamalai
hills (Garg et al. 2018). It was first described by Jerdon
in 1853 from the mountain streams of Wyanad (Garg et
al. 2018). Later the species details which also include notes on tadpole
morphology were added by Parker (1934). Recently, in the revisionary studies of
the genus, the species was redescribed based on a
freshly collected topotype (Garg et al. 2018). This frog is considered a
montane species and is restricted to higher altitude ranges of 800 m to 1,700 m
(Frost 2023). For breeding and spawning, it has a much more limited
microhabitat within the habitat in landscape (Parker 1934; Garg et al. 2018).
Tadpoles of Uperodon are free swimming and exotrophic (Altig & Johnston
1989; Garg et al. 2018). The tadpoles of the congeners can be classified and
identified based on the variations in their tail morphology, the shape of the
spiracular opening and the location of the mouth and spiracle (Garg et al.
2018).
During one of our regular field
visits to Coorg, Western Ghats, we surveyed small rock pools beside the
mountain streams in which tadpoles were observed. Efforts were made to identify
the tadpoles based on the existing literature (Rao 1918, 1937; Parker 1934; Ramaswami 1940; Raj et al. 2017; Garg et al. 2018), and
secondly genetic data. In the present study, we have appraised the description
of morphometric characters, field observations of the tadpole of Uperodon montanus,
especially in Gosner stages 25–40 and identification
of the tadpole using mt 16S rRNA sequences. We also
present new data on the distribution of this species with an extended
geographical and elevational range.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Observations on spawning ground
and tadpoles of different stages were made. Tadpoles were photographed in
nature without disturbing the individuals from the Brahmagiri
range (11.969 N, 75.984 E, elevation 870 m) Coorg District, Karnataka State
during the post-monsoon season, November 2021. Additionally, field surveys were
conducted in several other parts of the Western Ghats during which U. montanus was observed. Developmental stages were
identified based on the Gosner stages (Gosner 1960).
For detailed studies, tadpoles
were collected (n = 7; Gosner stage 25) and were
photographed under controlled conditions; specimens were euthanized using MS222
and tissue samples were fixed in 70% ethanol for molecular studies (n = 1) and
morphometric measurement specimens (n = 6) were fixed in 10% buffered formalin
for two days and preserved in a 1:1 mixture of 10% buffered formalin at the Gosner stage 25. Tadpole morphology and measurements were
done using the Olympus stereo zoom microscope (8x magnification) (to the
nearest 0.1 mm). Studied samples were deposited at the National Zoological
Collections of the Zoological Survey of India
ZSI/WRC/Pune(ZSI/WRC/V/A/2519–2524).
Protocols were followed after
Hegde et al. (2020) for the generation of 16S rRNA gene sequence and
phylogenetic studies. Sequences used in the studies are provided in Table 1.
For calculating uncorrected pairwise genetic distances, MEGA 5.2 (Tamura et al.
2013) was used. The maximum likelihood (Ml) tree was
generated with RaxMl (Silvestro & Michalak 2012)
under the GTR+GAMMA+I model, with 1,000 thorough bootstrap replicates to assess
node support, and FigTree v1.4.0 visualized the final
consensus tree.
For mapping, the distribution
range of the species was taken from the published literature in addition to the
present record of tadpoles and the field studies of KPD and team between the
period 2010–2020. The IUCN Red List criteria based on the extent of occurrence
(EOO) and area of occupancy (AOO) for the species were estimated using the GeoCAT Geospatial Conservation Assessment Tool (Bachman et
al. 2011).
Abbreviations
BH, Body height (the highest
height of the body); BW, body width (the highest width of the body); ED, eye
diameter (the greatest length of the orbit from the anterior margin to the
posterior margin of the eye); END, Eye to nostril distance (from the anterior
corner of the eye to the posterior margin of the naris (nostril)); HL, Head
length; HW, Head width at the level of eyes; Snout to spiracle distance, from
the tip of the snout to the posterior margin of the spiracle; IOD, Inter
orbital distance; IND, inter-narial distance (measured from the centres of the narial apertures); LTF, Lower tail fin
height (the highest height of the lower fin, from the lower margin of the lower
fin to the lower margin of the tail musculature); MTH, Maximum height of tail
(the highest height of the tail); tail height at mid-length of tail (including
caudal fin); maximum tail height (tail height at the mid-length of the tail
including caudal fin and tail musculature); NSD, Nostril to snout distance
(from the anterior margin of the naris to the tip of the snout); Tail length,
from the junction of the posterior body and the tail musculature to the tip of
the tail; TL, total length (sum of BL and TaL)(from
the tip of the snout to the tip of the tail); TMH, Tail muscle height at the
base of tail; TMW, tail muscle width (at the beginning of the tail); UTF, Upper
tail fin height (the highest height of the upper fin, from the upper margin of
the tail musculature to the upper margin of the upper fin).
RESULTS
Tadpole identification was
confirmed as Uperodon montanus
based on the sequences generated from the tadpole tissue samples collected
during the present study (Figure 1; Table 2).
A total of 40 tadpoles were
observed, out of which 37 tadpoles were of Gosner
stage 25 and three tadpoles were of Gosner stage 40
in the rocky pools characterised by 80 cm in length,
50 cm in width and 15.5 cm depth in the steep slopes. These rock pools are
situated close to the torrent and cascading third order streams with
characteristic of water splashing activity from the stream cascades, especially
during monsoon (Image 2H).
Tadpole external morphology (Gosner stage 25): Exotroph, neustonic tadpole, In U. montanus
head part is dorsoventrally compressed or flattened, the mouth is situated
at the terminal end and lateral eyes form part of the dorsal outline of the
tadpole. Tail musculature is brown and unicoloured,
comparatively denser towards the body and more stressed in the upper tail fin.
The external opening of the cloaca is medial, vent-aperture of vent tube is in
line with the axis of the ventral fin. The oral disc is terminally positioned
without marginated papillae, labial teeth or hard
beaks. The upper lip is slightly extended in the middle and emarginated on both
the sides which cover the lower lip. During the feeding slight lower lip
movement is observed. The lower lip is U-shaped with cuspate rounded jaw
sheaths with no keratinisation. The lateral process
is a poorly delimited posterolateral extension of the upper jaw, often
non-serrate, long-extending well beyond the lower jaw. Paired
ventrolateral spiracle, the external opening for the exit of water from the opercular chamber. Long tail fin with a rounded tip (Image
2).
Body measurements: Mean
values (in mm) and standard deviations of measurements of the collected
tadpoles (n = 6) of U. montanus at Gosner stage 25 as follows, TL: 17.2± 8.8; IOD: 2.9± 1.2;
ED: 0.5± 0.2; IND: 1.0± 0.4; END: 1.3± 0.6;
NSD: 1.0± 0.4; HW: 4.0± 1.7; Snout to spiracle distance: 4.3± 2.0; BW:
4.5± 1.9; HL: 6.3± 2.7; TMW: 1.6± 0.8; LTF: 0.7± 0.3; UTF: 0.8± 0.4; MTH: 2.7±
1.2; Tail length: 11.6± 5.4; TMH: 1.9± 0.9; BH: 2.4± 1.2 (Table 1).
Colour in life (Gosner stage 25): Brown pigment spots all over the
body denser towards the forebrain, midbrain and gut regions. Near gills,
reddish spots are seen from inside the body as the body is transparent. In
notochord region of the tail near the body is dense. Comparatively dull brown
patches surrounding the nostril are seen. The vent region is opaque without any
brown pigments and the ventral side of the gut region is more transparent
compared to the dorsal. The lower part of the tail is more transparent without
many brown pigments like the upper part of the tail. Overall colour slightly varied between individuals within the same
pool, further studies are needed in this regard (Image 2).
Colour in preservative (Gosner stage 25): The body is roughly dark brown in colouration and the eyes are dark. Brown pigments all over
the body which are not uniform, comparatively less pigmented in the lower tail,
tail tip, below the gut region and it is transparent outside the body region.
Besides the forebrain and midbrain region bright patch is visible from inside
the body, compared to the living tadpole.
Notes on the Gosner
stage 40: Tadpoles were observed in nature, with no webbing in the hind limbs
(subarticular tubercles are seen) and they are banded with golden stripes or
radiant yellow. Body regions are coloured with dark
brown, golden spots all over the body and it is uniform dorsally. However, near
the upper tail notochord region, it is more prominent. Ventrally it is dark
brown in colouration (Image 2I). In November
(post-monsoon), the tadpoles were seen in the rock pools beside the mountain
streams of the evergreen forests. Most of these pools/pockets had organic
debris, leaf litter and aquatic insects. Within the single clutch or in the
single pool after Gosner stage 25, there wasn’t any
uniformity in development stages between the tadpoles of this species, this
might be related to the diet and competition.
Change in the tadpole body colouration was observed during the day and night. In the
daytime, they looked comparatively darker and at night they were slightly
transparent, especially observed for the Gosner stage
25. In these small rock pockets, the tadpoles above Gosner
stage 25 rarely come to the surface during the daytime and they hide under the
dark black decayed leaf litter and brown algal substrate. Tadpoles might be
using the substrate as micro refugia. The body colour
is adapted to blend with the dark substrate as the light penetration is
comparatively low at the bottom (Image 2).
In the daytime, tadpoles of other
species were encountered surrounding the study site in Brahmagiri,
Kodagu, Karnataka including unidentified Indosylvirana
and Nyctibatrachus. In the same location
during night hours, Micrixalus, Nyctibatrachus, Indirana,
Indosylvirana, and Raorchestes
species adults were observed.
Distribution of U. montanus:
During the present study, this
species was observed from several localities across the Western Ghats (Table
3). The extent of occurrence (EOO) was calculated to be 18,418.65 km2
which suggests ‘Vulnerable’ status and the area of occupancy (AOO) amounts to
96.00 km2 which suggests ‘Endangered’ (Bachman et al. 2011) status.
This species is restricted to mountain forests of the Western Ghats, especially
in the southern part of central Western Ghats and southern Western Ghats. Our
field data confirms the presence of the species from Toregadde
forests in the foothills of Pushpagiri hill ranges in
Karnataka which is the northern limit to Murunga mottai
forests of Agasthyamalai hill ranges of Tamil Nadu
which is the southern limit in the Western Ghats (Image 1). Our studies confirm
the higher altitude record of species at 1,916 m that is 216 m above the
previous report of 1,700 m (Frost 2023; Garg et al. 2018).
DISCUSSION
Molecular identification in
tadpoles is particularly useful when the habitat has multiple species belonging
to the same family or genus, where sympatric species share the same
microhabitat. It is also very helpful where the two allopatric species meet at hybridising zones (where high elevation species share the
same zone with mid elevational species or two species meet near the
biogeographic barrier) or when the tadpoles show a great amount of
morphological variation, polymorphism, and plasticity where morphological key
characters are difficult to rely on. Historical descriptions provided by Parker
(1934) were limited and it would have been difficult to identify the tadpole
species without molecular studies in this context. A holistic approach to the morphological
character of the tadpoles is much needed with molecular confirmation to make
the morphological characters data set handy for the identification of the
members of the genus or the family in the field/museum.
Parker’s (1934) tadpole
descriptions for U. montanus, developmental
stages (Image 3) are not clear and sample sizes are not mentioned and it is
difficult to conclude or compare the tadpole in gross scale; subsequent
descriptions of tadpole stages by Gosner (1960)
facilitated identifying the stages. Parker mentioned that the largest unstaged tadpole of U. montanus
measures 45 mm. In our study out of six tadpoles (Gosner
stage 25), the larger one measured 23.2 mm and the average was 17.2 mm ±
8.8.
Parker (1934) mentioned that Head
length (HL) is one and a half times as long as body width (BW). In the present
study, HL is 1.4 times bigger than BW; END is equal to NSD but in this studies,
they are not equal and END is slightly longer than NSD; IOD is five times the
IND, but in our studies, IOD is double the IND; TL is one and half time long as
head length (HL) but in our studies, TL is 2.73 times bigger than the HL; UTF
& LTF are not equal, they are highly variable, END is twice the ED (Table
1).
Chromatophores or colour pigments might play a very important role in visual
communication between conspecifics and heterospecifics.
Tadpoles with respect to different developmental stages show different colour variations, some may be adapted for crypsis and aposematism for survival (Toledo & Haddad
2009). The current study reports natural history observation of U. montanus in the Gosner stage
25 changes colour with respect to the diel cycle.
However, these are based only on visual observation in situ and photographs.
More reproducible and objective studies are needed in this regard.
In the present work, Gosner stage 40 showed no webbing (n = 3); however, the
sample size is small, so it will be interesting to study more about the tadpole
webbing variation and tail fin with respect to different elevational and
spawning ground variations. Garg et al. (2018) have already mentioned that the
webbing of the U. montanus is highly variable
and there are some studies reported globally on tadpole webbing variations
(Goldberg & Fabrezi 2008). The studies on
variations in tadpole morphology with respect to different environmental
variables like water depth, temperature, oxygen levels and microhabitat
features such as syntopy, predator, density and
abundance will also be of great importance.
When the ambient temperature gets
comparatively high (especially during the midnoon),
water temperature increases, this might be one of the direct threats to several
puddle tadpoles where mud puddles dry fast and rock pools (Chandramouli
& Kalaimani 2014; Gaitonde
et al. 2016) remain warmer for longer durations. Also, desiccation is the main
cause of mortality, next to predation by some species of arthropods and aquatic
beetles (Wells 2007).
The conservation status of U. montanus is listed as Near Threatened in the IUCN Red
List (Biju et al. 2016; Das et al. 2020). To ascertain this status,
reassessment was attempted in the present study to show the EOO suggesting
Vulnerable status and the AOO suggesting Endangered status (Bachman et al.
2011). This species is restricted only to the mountain forests of the Western
Ghats like the other two species U. anamalaiensis (Rao,
1937) and U. triangularis (Gunther, 1876) from
the same genus (Garg et al. 2018). Suggesting ‘Endangered’ status for
the species is a high priority conservation measure. Earlier reported northern
limit of the range of distribution for this species was Thirunelli
in Wyanad hill ranges of Kerala and the southern
range of distribution was Kakachi in Agasthyamalai hill ranges of Tamil Nadu (Garg et al. 2018).
Garg et al. (2018) presented several literature data citations and respective
point localities from Karnataka and even Maharashtra parts of the Western
Ghats, as those of U. montanus. Such
literature records of U. montanus (sic) cover
areas falling between Bisale Ghats, Karnataka up to Dangs in Gujarat (see Garg et al. 2018). Yet, their map
indicates dots only till Goa Gap (Garg et al. 2018). So, due to imprecise
taxonomic identities in many such reports, those records north of Wyanad are considered doubtful at best. Now our field data
reveals the presence of the species from Tore gadde
forests in the foothills of Pushpagiri hill ranges in
Karnataka (Image 1) which is 130 km further northwards than the previous limit,
Thirunelli. The previous record of altitude limit for
the species was 1,700 m (Garg et al. 2018) but our studies extend much higher
altitudinal range of 1,916 m from Vaguvarai, Idukki,
Kerala. Uperodon montanus
is an altitude and range specific anuran species that occurs within the central
and southern Western Ghats and is known for scanty or imprecise reports
(present study; Garg et al. 2018). Further studies are needed to understand its
biphasic life, microhabitat preference, morphology, breeding behaviour, ecology, and ontogenetic variations.
Table 1. Tadpole body
measurements (in mm) of Uperodon montanus at Gosner stage 25
(n = 6) *(Prefix ZSI/WRC/V/A/) (17 morphometric measurements).
|
Reg. No* |
2519 |
2520 |
2521 |
2522 |
2523 |
2524 |
Average + SD (n = 6) |
|
TL |
15.4 |
15.8 |
17.3 |
23.2 |
16.7 |
15.3 |
17.2 ± 8.8 |
|
IOD |
2.5 |
2.8 |
3.0 |
3.5 |
3.3 |
2.6 |
2.9 ± 1.2 |
|
ED |
0.4 |
0.4 |
0.5 |
0.7 |
0.5 |
0.5 |
0.5 ± 0.2 |
|
IND |
0.8 |
1.2 |
0.9 |
1.4 |
1.0 |
1.0 |
1.0 ± 0.4 |
|
END |
1.1 |
1.3 |
1.3 |
1.7 |
1.5 |
1.2 |
1.3 ± 0.6 |
|
NSD |
0.8 |
0.9 |
1.2 |
1.0 |
1.1 |
1.0 |
1.0 ± 0.4 |
|
HW |
3.3 |
3.7 |
4.3 |
4.7 |
4.5 |
3.6 |
4.0 ± 1.7 |
|
Snout to spiracle distance |
3.2 |
4.3 |
3.6 |
5.9 |
4.6 |
4.3 |
4.3 ± 2.0 |
|
BW |
3.7 |
4.2 |
4.8 |
5.4 |
4.8 |
4.3 |
4.5 ± 1.9 |
|
HL |
5.4 |
5.9 |
6.4 |
7.6 |
6.8 |
6.0 |
6.3 ± 2.7 |
|
TMW |
1.4 |
1.4 |
1.7 |
2.6 |
1.8 |
1.0 |
1.6 ± 0.8 |
|
LTF |
0.6 |
0.6 |
0.6 |
0.8 |
1.0 |
0.8 |
0.7 ± 0.3 |
|
UTF |
0.6 |
0.7 |
0.7 |
0.9 |
1.1 |
1.0 |
0.8 ± 0.4 |
|
MTH |
2.0 |
2.4 |
2.8 |
3.3 |
3.3 |
2.5 |
2.7 ± 1.2 |
|
Tail Length |
10.0 |
10.5 |
10.9 |
15.6 |
13.4 |
9.3 |
11.6 ± 5.4 |
|
TMH |
1.7 |
1.9 |
1.6 |
2.7 |
1.9 |
1.7 |
1.9 ± 0.9 |
|
BH |
2.2 |
2.0 |
2.6 |
3.4 |
2.8 |
1.5 |
2.4 ± 1.2 |
Table 2. Details of mt 16S sequences used for building the maximum likelihood
(ML) tree.
|
GenBank accession number |
Species |
Reference |
|
MG557910.1 |
Uperodon anamalaiensis |
Garg et al.
2018 |
|
MG557914.1 |
Uperodon globulosus |
Garg et al.
2018 |
|
MG557924.1 |
Uperodon montanus |
Garg et al.
2018 |
|
MG557922.1 |
Uperodon montanus |
Garg et al.
2018 |
|
MG557921.1 |
Uperodon montanus |
Garg et al.
2018 |
|
MG557920.1 |
Uperodon montanus |
Garg et al.
2018 |
|
MG557919.1 |
Uperodon montanus |
Garg et al.
2018 |
|
MG557918.1 |
Uperodon montanus |
Garg et al.
2018 |
|
MG557917.1 |
Uperodon montanus |
Garg et al.
2018 |
|
MG557916.1 |
Uperodon montanus |
Garg et al.
2018 |
|
MG557915.1 |
Uperodon montanus |
Garg et al.
2018 |
|
MG557934.1 |
Uperodon mormorata |
Garg et al.
2018 |
|
MG557936.1 |
Uperodon nagaoi |
Garg et al.
2018 |
|
MG557942.1 |
Uperodon palmatus |
Garg et al.
2018 |
|
MG557943.1 |
Uperodon rohani |
Garg et al.
2018 |
|
MG557953.1 |
Uperodon systoma |
Garg et al.
2018 |
|
MT983198.1 |
Uperodon taprobanicus |
Garg et al.
2018 |
|
MG557962.1 |
Uperodon triangularis |
Garg et al.
2018 |
|
MG557965.1 |
Uperodon variegatus |
Garg et al.
2018 |
|
OQ372997.1 |
Uperodon montanus |
Present
study |
Table 3. Field locality details
for the records of Uperodon montanus
in the central and southern Western Ghats documented during the present study.
|
Lat. (N) |
Lon. (E) |
Altitude (metres) |
Location in the Western Ghats |
|
12.669 |
75.717 |
904 |
Tore gadde,
Kodagu, Karnataka |
|
11.970 |
75.985 |
870 |
Brahmagiri, Kodagu, Karnataka |
|
11.531 |
76.053 |
926 |
Vythiri, Wyanad , Kerala |
|
11.112 |
76.421 |
1,090 |
Silent Valley, Palakkad, Kerala |
|
11.110 |
76.423 |
1,076 |
Silent Valley, Nilgiris, Tamil Nadu |
|
11.110 |
76.420 |
1,089 |
Silent Valley, Nilgiris, Tamil Nadu |
|
10.186 |
77.095 |
1,916 |
Vaguvarai, Idukki, Kerala |
|
10.168 |
76.974 |
1,564 |
Edamalayar, Idukki, Kerala |
|
10.143 |
77.045 |
1,752 |
Rajamalai, Idukki, Kerala |
|
9.594 |
77.335 |
1,801 |
Brook's Peak, Idukki, Kerala |
|
9.578 |
77.336 |
1,556 |
Upper Manalar,
Theni, Tamil Nadu |
|
9.540 |
77.365 |
1,494 |
Vellimalai, Theni, Tamil Nadu |
|
9.540 |
77.365 |
1,506 |
Vellimalai, Theni, Tamil Nadu |
|
9.179 |
77.265 |
1,351 |
Kudraikatti, Tirunelveli,
Tamil Nadu |
|
9.173 |
77.261 |
1,262 |
Kudraikatti, Tirunelveli,
Tamil Nadu |
|
8.828 |
77.217 |
1,249 |
Pandimalai forest, Kollam,
Kerala |
|
8.689 |
77.187 |
1,043 |
Pandipath,
Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala |
|
8.680 |
77.194 |
1,327 |
Pandipath,
Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala |
|
8.550 |
77.386 |
1,263 |
Kakachi, Tirunelveli,
Tamil Nadu |
|
8.533 |
77.432 |
1,279 |
Murunga mottai,
Tirunelveli, Tamil Nadu |
For figure &
images - - click here for full PDF
REFERENCES
Altig, R. & G.F. Johnston (1989). Guilds of anuran larvae:
relationships among developmental modes, morphologies, and habitats. Herpetological
Monographs 3: 81–109. https://doi.org/10.2307/1466987
Bachman, S.,
J. Moat, A.W. Hill, J. de la Torre & B. Scott (2011). Supporting Red List threat
assessments with GeoCAT: geospatial conservation
assessment tool. In: Smith, V. & L. Penev (Eds.).
e-Infrastructures for data publishing in biodiversity science. ZooKeys 150: 117–126. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.150.2109
Biju, S.D.,
G.D. Buddhe, S. Dutta, S., V.G. Broom, K. Vasudevan,
C. Srinivasulu & S.P. Vijayakumar (2016). Uperodon
montanus. The IUCN Red List of Threatened
Species 2016: e.T57986A86524733. Accessed on 14 September 2022.
https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2016-1.RLTS.T57986A86524733.en
Chandramouli, S.R. & A. Kalaimani (2014). Description of the larvae of
Günther’s Toad Duttaphrynus hololius (Günther, 1876) (Anura:
Bufonidae) with notes on development and oral
ultra-structure. Alytes 31: 3–12.
Das, S., K.V.
Gururaja, N. Modak, K.P. Rajkumar, K.S. Seshadri & V. Sankararaman
(2020). Conservation
Needs Assessment for Uperodon montanus, India (AArk/ASG
India Assessment Workshop). Accessed 20 September 2022. https://conservationneeds.org/Assessment/AssessmentResults?assessmentId=5727&countryId=146&speciesId=96
Frost, D.R.
(2023). Amphibian
Species of the World: an Online Reference. Version 6.0 Electronic Database.
American Museum of Natural History, New York.
https://amphibiansoftheworld.amnh.org/ Accessed 23 January 2023.
Gaitonde, N., V. Giri
& K. Kunte (2016). ‘On the rocks’: reproductive
biology of the endemic toad Xanthophryne (Anura: Bufonidae) from the
Western Ghats, India. Journal of Natural History 50(39–40): 2557–2572. https://doi.org/10.1080/00222933.2016.1200686
Garg, S., G. Senevirathne, N. Wijayathilaka,
S. Phuge, K. Deuti, K. Manamendra-Arachchi, M.
Meegaskumbura & S.D. Biju (2018). An integrative taxonomic review
of the South Asian microhylid genus Uperodon.
Zootaxa 4384(1): 1–88. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4384.1.1
Goldberg, J.
& M. Fabrezi (2008). Development and variation of the
anuran webbed feet (Amphibia, Anura). Zoological
Journal of the Linnean Society 152(1): 39–58. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1096-3642.2007.00345.x
Gosner, K.L. (1960). A simplified table for staging
anuran embryos and larvae with notes on Identification. Herpetologica
16(3): 183–190.
Hegde, A.,
K.P. Dinesh & G. Kadadevaru (2020). Phenotypic divergence in large
sized cricket frog species that crossed the geographical barriers within
peninsular India. Zootaxa 4838(2): 210–220. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4838.2.3
Parker, H.W.
(1934). A
Monograph of the Frogs of the Family Microhylidae.
London, (Trustees of the British Museum): I-III, 208 pp.
Raj, P., K.
Vasudevan, G. Sahu & S. Dutta (2017). Larval taxonomy of Indian
anurans, pp. 118–130. In: Das A. (ed.). Diversity and ecology of Amphibians
of India ENVIS bulletin: wildlife & protected Areas. Vol. 19. Wildlife
Institute of India, Dehradun, 319 pp.
Ramaswami, L.S. (1940). Some aspects of the
chondrocranium in the tadpoles of South Indian frogs. Journal of Mysore
University 1: 15–41.
Rao, C.R.N.
(1918). Notes on
tadpoles of Indian Engystomatidae. Records of
Indian Museum 15: 41–45.
Rao, C.R.N.
(1937). On some new
forms of Batrachia from S. India. Proceedings of
the Indian Academy of Sciences, Section B6: 387–427.
Silvestro, D.
& I. Michalak (2012). RaxmlGUI: A graphical front-end for RAxMl. Organisms Diversity and Evolution 12(4):
335–337. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13127-011-0056-0
Tamura, K.,
G. Stecher, D. Peterson, A. Filipski & S.
Kumar (2013). MEGA6:
Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis version 6.0. Molecular Biology and
Evolution 30(12): 2725–2729. https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/mst197
Toledo, L.F. &
C.F.B. Haddad (2009). Colors and some morphological traits as defensive mechanisms in
anurans. International Journal of Zoology 2009: 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1155/2009/910892
Wells, K.D. (2007). The Ecology and Behavior of
Amphibians. University of Chicago Press, 1,400 pp.