SarahMângiaBarros Tese
SarahMângiaBarros Tese
SarahMângiaBarros Tese
João Pessoa
Paraíba – Brasil
2017
SARAH MÂNGIA BARROS
__________________________ __________________________
Pedro Murilo Sales Nunes Sérgio Maia Queiroz Lima
Membro titular externo Membro titular externo
UFPE UFRN
__________________________ __________________________
Pedro C. Estrela de A. Pinto Márcio Bernardino da Silva
Membro titular interno Membro titular interno
UFPB UFPB
__________________________
Adrian Antonio Garda
Orientador
UFPB
i
Catalogação na publicação
Seção de Catalogação e Classificação
UFPB/BC
“Nada a temer
Senão o correr da luta
Nada a fazer
Se não esquecer o medo
Abrir o peito à força
Numa procura
Fugir às armadilhas da mata escura
ii
Agradecimentos
Fiz questão de fechar os olhos e relembrar todos os momentos (ora felizes, ora
desesperadores) que passei durante os quatro anos de Doutorado. Eu aprendi que não se faz
ciência sozinha. Fazer parcerias torna o trabalho menos árduo e gera resultados mais completos e
de melhor qualidade. Eu aprendi que é possível recarregar as energias com apenas uma
profissionais da área, quanto pessoas queridas que buscavam amenizar essa minha caminhada, eu
Agradeço ao meu orientador, Adrian, pelo esforço em ‘pai’trocinar toda a minha pesquisa
e permitir que eu conhecesse diversos lugares incríveis na Caatinga durante as minhas coletas.
Por me ensinar, durante a revisão dos artigos da tese, como colocar os resultados de forma
harmoniosa e coesa. Mas, principalmente, sou grata pela compreensão durante as fases difíceis
que enfrentei durante o doutorado, e por estar ciente que cada aluno tem seu tempo. Adrian, isso
psicólogo e conselheiro, Diego. Agradeço pelo seu apoio, amor e atenção incondicionais, e por
acreditar sempre na minha capacidade. Cada parágrafo dessa tese carrega a opinião deste grande
profissional, digno da minha admiração e amor eternos. Obrigada, meu herpetólogo preferido!
Agradeço à minha mãe, Zilda, por sempre me apoiar em meus sonhos, comemorar as
minhas realizações, compreendendo a minha ausência e suportando a saudade. Devo a ela o meu
eterno agradecimento por tudo que sou, e a minha admiração pela força e exemplo de vida. E a
todos os meus familiares que, mesmo sem saber o que faço exatamente, contribuíram com um
iii
sorriso ou um abraço. À família “Santana-Silva”, pela presença maravilhosa na minha vida.
agradeço pela companhia nas horas de alegria e pelo apoio e amizade nos momentos difíceis.
Embora alguns já não estejam presentes no LAR, nunca deixarão de ser essa família na minha
vida: Li (que me salvou nas análises filogeográficas – um dia quero saber pelo menos a metade
do que essa pequena sabe), São-Pedro, Camurugi, Boy, Ricardo-mais-lindo, M.C. Gehara,
Andréia, Will, Marília, Manel, Flavinha, Thiago-da-Tim, David Lucas, (abro aqui um parêntese
para um agradecimento especial aos meus irmãos Camura, Boy e Xily, que me ouviram over and
over and over, e fizeram o meu caminho menos pesado e muito mais divertido, além dos milhões
redescobri com 10 anos de idade e encontrei coleguinhas do mesmo nível. Vocês são minha dose
Guilerme; incluindo os agregados Pam, Poli, Jabur e Gustavo, amigos para sempre dividindo
Sou grata ao Ricardo Koroiva e ao professor Fernando Paiva, por pacientemente terem me
funcionamento dos equipamentos. Sem vocês, eu não conseguiria realizar a parte molecular da
iv
Pelo empréstimo de material, agradeço aos curadores de museus de herpetologia no
Brasil: Paulo Garcia (UFMG), Luciana Nascimento (PUC-Minas), Marcelo Napoli (UFBA),
Flora Juncá (UEFS), Maria Lúcia Del-Grande (UESB), Daniel Mesquita (UFPB), Diva Borges-
Nojosa (UFC), Robson-Ávila (URCA), Selma Torquato (UFAL), Pedro Nunes (UFPE), e
Agradeço também às minhas dog-filhas, Mentira e Farofa, que foram minha terapia diária
Vencer os meus medos e superar todos os obstáculos durante os quatro anos de pesquisa
foram essenciais para o meu crescimento pessoal e profissional. Hoje eu confio em mim como
pesquisadora e acredito na qualidade do meu trabalho. Isso só foi possível devido às pessoas
citadas acima, minhas maiores conquistas durante o Doutorado. Muito obrigada a todos!
v
Sumário
Resumo ......................................................................................................................... 1
Abstract ......................................................................................................................... 2
Artigo I. Mângia, S., Santana, D.J., Sant’Anna, A.C., Garda, A.A. Taxonomic
Artigo II. Mângia, S., Koroiva, R., Nunes, P.M. S., Roberto, I.J., Santa’Anna, A.C.,
Santana, D.J. and Garda, A.A. A new and endangered species of Proceratophrys
Artigo III. Mângia, S., Koroiva, R., Oliveira, E.F., Leite, F.S.F., Del-Grande, M.L.,
Napoli, M.F., Juncá, F.A., Santana, D.J. and Garda, A.A. Speciation in dwarf
Artigo IV. Mângia, S., Oliveira, E.F., Santana, D.J., Koroiva, R. and Garda, A.A.
vi
Resumo
BARROS, Sarah Mângia, D. Sc., Universidade Federal da Paraíba, Março de 2017. Sistemática e
biogeografia do complexo de espécies Proceratophrys cristiceps (Anura, Odontophrynidae).
Orientador: Adrian Antonio Garda.
A Caatinga é um bioma no nordeste do Brasil caracterizado por uma vegetação decídua, xerófita
e espinhosa, com cactos, arbustos e pequenas árvores além de precipitação esporádica.
Atualmente, este domínio abriga 56 espécies de anfíbios, porém, novas espécies típicas da
Caatinga são continuamente descritas, incluindo espécies restritas aos Brejos de altitude, o que
indica que a riqueza da região ainda está subestimada. O gênero Proceratophrys compreende 40
espécies divididas em grupos e complexos morfológicos sem corroboração filogenética. Com
base em estudos recentes, definimos o complexo P. cristiceps constituído por seis espécies: P.
cristiceps, P. minuta, P. redacta, P. schirchi, P. caramaschii e P. aridus. O presente estudo teve
como objetivo avaliar a taxonomia, biogeografia e evolução das espécies relacionadas ao
complexo P. cristiceps, combinando características morfológicas, morfométricas, acústicas e
análises moleculares multilocus, com inferência bayesiana. Nossos resultados, baseados nessas
análises integrativas, mostraram que P. aridus, P. caramaschii e P. cristiceps pertencem a uma
mesma linhagem e não apresentam distinção morfológica e acústica. Dessa forma, nós
sinonimizamos as duas primeiras espécies com P. cristiceps. Também encontramos uma
população proveniente da Chapada do Araripe, previamente chamada de P. cristiceps,
relacionada com a espécie amazônica P. concavitympanum, que aqui descrevemos como uma
espécie nova para o gênero. Esta nova espécie se encaixa na categoria Ameaçada da IUCN, uma
vez que ocorre em uma pequena área (ca. 3.100 km2) severamente impactada pelo desmatamento
e canalização de riachos locais para agricultura. Nós também revisamos as populações de
Proceratophrys que ocorrem em áreas de altitude na Chapada Diamantina e descrevemos duas
novas espécies com base em caracteres da morfologia, morfometria e no relacionamento
filogenético (usando um marcador nuclear e um mitocondrial). Verificamos que cada linhagem
na Chapada Diamantina corresponde a diferentes ilhas de altitude, separadas por vales com
temperaturas mais quentes, o que poderia ter agido como barreira entre estas populações,
propiciando diversificação alopátrica entre elas. Portanto, nós consideramos cada linhagem como
uma espécie distinta, exceto a população do município de Pindobaçu, que requer a análise de
mais exemplares e a utilização de mais marcadores moleculares para definir com mais precisão
seu status taxonômico. Por fim, nós conduzimos análises filogeográficas multiloci, para avaliar a
diversidade genética, estruturação geográfica e demografia histórica de P. cristiceps. Nossos
resultados mostraram P. cristiceps constituído por apenas uma população amplamente distribuída
na Caatinga, com baixa diversidade genética para todos os genes avaliados (16S mtDNA, CRYb,
POMC e rhodopsina nuDNAs). Nossas análises para avaliar a demografia histórica de P.
cristiceps revelaram que a espécie sofreu uma recente expansão, coincidindo com as flutuações
climáticas do Pleistoceno.
Palavras-chave: Anfíbios, Taxonomia integrativa, Filogeografia, Molecular, Diversificação.
1
Abstract
BARROS, Sarah Mângia, D. Sc., Universidade Federal da Paraíba, March de 2017. Systematic
and biogeography of the species complex Proceratophrys cristiceps (Anura,
Odontophrynidae). Adviser: Adrian Antonio Garda.
The Caatinga is a biome in northeastern Brazil characterized by deciduous xerophytic and thorny
vegetation, and by a severe water deficit caused by intense and unpredictable dry seasons.
Currently, the Caatinga harbors 56 species of amphibians. However, new species from this
domain are being continuously described, including taxa restricted to rainforest natural enclaves
(called “Brejos de altitude”), indicating that the richness of the region is still underestimated. The
Proceratophrys genus is composed by 40 species, organized into morphological groups or
complexes without phylogenetic support. Based on recent studies, we defined the complex P.
cristiceps as the group including six species: P. cristiceps, P. minuta, P. redacta, P. schirchi, P.
caramaschii and P. aridus. Herein, we evaluated the taxonomy, biogeography, and evolution of
the species related to the P. cristiceps complex, combining morphologic, morphometric and
acoustic characteristics, and molecular multilocus analyses. Our results, based on these
integrative analyses, show P. aridus, P. caramaschii and P. cristiceps as belonging to the same
lineage, without morphologic or acoustic distinction. Thus, we place the first two species as
junior synonyms of P. cristiceps. We also found one population from Chapada do Araripe,
previously called P. cristiceps, related to the Amazonian species P. concavitympanum, that we
described as a new species. We considered this new species as Endangered based on IUCN
criteria, once it occurs in a small area (ca. 3.100 km2), severely impacted by deforestation and
canalization of local streams for agriculture and recreational use. Next, we revised
Proceratophrys populations from higher elevations in the Chapada Diamantina and described
two new species based on morphology and phylogenetic relationships (we used one
mitochondrial and one nuclear marker). We found that each lineage from the Chapada
Diamantina corresponds to a specific mountain block, each separated by warmer and more xeric
valleys, which may act as barriers to gene flow, promoting allopatric diversification. Therefore,
we considered each one as distinct species, except the Pindobaçu population, which requires
further analyses (more individuals and molecular markers) to define more precisely its taxonomic
status. Finally, we conducted a multilocus phylogeographic analysis to evaluate the genetic
diversity, geographic structure and demography history of P. cristiceps. We recovered P.
cristiceps as one single population widely distributed in the Caatinga, with low levels of
haplotype diversity for 16S mtDNA and CRYb, POMC, and rhodopsin nuDNAs. Our results
indicate that P. cristiceps effective population size varied, with a rapid and recent expansion
throughout the upper Pleistocene.
Key-words: Amphibian, Integrativa taxonomy, Phyllogeography, Molecular, Diversification.
2
Introdução Geral
baixa diversidade (Vanzolini, 1963). Contudo, estas características são adotadas por quem não
conhece a riqueza e a importância da “Mata Branca”. Talvez seja por isso que a maioria dos
florestados (Furley e Metcalfe, 2007). Cobrindo 850.000 km2 no nordeste do Brasil, a Caatinga é
caracterizada principalmente por uma vegetação decídua xerófita e espinhosa, com cactos,
arbustos e pequenas árvores. A temperatura média anual varia entre 27 a 29ºC e a precipitação é
esporádica (Ab’Saber, 1998). Contudo, existem áreas na Caatinga que contrastam com essa
metros de altitude ou em maiores elevações. Tais fragmentos são chamados de Brejos de Altitude
Borborema, Ibiapaba e Araripe, abrigando várias espécies típicas de florestas tropicais, as quais
novas espécies típicas da Caatinga são continuamente descritas (Pombal-Jr et al., 2012;
Magalhães et al., 2014), incluindo espécies restritas aos Brejos de altitude (Napoli et al., 2011;
Teixeira-Jr et al., 2012; Roberto et al., 2014), o que indica que a riqueza do bioma ainda está
subestimada. Com efeito, trabalhos em andamento onde todas as espécies de Brejos de Altitude e
regiões de transição com a Floresta Atlântica são incluídas indicam que a riqueza de anfíbios do
diversificaram a fauna de anfíbios da América do Sul (Amaro et al., 2013), estudos focados
3
apenas em espécies típicas da Caatinga são raros (Thomé et al., 2016; Oliveira et al., 2015;
Werneck et al., 2015; São-Pedro et al., manuscrito em preparação). É importante ressaltar que
elucidar as questões taxonômicas é parte primordial na busca por respostas às questões ecológicas
e evolutivas (Bortolus, 2008; Padial et al., 2010). Neste contexto, no intuito de reconhecer as
espécies, considerando-as como linhagens independentes (de Queiroz, 2007), e ao mesmo tempo
abordagens integrativas é cada vez mais exigido e recomendado, uma vez que diversas fontes de
Paraguai (Dias et al., 2013, Brandão et al., 2013, Martins e Giaretta 2013; Mângia et al. 2014).
Nos últimos 15 anos, foram descritas 27 espécies (Eterovick e Sazima 1998; Izecksohn et al.;
1999; Giaretta et al., 2000; Kwet e Faivovich 2001; Cruz et al., 2005; Prado e Pombal 2008; Cruz
e Napoli 2010, Ávila et al., 2011, Martins e Giaretta 2011, Napoli et al., 2011, Teixeira-Jr. et al.,
2012; Ávila et al., 2012; Brandão et al., 2013, Dias et al., 2013; Godinho et al., 2013; Martins e
Giaretta 2013; Mângia et al., 2014), além da inclusão da espécie antes conhecida como
Odontophrynus moratoi no gênero Proceratophrys (Amaro et al., 2009). Essa alta taxa de
descrição de espécies sugere que a riqueza do gênero esteja subestimada (Teixeira-Jr. et al.,
2012).
com base em similaridades morfológicas (Prado e Pombal 2008; Cruz et al., 2012), sem
corroboração filogenética até o momento (Amaro et al., 2009; Dias et al., 2013). O grupo P.
2011, P. caramaschii, P. aridus Cruz, Nunes e Juncá, 2012, P. redacta Teixeira-Jr., Amaro,
carranca Godinho, Moura, Lacerda e Feio, 2013, P. rotundipalpebra Martins & Giaretta, 2013,
denominação de “grupo P. cristiceps” (e.g. Cruz et al. 2005; Cruz e Napoli 2010; Napoli et al.,
2011; Cruz et al., 2012; Ávila et al., 2012; Brandão et al., 2013; Dias et al., 2013; Godinho et al.,
2013), citando sensu Giaretta et al. (2000). A proposição deste grupo foi feita pelo
elevações pós-oculares) e com base no padrão de distribuição das espécies: as espécies cristiceps,
moratoi, que também ocorre em áreas de Cerrado (Santana et al., 2010), corroborando a proposta
Martins e Giaretta 2011; Ávila et al., 2012; Brandão et al., 2013; Godinho et al., 2013; Martins e
5
Giaretta, 2013), P. caramaschii, P. aridus e P. redacta com ocorrência na Caatinga (Cruz et al.,
distribuição de P. cristiceps aos ambientes costeiros e sugeriram que os indivíduos que ocorrem
exemplares das espécies citadas de toda a área de distribuição e os indivíduos que ocorrem na
Caatinga ficaram sem um nome específico. Segundo Teixeira-Jr et al. (2012), estas são
espécies.
Nos trabalhos de Amaro et al. (2009), Teixeira-Jr. et al. (2012) e Dias et al. (2013) foram
espécies do “grupo cristiceps” estão em diferentes ramos das árvores apresentadas por estes
autores, indicando que os caracteres morfológicos adotados atualmente para separação dos
grupos fenéticos não suportam essa hipótese. Mesmo para o gênero Proceratophrys, a
presença/ausência de apêndices palpebrais e rostrais não é uma sinapomorfia para nenhum grupo,
Dessa forma, a partir das informações citadas acima e dos dados apresentados por Amaro
et al. (2009), Teixeira-Jr. et al. (2012) e Dias et al. (2013), não é correto a utilização de “grupo
assim, para fins deste trabalho, nós estudamos apenas as espécies relacionadas ao clado o qual
Também foram estudadas as espécies P. caramaschii e P. aridus, as quais foram descritas a partir
de exemplares identificados a priori como P. cristiceps. Além disso, utilizamos como grupos
complexo P. cristiceps.
Principais resultados
encontramos características que diferenciem estas três espécies como linhagens distintas.
nossos resultados indicam que trabalhos de taxonomia alfa devem ser realizados com cuidado, e
que precisamos ser cautelosos com as diversas linhas de evidência, para prevenir decisões
taxonômicas errôneas.
descrevemos uma nova espécie de Proceratophrys para a Chapada do Araripe. Por meio de
marcadores nucleares e mitocondriais, nós mostramos que esta nova espécie está relacionada com
Ameaçada da IUCN, uma vez que ocorre em uma pequena área (ca. 3.100 km2) severamente
7
No terceiro artigo nós revisamos as populações de Proceratophrys que ocorrem em áreas
ilhas de altitude, separadas por vales com temperaturas mais quentes que podem ter agido como
barreiras entre estas populações. Portanto, nós consideramos cada linhagem como uma espécie
distinta, exceto a população do município de Pindobaçu, que requer a análise de mais exemplares
e a utilização de mais marcadores moleculares para definir com mais precisão seu status
taxonômico.
resultados mostraram P. cristiceps constituído por apenas uma população amplamente distribuída
na Caatinga, com baixa diversidade genética para todos os genes avaliados (16S mtDNA, CRYb,
cristiceps revelaram que a espécie sofreu uma recente expansão, coincidindo com as flutuações
climáticas do Pleistoceno.
Referências
19(1/2):51–69.
São Paulo.
8
Albuquerque, U.P., E. de Lima Araújo, A.C.A. El-Deir, A.L.A. de Lima, A. Souto, B.M.
Bezerra, ... G.J.B. de Moura. 2012. Caatinga revisited: ecology and conservation of an
Amaro, R.C., D. Pavan, M.T. Rodrigues. 2009. On the generic identity of Odontophrynus
Amaro, R.C., M.M. Laguna, T. Machado, M.J.J. Silva. 2013. Filogeografia e os mecanismos
Ávila, R.W., R.A. Kawashita-Ribeiro, D.H Morais. 2011. A new species of Proceratophrys
Bortolus, A. 2008. Error cascades in the biological sciences: The unwanted consequences of
using bad taxonomy in ecology. AMBIO: A Journal of the Human Environment, 37:114–
118.
Brandão, R.A., U. Caramaschii, W. Vaz-Silva, and L.A. Campos. 2013. Three new species of
Cruz, C.A.G., G.M. Prado, E. Izecksohn. 2005. Nova espécie de Proceratophrys Miranda–
9
Cruz, C.A.G, M.F. Napoli. 2010. A new species of smooth horned frog, genus Proceratophrys
Cruz, C.A.G., I. Nunes, F.A. Juncá. 2012. Redescription of Proceratophrys cristiceps (Müller,
1883) (Amphibia, Anura, Odontophrynidae), with description of two new species without
7:110–122.
de Queiroz, K. 2007. Species concepts and species delimitation. Systematic Biology. 56:879–
886.
Dias, P.H.S., R.C. Amaro, A.M.P.T. Carvalho-e-Silva, and M.T. Rodrigues. 2013. Two new
Eterovick, P.C. I. Sazima. 1998. New species of Proceratophrys (Anura: Leptodactylidae) from
Furley, P.A., S.E. Metcalfe. 2007. Dynamic changes in savanna and seasonally dry vegetation
Giaretta, A.A., P.S. Bernarde, M.N.C. Kokubum. 2000. A new species of Proceratophrys
(Anura: Leptodactylidae) from the Amazon Rain Forest. Journal of Herpetology. 34(2):
173–178.
Godinho, L.B., M.R. Moura, J.V.A. Lacerda, and R.N. Feio. 2013. A new species of
10
Izecksohn, E., C.A.G. Cruz, O.L. Peixoto. 1998. Sobre Proceratophrys appendiculata e algumas
37–54.
Kwet, A., J. Faivovich. 2001. Proceratophrys bigibbosa species group (Anura: Leptodactylidae),
Magalhães, F.M., D. Loebmann, M.N.D.C. Kokubum, C.F.B. Haddad, A.A. Garda. 2014. A new
Mângia, S., D.J. Santana, C.A.G. Cruz, R.N. Feio. 2014. Taxonomic revision of Proceratophrys
Moritz, C. 1994. Defining ‘Evolutionarily Significant Units’ for conservation. Trends in Ecology
Napoli, M.F., C.A.G. Cruz, R.O. Abreu, M.L. Del-Grande. 2011. A new species of
Oliveira, E.F., M. Gehara, V.A. São Pedro, X. Chen, E.A. Myers, F.T. Burbrink, ... F.J. Arias.
2015. Speciation with gene flow in whiptail lizards from a Neotropical xeric biome.
Pombal-Jr., J.P., V.A. Menzes, A.F. Fontes, I. Nunes, C.F.D. Rocha, M. Van Sluys. 2012. A
second species of the casque-headed frog genus Corythomantis (Anura, Hylidae) from
Northeastern Brazil, the distribution of C. greeningi, and comments on the genus. Boletim
Prado, G.M., J.P. Pombal Jr. 2008. Espécies de Proceratophrys Miranda–Ribeiro, 1920 com
Roberto, I.J., L. Brito, M.T.C. Thomé. 2014. A new species of Rhinella (Anura: Bufonidae) from
http://dx.doi.org/10.2994/SAJH-D-13-00028.1.
Santana, D.J., V.A. São Pedro, P.S. Bernarde, R.N. Feio. 2010. Descrição do canto de anúncio e
São Pedro, V.A., E.F. Oliveira, M.C. Gehara, G.C. Costa, F.T. Burbrink, G.R. Colli, M.T.
Dez 2015.
Teixeira-Jr, M., R.C. Amaro, R.S. Recoder, F.D. Vechio, M.T. Rodrigues. 2012. A new dwarf
12
Thomé, M.T.C., F. Sequeira, F. Brusquetti, B. Carstens, C.F Haddad, M.T. Rodrigues, J.
Alexandrino. 2016. Recurrent connections between Amazon and Atlantic forests shaped
Vanzolini, P.E. 1963. Problemas faunísticos do Cerrado. In: Simpósio Sobre o Cerrado (ed. M.G.
Werneck, F.P., R.N. Leite, S.R. Geurgas, M.T. Rodrigues. 2015. Biogeographic history and
cryptic diversity of saxicolous Tropiduridae lizards endemic to the semiarid Caatinga. BMC
13
Artigo I – Mângia, S., Santana, D.J., Sant’Anna, A.C., Garda, A.A. Taxonomic revision of
Brazilian Caatinga.
14
Taxonomic revision of Proceratophrys cristiceps (Müller, 1883) (Amphibia: Anura:
Sarah Mângia1,4, Diego José Santana2, Anathielle Caroline Sant’Anna2, Adrian Antonio Garda3
1
Universidade Federal da Paraı́ba, Departamento de Sistemática e Ecologia, João Pessoa, PB,
Brazil
2
Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso do Sul, Centro de Ciências Biológicas e da Saúde, Cidade
Abstract: Recently, Proceratophrys cristiceps was redescribed, along with the description of two
new species from the Caatinga domain: P. caramaschii and P. aridus. However, the authors did
not examine individuals from across their ranges, including the populations from Caatinga
domain. Thus, the revision of Proceratophrys populations from the Caatinga is paramount to
establish a solid taxonomic background and to test the validity of the described species. Based on
morphologic, morphometric, acoustic, and 16S mtDNA barcoding analysis, we define the range
of inter and intrapopulation variation in the parameters analyzed, establishing which ones are
as distinct species and thus place them as junior synonyms of P. cristiceps. Our results reinforce
the importance of the use of several lines of evidence to avoid taxonomic instability.
15
Introduction
Taxonomic revisions frequently lack enough resolution in species diagnosis, which can
taxonomic studies that use solely one base of data (such as morphology) must be treated with
caution, especially nowadays where integrative taxonomy studies are easier to conduct and have
groups (Prado and Pombal 2008; Cruz et al. 2012) without phylogenetic support (Amaro et al.
2009; Teixeira-Jr. et al. 2012; Dias et al. 2013). Proceratophrys cristiceps complex includes 15
species and is characterized by the absence of rostral and palpebral appendages or post-ocular
elevations (Cruz et al. 2012). It was suggested based mostly on geographic distribution: P.
cristiceps (Müller 1883), P. cururu Eterovick and Sazima, 1998, and P. goyana (Miranda-Ribeiro
1937) from open areas seasonally dry, and P. concavitympanum in the Amazon region (Giaretta
et al. 2000). Later, P. moratoi (Jim and Caramaschi 1980), from Cerrado areas, was placed in the
“P. cristiceps group” (Santana et al. 2010), corroborating Giaretta's et al. (2000) proposal.
All recently-described species for the group are distributed in open areas of the Cerrado
and Caatinga biomes. Proceratophrys strussmannae Ávila, Kawashita-Ribeiro and Morais, 2011,
P. vielliardi Martins and Giaretta, 2011, P. huntingtoni Ávila, Pansonato and Strüssmann, 2012,
P. carranca Godinho, Moura, Lacerda and Feio, 2013, P. rotundipalpebra Martins and Giaretta,
2013, P. bagnoi Brandão, Caramaschi, Vaz-Silva and Campos, 2013, P. branti Brandão,
Caramaschi, Vaz-Silva and Campos, 2013, and P. dibernardoi Brandão, Caramaschi, Vaz-Silva
and Campos, 2013 also occur in the Cerrado domain (Ávila et al. 2011; Martins and Giaretta
2011; Ávila et al. 2012; Brandão et al. 2013; Godinho et al. 2013; Martins and Giaretta 2013).
16
Proceratophrys caramaschii Cruz, Nunes and Juncá, 2012, P. aridus Cruz, Nunes and Juncá,
2012, and P. redacta Teixeira, Amaro, Recoder, Vechio and Rodrigues, 2012 are distributed in
Recently, Cruz et al. (2012) redescribed P. cristiceps and described two new species from
the Caatinga semi-arid region of Brazil: P. caramaschii and P. aridus. Cruz et al. (2012) limited
the distribution of P. cristiceps to costal Northeastern Brazil and suggested that individuals
occurring in the Espinhaço Mountain Range must be treated as P. cururu, while those occurring
in the Cerrado domain should be considered P. goyana. However, Cruz et al. (2012) did not
examine, comparatively, individuals of all cited species or from populations encompassing all
their ranges. Indeed, most populations from Caatinga domain were not included. Furthermore, as
pointed by Teixeira et al. (2012), the morphological similarity of large-size species from the P.
cristiceps complex makes the group prone to misidentifications. Hence, recent species
descriptions, dubious identifications from several localities, and the lack of appropriate
taxonomic appraisals across all species distributions indicate that the group is likely species-rich,
establish a solid taxonomic background and to test the validity of the described species. To shed
light on these issues, in this study our goals were: 1) revise the taxonomic status of all
Proceratophrys populations from the Caatinga domain, covering a significant portion of its
barcoding analyses, 2) identify the inter and intrapopulation variations of the parameters
analyzed, to select which characters can be used as diagnostic and which are polymorphic, and 3)
17
Material and Methods
Ciências Naturais, Pontifícia Universidade Católica de Minas Gerais); MNRJ (Museu Nacional,
cristiceps (160 males, 134 females), 33 of P. aridus (12 males, 21 females), and 31 of P.
caramaschii (27 males, 4females) (Appendix I) were analyzed. We follow the terminology for
external morphology of Prado and Pombal (2008), Brandão et al. (2013), and Mângia et al.
(2014), and the terminology for morphometric measurements from Mângia et al. (2014).
Abbreviations used for the measurements of adult specimens are: SVL (snout-vent length), HL
(head length), HW (head width), DICS (distance from the interocular crest to the tip of snout),
IND (internarial distance), END (eye-nostril distance), ED (eye diameter), UEW (upper eyelid
width), IOD (interorbital distance), THL (thigh length), TL (tibia length), FL (foot + tarsus
length), and FHL (forearm and hand length). We focused on examining individuals from the
18
lowlands areas in the Caatinga domain in this study, including P. aridus, P. caramaschii, and P.
cristiceps. To verify the coloration pattern we used only photographs of individuals in life,
because specimens in preservative lack important coloration characters present only in life.
Acoustic analysis
We analyzed calls from 14 localities (Table 1). We recorded calls of two individuals from
Macaíba municipality, Rio Grande do Norte State, one on May 12, 2011 (air temperature not
available) and one Jun 17, 2010 (air temperature 24.8°C); one individual from ESEC Seridó,
Serra Negra do Norte municipality, Rio Grande do Norte State on May 2013 (air temperature
24.2°C); one individual from Itapipoca municipality, Ceará State on March 20, 2014 (air
temperature 24.0ºC); three individuals from Jaguaribe municipality, Ceará State on April 12,
2014 (air temperatures not available), one individual from Quixadá municipality, Ceará State on
April 18, 2015 (air temperature not available); five individuals from PARNA Confusões, Caracol
municipality, Piauí State on October 22, 2014 (air temperature not available). All recordings were
conducted using a Marantz PMD 660 digital coupled with a Sennheiser ME 66 directional
microphone. Recordings are deposited in the Arquivos Sonoros da Universidade Federal do Rio
Grande do Norte (ASUFRN). We also analyzed calls from several populations loaned from
We analyzed calls with Raven Pro 1.5 for Windows (Cornell Lab of Ornithology) and
constructed audio spectrograms in R software using the package “seewave” (Sueur et al. 2008; R
Development Core Team) with the following parameters: FFT window width = 256, Frame =
100, Overlap = 75, and flat top filter. We analyzed usual acoustic parameters for Proceratophrys
taxonomy (e.g. Mângia et al. 2010; Santana et al. 2010; Santana et al. 2011; Mângia et al. 2014):
call duration, pulse number per call, pulse number per second and dominant frequency. Call
19
terminologies followed Duellman and Trueb (1994). For acoustic comparisons, we used
published records of the advertisement call of P. cristiceps (Nunes and Juncá, 2006) and P.
We extracted genomic DNA from muscle or liver using the phenol-chloroform protocol
(Sam Brooks et al., 1989). PCR amplification and sequencing with the primers 16Sa (5–CGC
CTG TTT ATC AAA AAC AT–3) and 16Sb (5–CCG GTC TGA ACT CAG ATC ACG T–3) of
Palumbi et al. (2002) were performed to amplify a section of the mitochondrial 16S ribosomal
RNA gene. PCR conditions followed those described by Costa et al. (2016). We purified PCR
products using Ethanol/Sodium Acetate protocols and sequenced them in ABI 3730 XL DNA
Analyzer (Applied Biosystems). We edited sequences by aligning forward and reverse reads
using the Geneious 9.1.2 program and deposited final sequences in GenBank (access numbers not
available yet).
available in GenBank in Geneious Pro v9.1.2 using the MUSCLE algorithm with default
parameters (Edgar 2004). The final sequence length used for the phylogenetic analysis was 450
bp. The best model of nucleotide substitution for the alignment was GTR+I+G, determined with
jModeltest (Posada 2008), using the Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC). We performed a
Bayesian phylogenetic analysis using MrBayes v3.2 software (Ronquist et al. 2012). We ran 30
million generations, sampling every 1,000 steps. We checked for stationarity by visually
inspecting trace plots and ensuring that all values for effective sample size were above 200 in
Tracer v1.5 (Rambaut and Drummond 2007). Genetic distances (uncorrected p-values) were
20
Results and Discussion
Caatinga domain (Fig. 1). The number of morphotypes varied among populations, and we could
Nunes et al. 2016). Vieira et al. (2008) recovered two sympatric basic color patterns in P.
cristiceps throughout their range in the Caatinga domain: a "common" morphotype (brown to
gray) and a "yellow" morphotype (or an approximate tone). Nunes et al. (2016) described the
following color variation to P. caramaschii: “dorsal color pattern is marbled with several shades
of brown on a cream background. The cream back-ground and the light brown tones may have a
reddish hue. The mid-dorsal region, internal to the limits of a spear-shaped ornamentation, may
have the same dorsal pattern, a lighter pattern, or a uniform pattern without drawings. If there is
The rostral region can have a lighter smooth coloration, like a mask.”
species or treat them in a context related to taxonomic identification (Kwet and Faivovich 2001;
Garcia et al. 2007; Kwet 2008). Conversely, other studies use these characters to distinguish
populations according to the areas in which they occur (Feio et al. 2006; Marcelino et al. 2009;
Vieira et al. 2008). However, based on the samples collected by ourselves and the data from the
literature, using dorsal coloration patterns as diagnostic characters for Caatinga Proceratophrys
populations is impossible.
21
We also quantified morphological variation among populations of P. cristiceps from
across the Caatinga biome and among individuals from the same population. The snout can be (1)
rounded or (2) triangular (Fig. 2). The ocular-dorsal ridge of warts can be (1) continuous
extending from the edge of the eyelid to the sacral region, (2) interrupted in the pre-sacral
constriction or (3) absent (Fig. 3). The interocular ridge can be formed by (1) one or (2) two rows
of warts (observed only on two individuals of P. cristiceps - the holotype and one individual from
Piripiri municipality, Piauí State, and four individuals of P. caramaschii, Fig. 4). The inner part
of metacarpal tubercle can be (1) smaller or (2) equal to the outer one (Fig. 5). The ventral region
coloration can be (1) cream without blotches or (2) cream with brown spots or blotches (males
warts, and size of metacarpal tubercles, are used to diagnose P. aridus, P. caramaschii and P.
cristiceps as three different species (Cruz et al. 2012). However, the large interspecific variation
Males and females do not differ with respect to morphological characters. However, the
gular region in males is darker and more prominent than in females due to the presence of vocal
sac. Males also present two vocal slits in the inner part of the mouth, each one on both sides of
the maxilla, extending from the insertion of the tongue to close to the jaw joint.
The advertisement calls of individuals from the 14 different populations are composed by
one single multipulsed note (Fig. 7). The values of the acoustic parameters have similar values
among the populations (Table 1). Based on the calls of all populations analyzed (including data
22
from literature), the advertisement call of Proceratophrys cristiceps presents a duration of 0.354
– 0.955 s, with 32 – 113 pulses/note, a emission rate of 71.4 – 124 pulses/s, and dominant
The call of P. caramaschii was described by Nunes et al. (2016). We reanalyzed the same
recordings used in the description, all from Planalto de Ibiapaba, Ceará State. We found that the
advertisement calls are indistinguishable between P. cristiceps and P. caramaschii, and there are
no differences when we compare calls of populations from the entire distribution of P. cristiceps
in the Caatinga domain (Table 1). Because these two species are morphologically similar (see
above) and were recovered as belonging to the same lineage in the tree topology (see below), the
Molecular phylogeny
Our 16S mtDNA gene tree (Fig. 8) shows Proceratophrys aridus, P. caramaschii, and P.
cristiceps in the same lineage with high support value (1.00 pp). Aside from a small clade within
P. cristiceps, the tree shows absolutely no structure among the three species. This same marker,
when compared across other recognized species of Proceratophrys, presents moderate to high p-
distances (Table 2). Remarkably, these three species are virtually identical considering
uncorrected p-distances (Table 2). This is not a surprise, considering the results of an ongoing
phylogeographic study on P. cristiceps that corroborates the low diversity for this marker and a
Taxonomic Implications
23
Cruz et al. (2012) described Proceratophrys aridus based on 56 specimens, all collected
in Milagres municipality, Ceará State, Brazil. The following diagnostic characters were used to
separate it from P. cristiceps: (1) wider head (HL/HW 86 – 96% in P. aridus and 77 – 84% in P.
cristiceps) – we measured the P. aridus type series and the values of the relation HL/HW overlap
with P. cristiceps (67 – 83% in P. aridus and 56 – 77% in P. cristiceps); (2) triangular snout in
dorsal view (nearly rounded in P. cristiceps) –in the present work we define two shapes of snout
to P. cristiceps all over its distribution (rounded or triangular).We also observed individuals of
the type series of P. aridus presenting snout rounded on dorsal and ventral views; (3) skin texture
of small granules (several warts in P. cristiceps) – although the type series of P. aridus presents
small granules on the dorsal skin, we observed individuals of P. cristiceps with the same pattern;
and (4) presence of one interocular transverse crest of tubercles in P. aridus (two crests in P.
cristiceps) – we observed the presence of two interocular transverse crests of tubercles only on
two individuals of P. cristiceps (the holotype and one individual from Piripiri, Piauí State), and in
From the analysis of the topotype of P. aridus (AAGARDA 11910), the holotype (MNRJ
55782) and the type series (MNRJ 55349, 55778–55781, 55783–55822, 75156, 75157, 75158–
75168), there are no characters that allow a differentiation between P. aridus from P. cristiceps.
We observed all the diagnostic characters of P. aridus in individuals of P. cristiceps along the
entire distribution in the Caatinga and adjacent areas. Thus, all characters used to diagnose P.
aridus are individual variation within populations of P. cristiceps along its distribution (as
showed in the topic variation). Furthermore, all morphometric characters analyzed in P. aridus
Once we found no characteristics supporting these taxa as two different species, and there
is no genetic distance (0.00% in 16S mtDNA barcoding) between them (occurring in the same
24
clade) (see above), we consider Proceratophrys aridus Cruz, Nunes & Juncá, 2012 as a junior
collected with the holotype in Mucuripe, Fortaleza municipality, Ceará State, Brazil. The type
series was collected in 1945 by A.L. Carvalho and, since then, the area has been modified
drastically. We went in April 2015 to the type locality of P. caramaschii (Mucuripe) to collect
new individuals, sample tissues and to record vocalizations. However, nowadays the locality had
become an urban square within the city, surrounded by buildings (Fig. 9). Thus, we found no
individuals of P. caramaschii or suitable natural habitats for harbor individuals of the species.
We searched for the species even in green areas near the type locality (e.g. urban parks), but
without success. The nearest place we have recorded individuals of Proceratophrys was in
Aquiraz municipality, approximately 20 km away from the type locality, where we gathered
Brandão et al. (2013) use the type series and individuals from Piripiri municipality, Piauí
State, which they called as P. caramaschii, to compare with three new species of Proceratophrys
from Cerrado. However, the authors did not formally extend the distribution of P. caramaschii.
Nunes et al. (2016) extended the geographic distribution of P. caramaschii in approximately 300
km far from its type locality to Ubajara, Ceará State, and described the advertisement call from
this same place. The authors also indicate the occurrence of this species in the Piauí State (500
25
We analyzed the morphology of specimens from Piripiri municipality, Piauí State,
Ubajara, Itapipoca, Aquiraz municipalities, and other localities close to the type locality, in Ceará
State, the holotype (MNRJ 16592) and the type series (MNRJ 1419-1420, 1680, 16470-16484,
16487-16489, 16591, 16593-16600), in order to verify the diagnose of P. caramaschii from the
original description (Cruz et al. 2012). The authors distinguished P. caramaschii from P.
cristiceps by the following combination of characters: (1) absence of tubercles on the snout and
top of the head (present in P. cristiceps) – we have not observed tubercles on the snout and top of
the head in individuals of P. cristiceps, P. aridus and P. caramaschii; (2) presence of one
interocular transverse crest of tubercles (two in P. cristiceps) – we observed the presence of two
interocular transverse crests of tubercles only on two individuals of P. cristiceps (the holotype
and one individual from Piripiri municipality, Piauí State), and in some individuals of P.
caramaschii; (3) presence of pronounced frontoparietal crest with depression between them
cristiceps and P. caramaschii, and because it is difficult to define which crest is very or poorly
pronounced, we did not use this character; (4) the inner part of metacarpal tubercle bigger than
the outer (the inner part smaller than the outer in P. cristiceps) – we identify here that the inner
part of metacarpal tubercle of P. cristiceps can be smaller or similar size to the outer. Individuals
of P. caramaschii type series present the same pattern of P. cristiceps, and the inner part of
metacarpal tubercle is never bigger than the outer; and (5) few bigger blotches on venter (larger
and variable scattered small blotches in P. cristiceps) – In the present study we identify two
patterns of ventral region coloration of P. cristiceps: cream without blotches or cream with brown
spots and/or blotches in various sizes and shapes. As shown in the topic “variation”, the
diagnostic characteristics used to describe P. caramaschii are within the inter and
26
intrapopulational variation of these characters for P. cristiceps. At last, all the morphometric
recordings from Planalto do Ibiapaba, Ceará State. The authors separate the calls of this species
from P. cristiceps calls (Nunes and Juncá, 2006, calls from Feira de Santana, Bahia State)
because of the lower number of pulses per second (75.7 – 81.8 pulses/s;87.4 – 91.9 in P.
cristiceps) and by the dominant frequency (860 or 1030 Hz; 900 – 990 Hz in P. cristiceps). As
shown in the topic “variation” all the acoustic parameters overlap when we observed calls from
different localities (Table 1). Therefore, there are no differences between the calls of P.
Lastly, in the tree topology of the genus (Fig. 8) presented herein, P. caramaschii and P.
cristiceps were recovered embedded in the same clade and there is no genetic distance between
them (0.00% in 16S mtDNA barcoding). Thus, we considered P. caramaschii Cruz, Nunes and
Proceratophrys aridus Cruz, Nunes, and Juncá, 2012, S. Am. J. Herpetol., 7: 118. Holotype:
MNRJ 55782, by original designation. Type locality: "Minador farm, municipality of Milagres
(38° 56′ W and 07° 18′ S, 334 m a.s.l.; SAD69 datum), state of Ceará, northeastern Brazil". New
synonymy.
27
Proceratophrys caramaschii Cruz, Nunes, and Juncá, 2012, S. Am. J. Herpetol., 7: 117.
Fortaleza (03° 43′ S and 38° 29′ W, 334 m at sea level; WGS84 datum), state of Ceará,
date of collecting.
(1) medium size (33.1–53.6 mm in adult males, 35.1–64.5 mm in adult females); (2) eyelid
tubercles fused, short and round (formulae L 2, 3/5; R 2, 3/5); (3) contact point between the
ocular-dorsal ridge of warts and the external eyelid margin tubercles in the posterior third of
portion of the eyelid (4) tubercles in the forearm organized in two rows (one row with not fused,
enlarged and pointed tubercles, and other with fused and short tubercles) (5) advertisement call
with duration of 0.354 – 0.955 s, 32 – 113 pulses/note, 71.4 – 124 pulses/s, and dominant
Comparisons with other species (data for species in comparison are given in parenthesis).—
and P. tupinamba by the absence of a single uni-cuspidate palpebral and rostral appendages
Proceratophrys cristiceps presents eyelid tubercles fused, short and rounded(fused with
small, rounded and not fused in P. cururu and P. rotundipalpebra; slightly fused without
enlarged, pointed and with the largest tubercle in the middle more projected than lateral tubercles
in P. minuta; small and rounded in P. redacta; multiple short and pointed expansions in P.
schirchi). By having tubercles in the forearm organized in two rows - one row with not fused,
enlarged and pointed tubercles, and other with fused and short tubercles – P. cristicepsdiffer from
de São João do Cariri, in the municipality of São João do Cariri (7º29’34”S , 36º41’53”W),
Paraíba State, Brazil. Individuals were deposited at the Museu Nacional do Rio de Janeiro
Proceratophrys cristiceps based on calls of two individuals from Serra de São José, Feira de
Santana municipality, Bahia State, Brazil. In the present work we present the description of the
advertisement call of. P. cristiceps based on calls from 14 localities (see Table 1 for details).
Variation.—We discuss the color and morphological variation in the present study in the topics
“Color and external morphology variation”, “Advertisement call variation”, and in the synonym
topics. Descriptive basic statistics of measurement variables from adults is presented in Table 3.
29
Distribution.—Proceratophrys cristiceps occurs in the Caatinga domain and adjacent areas
(Cerrado domain in western distribution and Atlantic Forest in the eastern distribution) (Fig. 10).
Von F. Müller, in 1883, when cataloging the amphibians and reptiles from
Proceratophrys cristiceps) based on an adult female. The author briefly characterized the species
and determined its type locality as “Brasilien” (Brazil). Miranda-Ribeiro (1920), allocated
Ceratophrys cristiceps in the genus Stombus due to the absence of external cranial ossification,
and after Nieden (1923) replaced it into the genus Ceratophrys and provided some data on
morphology and coloration. Forcart (1946) appointed the number NHMB1503 as the holotype.
Proceratophrys cristiceps was described without a specific type locality, and there is no
other information about the holotype in the Naturhistorisches Museum (U. Wüest, pers. comm.).
Thus, we are not able to follow the steps of the collector in order to identify where he had
collected the individual, because this information does not exist. We tried to associate one
population of Proceratophrys cristiceps from all over its distribution to the morphotype of the
holotype to define the type locality. However, based on just one female individual (the holotype),
and because P. cristiceps presents a large morphological variation (see above), we cannot relate
the holotype to a specific population. Therefore, here we define the type locality of
Proceratophrys cristiceps to the Caatinga biome and adjacent areas, in all its geographic
30
Acknowledgments.— SM thanks CAPES for her scholarship. We thank F. Juncá, M.
Napoli, G. Colli, F. Medeiros, F. Camurugi, R. Rodrigues, S. Ribeiro for help during fieldwork,
and I. Roberto by the specimens, recordings, and pictures. We thank Marinus Hoogmoed for
discussions on the type locality of P. cristiceps. We thank several curators and researchers who
granted access to specimens and shared tissue samples under their care (see methods). This work
was funded by grants to AAG from CNPq (552031/2011-9, 431433/2016-0, and 457463/2012-0)
Literature Cited
Amaro, R.C., D. Pavan, and M.T. Rodrigues. 2009. On the generic identity of Odontophrynus
Ávila, R.W.,A. Pansonato, and C. Strussmann. 2012. A New Species of Proceratophrys (Anura:
Brandão, R.A., U. Caramaschii, W. Vaz-Silva, and L.A. Campos. 2013. Three new species of
Costa, H.C., D.J. Santana, F. Leal, R. Koroiva, and P.C.A. Garcia. 2016. A new species of
72:157–166.
Cruz, C.A.G., I. Nunes, and F.A. Juncá. 2012. Redescription of Proceratophrys cristiceps
31
species without eyelid appendages from Northeastern Brazil. South American Journal of
Herpetology 7:110–122.
Dias, P.H.S., R.C. Amaro, A.M.P.T. Carvalho-e-Silva, and M.T. Rodrigues. 2013. Two new
Duellman, W.E., and L. Trueb. 1994. Biology of amphibians. Baltimore, the Johns Hopkins
University Press.
Edgar, R.C. 2004. MUSCLE: Multiple sequence alignment with high accuracy and high
Feio, R.N., M.F. Napoli, and U. Caramaschi. 2006. Taxonomic consideration of Thoropa miliaris
60.
Garcia, P.C.A., J. Faivovich, and C.F.B. Haddad. 2007. Redescription of Hypsiboas semiguttatus,
with the description of a new species of the Hypsiboas pulchellus group. Copeia
(4):933–951.
Giaretta, A.A.; P.S. Bernarde, and M.N.C. Kokubum. 2000. A new species of Proceratophrys
34(2):173–178.
Godinho, L.B., M.R. Moura, J.V.A. Lacerda, and R.N. Feio. 2013. A new species of
306 pp.
Jim, J., and U. Caramaschi. 1980. Uma nova especie de Odontophrynus da região de Botucatu,
São Paulo, Brasil (Amphibia, Anura). Revista Brasileira de Biologia 40: 357–360.
Kwet, A. 2008. New species of Hypsiboas (Anura: Hylidae) in the pulchellus group from
1–238.
Mângia, S.; D.J. Santana, C.A.G. Cruz, and R.N. Feio. 2014. Taxonomic revision of
Mângia, S., D.J. Santana, and R.N. Feio. 2010. Advertisement call of the Cycloramphidae toad
Herpetology 5(2):127–131.
Marcelino, V.R., C.F.B. Haddad, and Alexandrino, J. 2009. Geographic distribution and
43(2):351–361.
Martins, L.B., and A.A. Giaretta. 2011. A new species of Proceratophrys Miranda-Ribeiro
Müller, F. 1883. Dritter Nachtrag. Katalog der herpetologischen Sammlung des Basler Museums.
Basel: J. G. Bauer.
Napoli, M.F., C.A.G. Cruz, R.O. Abreu, and M.L. Del-Grande. 2011. A new species of
Nunes, I., D. Loebamann, C.A.G. Cruz, and C.F.B. Haddad. 2016. Advertisement call, colour
Nunes, I., and F.A. Juncá. 2006. Advertisement calls of three Leptodactylid frogs in the state of
Padial, J.M., A. Miralles, I. De la Riva, and M. Vences. 2010. The integrative future of
Palumbi, S., A. Martin, S. Romano, W.O. Mcmillan, L. Stice, L., and G. Grabowski. 2002. The
25:1253–1256.
Prado, G.M., and J.P. Pombal-Jr. 2008. Espécies de Proceratophrys Miranda–Ribeiro, 1920 com
Pyron, R. A., & Wiens, J. J. (2011). A large-scale phylogeny of Amphibia including over 2800
Rambaut, A., and A.J. Drummond. 2007. Tracer, Version 1.4. Available at
http://beast.bio.ed.ac.uk/Tracer.
Ronquist, F., Teslenko, M., van der Mark, P., Ayres, D. L., Darling, A., Hohna, S., et al. (2012)
MrBayes 3.2: efficient Bayesian phylogenetic inference and model choice across a large
Sam Brooks, J., E.F. Fritsch, and T. Maniatis.1989. Molecular cloning: A laboratory manual,
Cold Spring Harbour Laboratory Press, Cold Spring Harbor, New York, USA.
Santana, D.J., R. Rodrigues, R.L. Albuquerque, D.O. Laranjeiras, A.S. Protázio, F.G.R. França,
and D.O. Mesquita. 2011. The advertisement call of Proceratophrys renalis (Miranda-
Santana, D.J., V.A. São-Pedro, P.S. Bernarde, and R.N. Feio. 2010. Descrição do canto de
Sueur, J., T. Aubin, and C. Simonis. 2008. Equipment review: seewave, a free modular tool for
35
Tamura, K., G. Stecher, D. Peterson, A. Filipski, and S. Kumar. 2013. MEGA6: Molecular
2729.
Teixeira-Jr., M., R.C. Amaro, R.S. Recoder, F.D. Vechio, and M.T. Rodrigues. 2012. A new
Vieira, K.S., C. Arzabe, M.I.M. Hernandéz, and W.L.S. Vieira. 2008. An examination of
36
Appendix I
Specimens examined
16487-89, 16591-600.
Aripuanã: MZUFV 9552, 9554-56. Paranaíta: ZUEC 14505-06, 16011-15, 16719, 21201. Pará:
Piranhas: UFBA 8-9, 43. Traipu: Serra da Mão: UFAL 8968, 9035-36, 9043, 9196, 9510, 9656.
Bahia: Caetité: UFMG 5851. Paulo Afonso: UFPB 12114, 12119, 12122-23, 12128. Ceará:
Aiuaba: AAGARDA 5111, 5132; URCA-H 7366, 7385, 7393, 7396, 7408, 7416, 7418. Barbalha:
URCA-H 4293, 4571. Baturité: UFC3722. Crateús: URCA-H 4744. Crato: AAGARDA 2735,
2737-40. General Sampaio: UFC 5351. Itapipoca: AAGARDA 9817, 10453-55. Ipu: UFPB
6117-19, 6121, 6123, 6125. Jaguaribe: AAGARDA 10176-79, 10286, 10398-402. Pacajus: UFC
4562. Paracuru: URCA-H 5773-74. Pentecoste: UFC 5001, 5018-19, 5193. São Gonçalo do
Amarante: URCA-H 5669, 5775, 5860. Santa Quitéria: UFPB 10651, 10753-58. Serra das
Almas: UFC 32, 131, 213, 224, 3319, 3464, 3467-68, 3470. Serra de Ibiapaba: UFPB 6117-26.
Ubajara, Parque Nacional de Ubajara: AAGARDA 10672, 10695, 10698-99, 10703, 10707-09,
10782, 10796, 10907, 10909, 10911-14, 10961, 10974, 10981, 10983. Várzea da Conceição:
UFPB 9661, 9665, 9667. Paraíba: Araruna: UFPB 8427, 8438, 8447, 8451, 8453, 8456, 8465,
8467, 8469, 8487. Boa vista: UFPB 1573-81. Cabaceiras: UFPB 6691-94, 11271, 11274. São
José dos Cordeiros: UFPB 5866. Pernambuco: Arcoverde: UFPB 9678-82, 9684, 9686-88, 9692,
37
9701. Betânia: UFC 3331. Bezerros: UFPB 7098. Exu: URCA 1462-63; UFPB 7214-17.
Nascente: UFPB 9670. Ouricuri: URCA 2988-89. Buíque, Parque Nacional do Catimbau:
AAGARDA 7706-12, 7747, 7760-61, 7765, 7799, 7802, 7804-05, 7824, 7886, 7975, 8056, 8362,
8417, 8435, 8437-40, 8450, 8463. Serra Talhada: UFPB 9656, 9659, 9660. Trindade: UFPB 974,
9673-77. Piauí: Floriano: UFPI 214-16, 222, 236. Piripiri: UFPB 10340, 10342-46. Rio Grande
do Norte: Serra Negra do Norte, Estação Ecológica do Seridó: AAGARDA 5447, 5528, 5583,
5689, 6061, 6790. João Câmara: AAGARDA 8913-15, 9806-11; URCA 422, 427, 483-85, 487-
88, 493, 498, 501. Macaíba, Escola Agrícola de Jundiaí: AAGARDA 1013-14, 1019-20, 1753-
71, 1773, 1776, 1778, 1786-91, 1935, 2495-96, 2583, 3757, 5447, 5528, 5554, 5583, 5689, 6061,
6790, 8866-71, 8913-15, 9806-11. Sergipe: Poço Redondo: UFPB 12120-21, 12125-27.
6049-57.
38
TABLE1.—Acoustic parameters of the advertisement call of Proceratophrys cristiceps.
Locality/Acoustic Recording Dominant
Duration (s) Pulse/call Pulse/sec. Reference
parameters collection label Frequency (Hz)
Macaíba, RN 0.553 ± 0.06 51 ± 5.47 93.5 ± 1.55 Present work
ASUFRN034 1033.6
(20 calls) 0.418 – 0.619 40 – 59 90.4 – 95.8 (individual 1)
Macaíba, RN 0.592 ± 0.03 55 ± 2.27 92.3 ± 1.40 Present work
ASUFRN044 1033.6
(14 calls) 0.550 – 0.633 51 – 58 90 – 94.6 (individual 2)
ESEC Seridó, RN 0.556 ± 0.04 53.5 ± 3.74 96.4 ± 1.81
ASUFRN 1125 Present work
(10 calls) 0.506 – 0.633 48 – 60 93.9 – 98.8
Aiuaba, CE 0.706 ± 0.12 61 ± 9. 67 84.4 ± 1.80 1125 ± 82.22
URCA7396 Present work
(13 calls) 0.450 – 0.896 38 – 73 81.9 – 81.5 937.5 – 1125
Aquiraz, CE 0.492 ± 0.09 42 ± 7.09 87.7 ± 2.30 861.3 ± 79.76
Present work
(22 calls) 0.364 – 0.742 33 – 60 80.7 – 91.9 861.3 – 1033.6
Barro, CE 0.509 ± 0.08 47 ± 6.96 91.9 ± 1.31
URCA7920 937.5 Present work
(27 calls) 0.354 – 0.638 33 – 57 88.7 – 93.8
Crato, CE 0.559 ± 0.04 55.5 ± 4.00 99.2 ± 1.00 1205.9 ± 29.53 Present work
(34 calls) 0.511 – 0.648 50 – 65 97.8 – 1027 1205.9 – 1378.1 (individual 1)
Crato, CE 0.526 ± 0.03 52 ± 3.25 99.8 ± 0.87 Present work
1205.9
(31 calls) 0.449 – 0.581 45 – 58 98.5 – 101.5 (individual 2)
Crato, CE 0.460 ± 0.03 45 ± 2.90 98.0 ± 0.83 1033.6 ± 58.20 Present work
39
(24 calls) 0.430 – 0.533 42 – 53 96.8 – 100.2 1033.6 – 1205.9 (individual 3)
Ipú, CE 0.559 ± 0.04 50.5 ± 2.84 90.3 ± 1.25
URCA9203 937.5 Present work
(12 calls) 0.499 – 0.619 46 – 55 88.5 – 92.2
Itapipoca, CE 0.570 ± 0.08 54.4 ± 6.81 95.7 ± 1.86
ASUFRN 1125 Present work
(10 calls) 0.477 – 0.728 46 – 68 93.4 – 97.8
Ubajara, CE 0.456 ± 0.03 35.9 ± 3.08 78.8 ± 0.89 Present work
861.3
(25 calls) 0.400 – 0.581 32 – 46 76.0 – 80.6 (individual 1)
Ubajara, CE 0.674 ± 0.04 54.2 ± 3.27 80.5 ± 0.83 Present work
861.3
(16 calls) 0.609 – 0.737 49 – 59 78.7 – 82.1 (individual 2)
Planalto do Ibiapaba, 0.570 ± 11.0 45 ± 9.19 80.0 ± 0.86
860 – 1030 Nunes et al. 2016
Ubajara, CE 0.410 – 0.740 33 – 59 78.6 – 81.2
Jaguaribe, CE 0.609 ± 0.08 59.5 ± 7.57 98.0 ± 1.92 1125 ± 79.06 Present work
ASUFRN
(10 calls) 0.447 – 0.704 45 – 68 96.6 – 101.9 937.5 – 1125 (individual 1)
Jaguaribe, CE 0.650 ± 0.05 63 ± 5.20 96.9 ± 0.18 Present work
ASUFRN 1125
(3 calls) 0.557 – 0.652 54 – 63 96.6 – 96.9 (individual 2)
Jaguaribe, CE 0.578 ± 0.06 60.5 ± 4.99 104.3 ± 1.88 Present work
ASUFRN 1125
(4 calls) 0.531 – 0.645 56 – 66 102.3 – 106.3 (individual 3)
Quixadá, CE 0.902 ± 0.14 77 ± 11.30 86.3 ± 1.61 Present work
ASUFRN 861.3
(9 calls) 0.623 – 1.011 55 – 85 88.3 – 84.1 (individual 1)
40
Floriano, PI 0.537 ± 0.05 52.5 ± 4.79 98.2 ± 4.12 Present work
AN0659 1033.6
(20 calls) 0.443 – 0.630 44 – 62 81.9 – 101.5 (individual 1)
Floriano, PI 0.633 ± 0.04 62 ± 4.23 97.7 ± 1.27 Present work
AN0663 1033.6
(18 calls) 0.532 – 0.694 52 – 68 94.9 – 99.1 (individual 2)
Floriano, PI 0.892 ± 0.04 90.5 ± 7.92 102.7 ± 6.06 1033.6 ± 46.05 Present work
AN0662
(14 calls) 0.814 – 0.955 82 – 113 100.1 – 124.0 861.3 – 1033.6 (individual 3)
PARNA Serra das 0.740 ± 0.04 53 ± 2.55 71.6 ± 0.32 Present work
ASUFRN 1033.6
Confusões, PI (9 calls) 0.653 – 0.782 47 – 56 71.4 – 72.4 (individual 1)
PARNA Serra das 0.703 ± 0.05 52 ± 4.01 74.3 ± 1.02 Present work
ASUFRN 1033.6
Confusões, PI (31 calls) 0.643 – 0.901 48 – 66 73.5 – 76.9 (individual 2)
PARNA Serra das 0.650 ± 0.02 49 ± 2.40 74.2 ± 2.63 Present work
ASUFRN 1033.6
Confusões, PI (37 calls) 0.599 – 0.707 45 – 58 73.3 – 89.2 (individual 3)
PARNA Serra das 0.680 ± 0.06 52.5 ± 3.92 77.9 ± 1.31 1033.6 ± 48.6 Present work
ASUFRN
Confusões, PI (24 calls) 0.591 – 0.781 47 – 61 75.9 – 80.5 861.3 – 1033.6 (individual 4)
PARANA Serra das 0.686 ± 0.07 51.5 ± 4.23 73.5 ± 1.40 Present work
ASUFRN 1033.6
Confusões, PI (40 calls) 0.570 – 0.811 44 – 59 71.6 – 77.2 (individual 5)
Feira de Santana, BA 0.561 ± 0.04 48 ± 4.25 84.7 ± 2.63 1033.6 ± 76.0 Present work
(9 calls) 0.506 – 0.628 43 – 55 83.0 – 92.1 861.3 – 1033.6 (individual 1)
Feira de Santana, BA 0.668 ± 0.09 59 ± 7.28 87.1 ± 0.90 861.3 Present work
41
(7 calls) 0.520 – 0.800 46 – 69 86.2 – 88.5 (individual 2)
Feira de Santana, BA 0.660 ± 0.05 57.5 ± 6.02 89.5 ± 1.20 940 ± 0.02
Nunes & Juncá, 2006
(29 calls) 0.520 – 0.790 46 – 69 87.4 – 91.5 900 – 990
42
TABLE 2.—Uncorrected p-distances of 16S mitochondrial fragment gene for the genus Proceratophrys.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
1 Proceratophrys aridus new synonym
2 Proceratophrys caramaschii new synonym 0.00
3 Proceratophrys cristiceps 0.00 0.00
4 Proceratophrys appendiculata 0.06 0.06 0.06
5 Proceratophrys avelinoi 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.04
6 Proceratophrys belzebul 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.01 0.05
7 Proceratophrys bigibbosa 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.03 0.03 0.04
8 Proceratophrys boiei 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.04 0.06 0.05 0.06
9 Proceratophrys concavitympanum 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.06 0.06 0.07 0.06 0.06
10 Proceratophrys cururu 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.05 0.07
11 Proceratophrys goyana 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.04 0.06 0.03
12 Proceratophrys itamari 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.06 0.02 0.04
13 Proceratophrys izecksohni 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.05 0.06 0.02 0.03 0.01
14 Proceratophrys laticeps 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.06 0.02 0.03 0.02
15 Proceratophrys mantiqueira 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.05 0.06 0.02 0.04 0.01
16 Proceratophrys melanopogon 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.04 0.04 0.05 0.04 0.06 0.07 0.03 0.04 0.02
17 Proceratophrys minuta 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.08 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.06
18 Proceratophrys moratoi 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.04 0.06 0.05 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.06 0.06 0.05
19 Proceratophrys pombali 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.07 0.03 0.03 0.03
20 Proceratophrys redacta 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.08 0.05 0.08 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.06
21 Proceratophrys renalis 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.08 0.03 0.04 0.03
22 Proceratophrys schirchi 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.06 0.08 0.04 0.05 0.04
23 Proceratophrys tupinamba 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.01 0.03 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.03 0.03 0.02
43
TABLE 2 (continued).—Uncorrected p-distances of 16S mitochondrial fragment gene for the genusProceratophrys.
13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
1 Proceratophrys aridus new synonym
2 Proceratophrys caramaschii new synonym
3 Proceratophrys cristiceps
4 Proceratophrys appendiculata
5 Proceratophrys avelinoi
6 Proceratophrys belzebul
7 Proceratophrys bigibbosa
8 Proceratophrys boiei
9 Proceratophrys concavitympanum
10 Proceratophrys cururu
11 Proceratophrys goyana
12 Proceratophrys itamari
13 Proceratophrys izecksohni
14 Proceratophrys laticeps 0.02
15 Proceratophrys mantiqueira 0.01 0.02
16 Proceratophrys melanopogon 0.02 0.03 0.02
17 Proceratophrys minuta 0.05 0.06 0.06 0.07
18 Proceratophrys moratoi 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.07 0.09
19 Proceratophrys pombali 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.07 0.06
20 Proceratophrys redacta 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.07 0.03 0.09 0.08
21 Proceratophrys renalis 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.08
22 Proceratophrys schirchi 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.07 0.05
23 Proceratophrys tupinamba 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.03 0.07 0.03 0.05
44
1 TABLE 3. Measurements of specimens of Proceratophrys aridus, P. caramaschii and P.
2 cristiceps.
45
Figure Captions
FIG. 1.—Inter and intra-populacional chromatic variation. A–E: individuals from Parque
Nacional Serra das Confusões, Piauí State. F–I: individuals from Jaguaribe municipality, Ceará
State. J–N: individuals from Macaíba municipality, Rio Grande do Norte State. O: individuals
from Milagres municipality, Ceará State. P–Q: individuals from Parque Nacional Serra das
Confusões, Piauí State. R: Paraipaba, Ceará State. Photos: D.J. Santana (F–N); I. Joventino (O,
46
FIG. 2.—Snout shape. A – B: triangular (AAGARDA 10453, Itapipoca, Ceará State). C –
47
FIG. 3.—Ocular-dorsal ridge of warts. a– continuous extending from the edge of the
eyelid to the sacral region (CHUFPB 12126, Poço Redondo, Sergipe State). b– interrupted in the
pre-sacral constriction (CHUFPB 10345, Piripiri, Piauí State). c–(AAGARDA 10286, Jaguaribe,
Ceará State) and d– absent (AAGARDA 10983, PARNA Ubajara, Ceará State).
48
FIG. 4.—Inter-ocular ridge of warts. a– one row (MNRJ 1419, Mucuripe, Ceará State). b–
(NHMB 1503, P. cristiceps holotype). c– two rows (MNRJ 16487, Mucuripe, Ceará State).
49
FIG. 5.—Inner part of metacarpal tubercle. A – smaller than the outer (CHUFPB 10344,
Piripiri, Piauí, State). B – similar size of the outer (CHUFPB 10146, Piripiri, Piauí, State).
FIG. 6.—Ventral region coloration. A – cream without blotches (URCA 5773, Paracuru,
Cearé State). B – 2 cream with brown spots or blotches (AAGARDA 10796, Ubajara, Ceará
State).C – males present darkish gular region (AAGARDA AAGARDA 9809, João Câmara, Rio
50
FIG. 7.—Advertisement call of Proceratophrys cristiceps (AAGARDA 10176, Jaguaribe,
Ceará State).
51
FIG. 8.— Bayesian tree topology obtained from the 16S mtDNA.
52
FIG. 9.—Type locality of Proceratophrys caramaschii new synonym. Mucuripe
53
FIG. 10.—Geographic distribution of Proceratophrys cristiceps in Northeastern Brazil.
54
Artigo II. Mângia, S., Koroiva, R., Nunes, P.M. S., Roberto, I.J., Santa’Anna, A.C., Santana,
D.J. and Garda, A.A. A new and endangered species of Proceratophrys (Amphibia: Anura:
55
1 A new and endangered species of Proceratophrys (Amphibia: Anura: Odontophrynidae)
6
1
7 Programa de Pós Graduação em Ciências Biológicas (Zoologia), Universidade Federal da
12 Avenida Professor Moraes Rego, 1235, Cidade Universitária, 50670-901, Recife, Pernambuco,
13 Brazil
4
14 Universidade Federal do Amazonas, Programa de Pós-graduação em Zoologia, Instituto de
15 Ciências Biológicas. Avenida General Rodrigo Octávio, 6200, 69077–000, Manaus, Amazonas,
16 Brazil
5
17 Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte, Botânica e Zoologia, Campus Universitário,
20
56
22 ABSTRACT: Natural Rainforest enclaves in Northeastern Brazil (called Brejos de Altitude)
23 are present in isolated nuclear areas surrounded by the semi-arid Caatinga vegetation. Among
24 these high altitude areas, the Araripe Plateau in Ceará State harbors physiognomies from
25 Caatinga, Cerrado, and Atlantic Forest remnants and is considered a priority area for biodiversity
26 conservation within the Caatinga domain. Herein, we described a new species of Proceratophrys
27 endemic to the Araripe Plateau. We show, based on nuclear and mitochondrial markers, that this
28 new species is phylogenetically related to the Amazonian species P. concavitympanum. The new
29 species occurs in a small area (ca. 3.100 km2), severely impacted by deforestation and
30 canalization of local streams for agriculture and recreational use. This same region harbors other
31 endemic vertebrate species, several of which, for the same reasons (human impact and restricted
32 distribution), are listed in local and IUCN red lists. Therefore, we recommend this species be
35
37 radiation, low nebulosity and relative humidity, and especially by low and unpredictable rainfall
38 patterns (Prado 2003). Several species well adapted to arid conditions are found in the Caatinga
39 (Brazão et al. 1992), which covers most of the Brazilian northeastern region. During Pleistocene
40 climatic cycles, the Amazon and Atlantic Forests expanded and contracted repeatedly,
41 establishing connections across the diagonal of open formations that cuts South America from
42 southwest to northeast (Por 1992). Such intermittent connections enabled faunal exchanges
44 During glacial periods, forested environments are believed to have retracted while the dry areas
45 expanded (Costa 2003; Werneck et al. 2011; Batalha-Filho et al. 2014). Nowadays, rainforest
57
46 natural enclaves (called Brejos de Altitude) are present in isolated nuclear areas surrounded by
47 the Caatinga semi-arid vegetation (Ab'Sáber 1977). Such remnants persist at the slopes of higher
48 altitude areas such as Baturité, Borborema, Ibiapaba, and Araripe plateau in northeastern Brazil,
49 where lower temperatures and orographic rains allow the maintenance of mesic habitats within
51 Because such rainforest enclaves were isolated during the Pleistocene, vicariance events
52 likely promoted high diversification rates within these areas (Werneck et al. 2011). Indeed,
54 squamate (e.g. Atractus ronnie, Leposoma baturitensis, Placosoma limaverdorum) species are
55 endemic to these high altitude regions (Hoogmoed et al. 1994; Rodrigues and Borges 1997;
56 Loebmann et al. 2009; Roberto et al. 2014; Borges-Nojosa et al. 2016; Roberto and Loebmann
57 2016). Among these high altitude areas, the Araripe Plateau harbors physiognomies from
58 Caatinga, Cerrado, and Atlantic Forest (MMA 2000) and is considered a priority area for
59 biodiversity conservation within the Caatinga domain (MMA 2007; Camardelli and Napoli
60 2012).
61 Currently, the genus Proceratophrys harbors 40 recognized species that are organized into
62 four morphological groups (Proceratophrys bigibbosa and P. cristiceps groups, and P. boiei, and
63 P. appendiculata complexes, Giaretta et al. 2000; Kwet and Faivovich 2001; Prado and Pombal
64 2008). During different field expeditions to the Araripe Plateau, the authors collected several
66 from the Araripe Plateau as a new species related to the Amazonian species P. concavitympanum
68
71 The humid forests along the slopes of the Araripe Plateau are about 200 km long and
72 mostly composed of 8 – 15 m high trees (Girão and Souto 2005). The region has two marked
73 seasons: the dry season from May to November with precipitation not exceeding 60 mm, and a
74 rainy season from December to April, with a mean rainfall of 1.033 mm. The mean annual
75 temperature is 25.7°C (Girão and Souto 2005; Linhares et al. 2010). The area is inserted in the
77 area).
79 Specimens used in the description and examined for comparisons are housed at the
85 Católica de Minas Gerais), MNRJ (Museu Nacional do Rio de Janeiro, Universidade Federal do
87 (Appendix).
88 We follow the terminology for morphological diagnosis of Cruz and Napoli (2010),
89 Teixeira et al. (2012), Brandão et al. (2013) and Mângia et al. (2014). Measurements of 11 adult
90 specimens (eight males, three females) follow Prado and Pombal-Jr. (2008) and are presented in
91 millimeters throughout the paper: SVL (snout-vent length), HL (head length), HW (head width),
92 DICS (distance from the interocular crest to the tip of snout), IND (internarial distance), END
93 (eye-nostril distance), ED (eye diameter), UEW (upper eyelid width), IOD (interorbital distance),
59
94 THL (thigh length), TL (tibia length), FL (foot + tarsus length), and FHL (forearm and hand
95 length).
96 Vocalizations
97 We recorded the advertisement calls of three males (total of 89 calls) at Sítio Caianas
98 (7°16’36’’S, 39°26’42’’W), Crato Municipality, Ceará State. Calls were recorded with a Sony
100 calls. We analyzed calls in Raven Pro 1.5 for Mac (Bioacustics Research Program 2012) and
101 constructed audio spectrograms with the following parameters: FFT window width = 256, Frame
102 = 100, Overlap = 75, and flat top filter. We analyzed acoustic parameters typically evaluated in
103 anuran taxonomy studies (e.g. Brasileiro et al. 2008; Mângia et al. 2014): call duration, pulse
104 number per call, pulse number per second, and dominant frequency. Terminology on call
105 descriptions follows Duellman and Trueb (1994). Comparative data for other species were
106 obtained from the available literature (see Santana et al. 2010; Nunes et al. 2016) (Table 1).
107 Voucher specimens were not collected, but were photographed and the species identity was
110 We sequenced fragments of 16S ribosomal RNA mitochondrial gene (14 individuals) and
111 of the nuclear gene rhodopsin (seven individuals) (Table 2). We extracted genomic DNA from
112 muscle and/or liver samples using the phenol-chloroform protocol (Sam Brooks et al., 1989). We
113 used the 16Sa/16Sb primer of Palumbi (2002), following PCR conditions described by Costa el
114 al. (2016). For the nuclear gene rhodopsin, we used primers Rhod1A and Rhod1C of Bossuyt and
115 Milinkovitch (2000). PCR conditions for amplification consisted of 1× buffer, dNTP at 0.2 mM,
116 each primer at 0.2 µM, MgCl2 at 2mM, 1U Taq polymerase and 2 µl of template DNA, in a total
117 reaction volume of 25 µl. We used the following PCR cycling program: 94°C for 2 min, followed
60
118 by 35 cycles of 94°C for 30 s, 59°C for 1 min, and 72°C for 1 min, and concluding with a 5 min
119 extension at 72°C. We purified PCR products with Ethanol/Sodium Acetate and sequenced at
120 ABI 3730 XL DNA Analyzer (Applied Biosystems, Foster City, California (CA)). Resulting
121 sequences were edited by aligning forward and reverse reads using Geneious 9.1.2 with
122 MUSCLE algorithm using default parameters (Edgar 2004). The final dataset was 453 bp for 16S
123 and 350 bp for rhodopsin. We deposited final sequences in GenBank (Table 2).
124 For phylogenetic analyses, we included 16S and rhodopsin sequences from 21
126 Odontophrynus americanus and Cycloramphus acangatan as outgroups (Table 2). To determine
127 the most probable pair of alleles for rhodopsin, we used the PHASE algorithm (Stephens et al.
128 2001) implemented in the DNASP 5.10 software (Librado & Rozas 2009) using default options.
129 We also determined the model of nucleotide substitution for each gene with jModelTest (Darriba
130 et al. 2012) using the Akaike Information Criterion (AIC). The best-fit models were GTR+I+G
132 First, we performed a Bayesian phylogenetic analysis for 16S using BEAST v.1.8
133 software (Drummond et al. 2012). We performed a run with 30 million generations, sampling
134 every 1,000 steps using a Yule Process prior tree. We checked for stationarity by visually
135 inspecting trace plots and ensuring that all values for effective sample size were above 200 in
136 Tracer v1.5 (Rambaut and Drummond 2007). To infer the timing of speciation of the new
137 sequenced species, we used Proceratophrys species and outgroups as terminal taxa for a species
138 tree in *BEAST, as implemented in BEAST v1.8 (Drummond 2012). Due to the lack of fossil
139 calibrations for this group, we used the mtDNA 16S mutation rate of 0.0028 per lineage per
140 million years (Lemmon et al. 2007; Lymberakis et al. 2007). We ran 250 million generations,
141 sampling at every 10,000 generations. Stationarity was determined by visually inspecting trace
61
142 plots and ensuring that all ESS values were above 200 in TRACER v1.5. The first 10% sampled
143 genealogies were discarded as burn-in, and the most credible clade was inferred with
144 TreeAnnotator v1.8 (Drummond 2012). We also calculated sequence divergences (uncorrected p-
146
150 Figs. (1 – 3)
151
153 Grangeiro, Crato Municipality, Ceará State (7º16'49"S, 39º26'22" W; 720m a.s.l.), on December
154 14, 2014 by P.M.S. Nunes; M.P.L. Castro; K.M. Kameoka; M.C. Guarnieri.
155 Paratopotypes.—CHUFPE 160, CHUFPE 161 (adult males), CHUFPE 152 (juvenile)
156 collected with the holotype, CHUFPE 226 and CHUFPE 227 (juvenile) collected on May 2015
157 by P.M.S. Nunes, A.V.A. Mello, M P.L. Castro, A.N. Cabral; A.R.M. Gonzaga; M.C. Guarnieri.
159 Serrano Atlético Cratense, Crato Municipality, Ceará State (7º16’10”S, 39º27’35”W; 740m
160 a.s.l.), on May 2011 by D.J. Santana and A.A. Garda. URCA-H 114 (adult female) collected at
161 Nascente, Chapada do Araripe, Crato Municipality, Ceará State, on May 1st 2008 by S.C.
162 Ribeiro; URCA-H 4028 – 29 (adult males), collected at Nascente, Chapada do Araripe, Crato
163 Municipality, Ceará State, on January 1st 2009; URCA-H 1030 (adult female) URCA-H 1031 –
164 34 (adult males) collected at Mata do Clube Recreativo Grangeiro, Crato Municipality, Ceará
167 males, 44.3 mm female); (2) snout rounded in dorsal and ventral views, obtuse and slightly
168 vertical in profile; (3) presence of short, fused but not pointed warts on upper eyelid border (L 1,
169 2/5, 3; R 1/2/5, 2); (4) one row of small and pointed tubercles on the forearm; (5) dorsal region
170 with pointed tubercles on the head, arms, legs, and pre-sacral region; the flanks, sacral-urostyle
171 region and coccyx end with shorter and fewer tubercles than the rest of the dorsal region; (6)
172 ventral region cream with dark-brown vermiculations on the gular region, chest and belly; (7)
173 advertisement call consisting of a multipulsed note with 0.526 ± 0.05 seconds of duration (0.430–
174 0.649), 52 ± 5.3 pulses per note (42–65), 99.2 ± 0.9 pulses per second (96.8–102.7), and
179 P. rondonae, P. sanctaritae, P. subguttata and P. tupinamba by the absence of single uni-
180 cuspidate palpebral and rostral appendages (present in those species; single, short and multi-
185 From P. avelinoi, P. bigibbosa, P. brauni and P. palustris, P. ararype differs by lacking
186 postocular swellings (present in these species). Proceratophrys ararype presents short, fused and
187 not pointed warts on upper eyelid border (fused with small points in P. goyana, P. strussmannae,
188 P. carranca, P. branti and P. concavitympanum; small, rounded and not fused in P. cururu and
191 middle more projected than lateral tubercles in P. minuta; small and rounded in P. redacta;
192 multiple short and pointed expansions in P. schirchi). From P. bagnoi, P. concavitympanum, P.
193 dibernardoi and P. goyana, P. ararype differs by the presence a single row of tubercles on the
194 forearm (two rows in P. bagnoi, P. concavitypanum and P. dibernardoi, tubercles not organized
195 in rows in P. goyana). From P. concavitympanum, P. ararype differs by the number, size, and
196 disposition of tubercles on the dorsal region: tubercles more concentrated on the head, arms, legs
197 and pre-sacral constriction; less concentrated and smaller tubercles on the flanks, sacral-urostyle,
198 and coccyx regions (tubercles uniformly distributed on the dorsal region with no variation in size
199 in P. concavitympanum).
200 A cream ventral region with dark-brown vermiculations on the gular region, chest and
201 belly, distinguishes P. ararype from P. branti, P. carranca, P. cristiceps, P. redacta and P.
202 strussmannae (dark spots in P. branti and P. carranca, light-brown dots on the gular region and
203 chest, or ventral surface cream in P. cristiceps, gular region blackish, scattered small, dark-brown
204 dots on the chest in P. redacta, and on the chest and belly in P. strussmannae).
205 Proceratophrys ararype can be distinguished from the sympatric species P. cristiceps by
206 the advertisement call with higher number of pulses/second (96.8–102.7; 87.4–91.9 pulses/s in P.
207 cristiceps) and higher dominant frequency (1033.6 – 1205.9 Hz; 900 – 990 Hz in P. cristiceps).
208 The advertisement call also distinguishes P. ararype from P. huntingtoni and P. moratoi by the
209 longer duration (0.430 – 0.649 s; 0.200 – 0.320 s in P. huntingtoni, 0.179 – 0.335 s in P.
64
213 Description of the holotype.—Head wider than long, head length 46% of SVL, snout
214 rounded in dorsal and ventral views, obtuse and vertical in profile; nares elliptical and prominent,
215 canthal crests marked, prominent and covered by small tubercles; no preocular crests; eyes
216 directed anterolateraly, eye diameter 22% of head length and 92% of the palpebral appendage;
217 eyelid with short and fused warts, five warts on the left eyelid and four on the right (L 1, 2/5, 3; R
218 1/2/5, 2), with one larger and more prominent; presence of one row of tubercles on the eyelid;
219 indistinct tympanum; vomerine teeth in two short rows between the choannae; frontoparietal
220 crests well developed; region between frontoparietal crests shallow; interocular ridge of warts
221 organized in a row, markedly curved; ocular-dorsal ridge of warts complete from the eyes to the
222 coccyx region; two parallel rows of warts on the supra-scapulae region. Dorsal surface, including
223 flanks, arms and legs, with various warts of different sizes and shapes, one row of close and
224 pointed forearm tubercles, reaching the hands; ventral surfaces, except hands and feet, covered by
225 numerous small, rounded, uniform warts. Finger lengths I > II < III > IV (Fig. 1); interdigital
226 webbing absent; inner metacarpal tubercle large and elliptical; outer metacarpal divided in two
227 parts, the internal oval and the external elliptical; scarce small rounded supernumerary tubercles;
228 subarticular tubercles large, rounded, but grooved anteriorly and posteriorly. Thigh length longer
229 than tibia length, the sum of thigh and tibia lengths 79% of snout-vent length; toe lengths I < II <
230 III < IV > V; inner metatarsal tubercle large, elliptical, spatulated; outer metatarsal tubercle
231 small, rounded; scarce small rounded supernumerary tubercles; subarticular tubercles large,
233 Measurements of the holotype (mm).—SVL 44.3; HL 20.6; HW 13.0; DICS 10.4; IND
234 2.6; END 4.2; ED 4.5; UEW 4.9; IOD 2.9; THL 18.8; TL 16.2; FL 24.8; FHL 23.2.
235 Color in life of the holotype.—Based on photographs of the holotype (Fig. 3A). Dorsal
236 background color grey, maculated with variegate brown and dark-brown pattern, resembling dead
65
237 leaves. Area delimited by the symmetrical dorsal crest light brown, bordered along the external
238 sides by a dark-brown band with four wave-like blotches on each side. Two brown bands from
239 the eye to the upper lip. From two to three transverse dark-grey bars on the fingers and toes.
241 delimited by the symmetrical dorsal crest light grey, bordered along external sides by a black
242 band with four wave-like blotches on each side. Two dark-grey bands from the eye to the upper
243 lip. From two to three transverse dark-grey bars on the fingers and toes. Ventral surface
244 background color cream with vermiculations dark-brown in the gular region, chest and belly (Fig.
245 1B).
247 (CHUFPE 161, adult male; CHUFPE 227, juvenile). One individual (CHUFPE 227, juvenile)
248 presents a cream dorsal background color. The measurements of the type series are provided in
249 Table 3.
251 pulsed note (Fig. 4) with a duration of 0.526 ± 0.05 seconds (0.430 – 0.649), emitted sporadically
252 with 52 ± 5.3 pulses/note (42 – 65), 99.2 ± 0.9 pulses/s (96.8 – 102.7), and a dominant frequency
254 Geographic distribution.—Proceratophrys ararype sp. nov. is known from the type
255 locality at Mata do Clube Recreativo Grangeiro, from Clube Serrano Atlético Cratense, and from
256 Sítio Caianas, Crato Municipality, Ceará State, Brazil (Fig. 5). A phylogeographic project being
258 northeastern Brazil, comparing specimens morphologically and molecularly. With 51 localities
259 analyzed, including several other “Brejos de Altitude”, P. ararype only occurs at Chapada do
260 Araripe.
66
261 Etymology.—The Araripe Plateau limits the Ceará, Pernambuco and Piauí States.
262 "Araripe", from the ancient tupi, ararype, means "on the araras river" (arara, arara + 'y, river +
263 pe, on the. Arara means Macaw in tupi and in Portuguese). Because the new species is known
264 only from the Araripe region, we name it after its distribution area. The specific epithet ararype
266 Environment and habitat.—The holotype and paratopotypes were collected in a forest
267 remnant at the slopes of Araripe Plateau, within the limits of a recreational club (Clube
268 Grangeiro). The area has suffered significant anthropogenic modification, including the
269 plantation of exotic trees (such as coconut, Cocus nocifera) and the use of trails for hiking. Palm
270 trees (Arecaceae) cover most of the area and the local drainage is composed of several permanent
271 streams that emerge from springs on the slopes of Chapada do Araripe. Many of these streams
272 and rivulets are partially or fully channeled for local supply, presenting a problem for P. ararype,
273 which uses lotic environments for reproduction. Some specimens (CHUFPE 152, 156, 160 and
274 161) were collected on December 2014, around 20:00h to 22:00h. Males were calling along a
275 permanent stream with males of other species (Physalaemus cuvieri, Adenomera sp. and
276 Dendropsophus minutus). The specimens registered on May 2015 (CHUFPE 226, 227) were
277 collected in pitfall traps. We also recorded the species in Sítio Caianas, located at the slopes of
278 Chapada do Araripe. There, the main habitat is humid forest alongside the streams, where males
279 of Proceratophrys ararype were found calling in the leaf litter near to the streams (10 - 50cm).
280 Other species found in calling activity were Physalaemus cuvieri, Adenomera sp. and Scinax gr.
281 ruber.
282 Molecular phylogeny and genetic divergence of the new species.—Our 16S mtDNA
283 (Fig. 6) confirmed that P. cristiceps populations occur at the Araripe plateau region, showing that
284 the P. ararype sp. nov. occurs sympatrically with P. cristiceps. However, both species belong to
67
285 two distant lineages within Proceratophrys. Sequence divergences between P. ararype and P.
286 cristiceps for 16S mtDNA is about 8% with uncorrected p-distance; and 4% between P. ararype
287 and P. concavitympanum from Aripuanã Municipality, Mato Grosso State (Table 4).
288 The topology of the species tree (Fig. 7) recovered Proceratophrys ararype as sister taxa
290 concavitympanum from Aripuanã Municipality, Mato Grosso State, Brazil, forms a well-
291 supported clade with the previous species (1.00 pp). The molecular dating analyses indicated that
292 the divergence between P. ararype and P. concavitympanum from Palmas took place
293 approximately 1.4 Mya during Pleistocene. The clade formed by these two species diverge from
294 P. concavitympanum from Aripuanã approximately 5.2 Mya, during the end of Miocene and
296
297 DISCUSSION
298 Some species occurring in natural rainforest enclaves in Northeastern Brazil (Brejos de
299 altitude) support preterit connections between these remnants and the Amazon and Atlantic
300 Forests. For example, phylogenetic and comparative studies recovered Adelophryne baturitensis,
301 A. maranguapensis, and Rhinella casconi more closely related to forest congeners (Fouquet et al.
302 2012; Roberto and Loebmann 2016). Likewise, some snake species reinforce preterit connections
303 of Chapada do Araripe with the Amazon, including Anylius scitale, Bothrops aff. atrox, and
304 Drymoluber dichrous (Ribeiro et al. 2012; Roberto and Loebmann 2016). The same pattern was
306 supporting that Araripe forests were once previously connected with the Amazon forest.
308 during the Pleistocene, probably as a result of forest expansions and contractions resulting from
68
309 climatic cycles (Por 1992). High altitude areas in Ceará State are frequently inhabited by moist
310 forest species, which likely originated from ancestors from the Amazon and/or Atlantic forests
311 (Roberto and Loebmann, 2016). Therefore, P. concavitympanum was likely more widespread and
312 one population became isolated in forest remnants around the Araripe Plateau as forests retreated
313 in response to the overall cooling of the planet during the Pleistocene. This population remained
314 surrounded by the Caatinga semi-arid vegetation leading to its divergence in isolation from P.
315 concavitympanum.
316 Proceratophrys cristiceps occurs sympatrically with P. ararype in the Araripe Plateau
317 region. Previous works considered P. cristiceps to occur in the Caatinga and in the humid forest
318 slopes of the Araripe Plateau (Ribeiro et al., 2016). However, P. cristiceps seems to be restricted
319 to the Cerradão phytophysionomy (drymorphic subdeciduous foliage tropical forest – Figueiredo
320 1990; Bezerra et al. 2003) at the top of the Araripe Plateau and to the Caatinga at lower elevation
322 The phylogenetic diversity within P. concavitympanum is likely underestimated. The first
323 phylogenetic tree reconstructed for the genus Proceratophrys used a sample from Palmas
324 Municipality (Tocantins State, Brazil) representing P. concavitympanum (Amaro et al. 2009). In
325 our study, we use samples from Aripuanã Municipality, Mato Grosso State (see Fig. 6), which is
326 much closer (200km versus 1400km in straight line) to the type locality of P. concavitympanum
327 (Espigão d’Oeste Municipality, Rondônia State, Brazil). Based on morphology, genetic and
328 geographic distances, and previous morphologic and acoustic analyses (Santana et al. 2010) we
329 consider the population of Aripuanã as P. concavitympanum. Hence, our results indicate that the
330 population of Proceratophrys from Palmas is yet another undescribed species. Such
331 underestimation may have important consequences for phylogenetic reconstructions, ecology,
334 endangered Araripe manakin (Antilophia bokermanni), the endangered freshwater crab Kingsleya
335 attenboroughi, and the endangered snake Atractus ronnie, the humid forests of Chapada do
336 Araripe (BirdLife International 2015; Pinheiro and Santana 2016; Roberto and Loebmann 2016).
337 Although the area is inserted in the sustainable use Environment Protected Area of Araripe
338 Plateau, this protection category is the least restrictive of the Brazilian legislation. Furthermore,
339 this region is highly deforestated and streams have been canalized for agriculture and recreational
340 uses. These are the main threats for the humid forest in the slopes of Araripe Plateau, and
341 consequently for the maintenance of the water aquifers in the region (Linhares et al. 2010) where
342 P. ararype occurs and reproduces. The conservation of these humid forests is therefore critical
343 for the species long-term survival. Furthermore, P. ararype known range is less than 5.000 km2
344 (3.100 km2). Thus, based on the criteria and categories of the IUCN Red List B1 (Version 3.1,
346
347 Acknowledgments.—This work was partially supported by grants from CNPq and
349 FACEPE to PMSN (APQ-0664-2.04-15). RK and SM thank CAPES for their scholarships. We
350 thank F. Juncá, M. Napoli, G. Colli, A.R. Gonzaga, A.V. Albano, A. Cabral, K. Kameoka, M.
351 Lins e Castro, M. Guarnieri, and S. Ribeiro for help during fieldwork, and C. Nascimento for
352 technical support. We thank several curators and researchers who granted access to specimens
353 and shared tissue samples under their care (see methods). AAG thanks CNPq for his productivity
355
359 Amaro, R.C., D. Pavan, and M.T. Rodrigues. 2009. On the generic identity of Odontophrynus
360 moratoi Jim & Caramaschi, 1980 (Anura, Cycloramphidae). Zootaxa 2071:61–68.
363 Ávila, R.W., A. Pansonato, C. and Strüssmann. 2012. A new species of Proceratophrys (Anura:
365 http://dx.doi.org/10.1670/11-038
366 Batalha-Filho, H., R.O. Pessoa, P.H. Fabre, J. Fjeldsa, M. Irestedt, P.G.P. Ericson, L.F. Silveira,
367 and C.Y. Miyaki. 2014. Phylogeny and historical biogeography of gnateaters (Passeriformes,
368 Conopophagidae) in the South America forests. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution
370 Bezerra, C.L.F., E.R.C. Trigueiro, A.A.J.F. Castro, and A.S.F. Castro. 2003. Survey of the
371 Vegetation in the State of Ceará. Pp. 105–115 in Global Change and Regional Impacts:
372 Water Availability and Vulnerability of Ecosystems and Society in the Semiarid Northeast of
373 Brazil. (T.G.M. Krol, H. Frischkorn, and H.F.J.C. de Araújo, eds.). Springer-Verlag, USA.
374 Bioacoustics Research Program. 2012. Raven Pro: interactive sound analysis software (Version
376 BirdLife International. 2015. Antilophia bokermanni. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species
379 http://www.webcitation.org/6mjGyOGka)
71
380 Borges-Nojosa, D.M., U. Caramaschi, and M.T. Rodrigues. 2016. A new species of lizard
383 http://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4169.1.8.
384 Bossuyt, F., and M.C. Milinkovitch. 2000. Convergent adaptive radiations in Madagascan and
385 Asian ranid frogs reveal covariation between larval and adult traits. Proceedings of the
387 Brandão, R.A., U. Caramaschi, W. Vaz-Silva, and L.A. Campos. 2013. Three new species of
390 Brasileiro, C.A., I. Martins, and J. Jim. 2008. Amphibia, Anura, Cycloramphidae, Odontophrynus
391 moratoi: Distribution extension and advertisement call. Check List 4:382–385.
392 Brazão, J.E.M., M.M. Santos, and L. da Silva. 1992. Vegetação e Recursos Florísticos. Pp. 59–68
393 in Recursos Naturais e Meio Ambiente: uma visão do Brasil (S.S. Caldeiron, ed.). Fundação
395 Camardelli, M., and M.F. Napoli. 2012. Amphibian conservation in the Caatinga biome and
397 http://dx.doi.org/10.1655/HERPETOLOGICA-D-10-00033.1.
398 Costa, H.C., D.J. Santana, F. Leal, R. Koroiva, and P.C.A. Garcia. 2016. A new species of
401 Costa, L.P. 2003. The historical bridge between the Amazon and the Atlantic Forest of Brazil: a
402 study of molecular phylogeography with small mammals. Journal of Biogeography 30:71–
407 Darriba, D., G.L. Taboada, R. Doallo, and D. Posada. 2012. jModelTest 2: more models, new
409 Dias, P.H.S., R.C. Amaro, A.M.P.T. Carvalho-e-Silva, and M.T. Rodrigues. 2013. Two new
411 Atlantic forest, with taxonomic remarks on the genus. Zootaxa 3682:277–304. DOI:
412 http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.3682.2.5.
413 Drummond, A.J., M.A. Suchard, D. Xie, and A. Rambaut. 2012. Bayesian Phylogenetics with
414 BEAUti and the BEAST 1.7. Molecular Biology and Evolution 29:1969–1973. DOI:
415 http://dx.doi.org/doi:10.1093/molbev/mss075.
416 Duellman, W.E. and L. Trueb. 1994. Biology of amphibians. Baltimore, the Johns Hopkins
418 Edgar, R.C. 2004. MUSCLE: Multiple sequence alignment with high accuracy and high
420 Eterovick, P.C., and I. Sazima. 1998. New species of Proceratophrys (Anura: Leptodactylidae)
422 Figueiredo, A.G. 1990. Vegetação. In: Atlas do Ceará. IPLANCE, Brasil.
423 Fouquet, A., D. Loebmann, S. Castroviejo-Fisher, J.M. Padial, V.G.D. Orrico, M.L. Lyra, I.J.
424 Roberto, P.J.R. Kok, C.F.B. Haddad, and M.T. Rodrigues. 2012. From Amazonia to the
425 Atlantic Forest: molecular phylogeny of Phyzelaphryninae frogs reveals unexpected diversity
73
427 Phylogenetics and Evolution 65:547–561. DOI:
428 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ympev.2012.07.012.
429 Giaretta, A.A., P.S. Bernarde, and M.N.D.C. Kokubum. 2000. A new species of Proceratophrys
430 (Anura: Leptodactylidae) from the Amazon rain forest. Journal of Herpetology 173–178.
432 Girão, W., and A. Souto. 2005. Breeding period of Araripe manakin Antilophia bokermanni
434 Godinho, L.B., M.R. Moura, J.V.A. Lacerda, and R.N. Feio. 2013. A new species of
435 Proceratophrys (Anura: Odontophrynidae) from the middle São Francisco River,
437 Hoogmoed, M.S., D.M. Borges, and P. Cascon. 1994. Three new species of the genus
438 Adelophryne (Amphibia: Anura: Leptodactylidae) from northeastern Brazil, with remarks on
440 IUCN. 2012. IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria: Version 3.1. Second edition. Gland,
442 Kwet, A., and J. Faivovich. 2001. Proceratophrys bigibbosa species group (Anura:
444 http://dx.doi.org/10.1643/0045-8511(2001)001[0203:PBSGAL]2.0.CO;2.
445 Lemmon, E.M., A.R. Lemmon, and D.C. Cannatella. 2007. Geological and climatic forces
446 driving speciation in the continentally distributed trilling chorus frogs (Pseudacris).
448 Linhares, KV., F.A. Soares, and C.S. Machado. 2010. Nest support plants of the Araripe Manakin
449 Antilophia bokermanni, a Critically Endangered endemic bird from Ceará, Brazil. Cotinga
450 32:90–94.
74
451 Loebmann, D., S.C. Ribeiro, D.L. Sales, and W.O. Almeida. 2009. New records of Atractus
452 ronnie (Serpentes, Colubridae) in relictual forests from the state of Ceará, Brazil, and
456 Eastern Mediterranean region. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 44:115–125. DOI:
457 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ympev.2007.03.009.
458 Mângia, S.; D.J. Santana, C.A.G. Cruz, and R.N. Feio. 2014. Taxonomic revision of
461 Martins, L.B., and A.A. Giaretta. 2011. A new species of Proceratophrys Miranda-Ribeiro
463 Martins, L.B., and A.A. Giaretta. 2012. Advertisement calls of two species of Proceratophrys
464 (Anura: Odontophrynidae) from Minas Gerais, Brazil, with comments on their distribution,
465 taxonomy and conservation status. South American Journal of herpetology 7:203–212. DOI:
466 http://dx.doi.org/10.2994/057.007.0302.
467 Martins, L.B., and A.A. Giaretta. 2013. Morphological and acoustic characterization of
470 http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.3750.4.1.
471 MMA (Ministério do Meio Ambiente). 2000. Avaliação e ações prioritárias para a conservação
75
474 MMA (Ministério do Meio Ambiente). 2007. Áreas prioritárias para conservação, uso sustentável
477 Nunes, I., D. Loebamann, C.A.G. Cruz, and C.F.B. Haddad. 2016. Advertisement call, colour
480 Nunes, I., and F.A. Juncá. 2006. Advertisement calls of three leptodactylid frogs in the state of
481 Bahia, northeastern Brazil (Amphibia, Anura, Leptodactylidae), with considerations on their
483 Palumbi, S., A. Martin, S. Romano, W.O. Mcmillan, L. Stice, and G. Grabowski. 2002. The
485 Pinheiro, A.P., and W. Santana. 2016. A new and endangered species of Kingsleya Ortmann,
488 Prado, D.E. 2003. As Caatingas da América do Sul. Pp 3–73 in Ecologia e Conservação da
489 Caatinga. (I.R. Leal, M. Tabarelli, and J.M.C. Silva, eds.) Ed. Universitária da UFPE, Brasil.
490 Prado, G.M., and J.P. Pombal-Jr. 2008. Espécies de Proceratophrys Miranda–Ribeiro, 1920 com
492 Por, F.D., 1992. Sooretama: The Atlantic Rain Forest of Brazil. The Hague: SPB Academic
494 Rambaut, A., and A.J. Drummond. 2007. Tracer, Version 1.4. Available at
496 http://www.webcitation.org/6mjItaSRx.
76
497 Ribeiro, S.C., I.J. Roberto, D.L. Sales, R.W. Ávila, and W.O. Almeida. 2012. Amphibians and
498 reptiles from the Araripe bioregion, northeastern Brazil. Salamandra 48:133–146.
499 Roberto, I.J., and D. Loebmann. 2016. Composition, distribution patterns, and conservation
500 priority areas for the herpetofauna of the state of Ceará, northeastern Brazil. Salamandra
501 52:134–152.
502 Roberto, I.J., L. Brito, and M.T.C. Thomé. 2014. A new species of Rhinella (Anura: Bufonidae)
503 from northeastern Brazil. South American Journal of Herpetology 9:190–199. DOI:
504 http://dx.doi.org/10.2994/SAJH-D-13-00028.1.
505 Rodrigues, M.T., and D.M. Borges. 1997. A new species of Leposoma (Squamata:
507 53:1–6.
508 Sam Brooks, J., E.F. Fritsch, and T. Maniatis. 1989. Molecular cloning: A laboratory manual,
509 Cold Spring Harbour Laboratory Press, Cold Spring Harbor, USA.
510 Santana, D.J., V.A. São-Pedro, P.S. Bernarde, and R.N. Feio. 2010. Descrição do canto de
513 http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0031-10492010001100001.
514 Tamura, K., G. Stecher, D. Peterson, A. Filipski, and S. Kumar. 2013. MEGA6: Molecular
515 Evolutionary Genetics Analysis version 6.0. Molecular Biology and Evolution 30:2725–
517 Teixeira-Jr, M., R.C. Amaro, R.S. Recoder, F.D. Vechio, and M.T. Rodrigues. 2012. A new
518 dwarf species of Proceratophrys Miranda-Ribeiro, 1920 (Anura, Cycloramphidae) from the
77
520 Werneck, F.P., G.C. Costa, G.R. Colli, D.E. Prado, and J.W. Sites Jr. 2011. Revisiting the
521 historical distribution of Seasonally Dry Tropical Forests: new insights based on
522 palaeodistribution modelling and palynological evidence. Global Ecology and Biogeography
524
78
525 APPENDIX
532 21201. Aripuanã: MZUFV 9552, 9554-56. Paranaíta: ZUEC 14505-06, 16011-15, 16719, 21201.
533 Pará: Paraopebas: PUC-MG 10561, 11206. Rondônia: Espigão do Oeste: MZUFV 10477.
535 Piranhas: UFBA 8-9, 43. Traipu: Serra da Mão: UFAL 8968, 9035-36, 9043, 9196, 9510, 9656.
536 Bahia: Caetité: UFMG 5851. Paulo Afonso: UFPB 12114, 12119, 12122-23, 12128. Ceará:
537 Aiuaba: AAGARDA 5111, 5132; URCA-H 7366, 7385, 7393, 7396, 7408, 7416, 7418. Barbalha:
538 URCA-H 4293, 4571. Baturité: UFC3722. Crateús: URCA-H 4744. Crato: AAGARDA 2735,
539 2737-40. General Sampaio: UFC 5351. Itapipoca: AAGARDA 9817, 10453-55. Ipu: UFPB
540 6117-19, 6121, 6123, 6125. Jaguaribe: AAGARDA 10176-79, 10286, 10398-402. Pacajus: UFC
541 4562. Paracuru: URCA-H 5773-74. Pentecoste: UFC 5001, 5018-19, 5193. São Gonçalo do
542 Amarante: URCA-H 5669, 5775, 5860. Santa Quitéria: UFPB 10651, 10753-58. Serra das
543 Almas: UFC 32, 131, 213, 224, 3319, 3464, 3467-68, 3470. Serra de Ibiapaba: UFPB 6117-26.
544 Ubajara, Parque Nacional de Ubajara: AAGARDA 10672, 10695, 10698-99, 10703, 10707-09,
545 10782, 10796, 10907, 10909, 10911-14, 10961, 10974, 10981, 10983. Várzea da Conceição:
546 UFPB 9661, 9665, 9667. Paraíba: Araruna: UFPB 8427, 8438, 8447, 8451, 8453, 8456, 8465,
547 8467, 8469, 8487. Boa vista: UFPB 1573-81. Cabaceiras: UFPB 6691-94, 11271, 11274. São
548 José dos Cordeiros: UFPB 5866. Pernambuco: Arcoverde: UFPB 9678-82, 9684, 9686-88, 9692,
79
549 9701. Betânia: UFC 3331. Bezerros: UFPB 7098. Exu: URCA 1462-63; UFPB 7214-17.
550 Nascente: UFPB 9670. Ouricuri: URCA 2988-89. Buíque, Parque Nacional do Catimbau:
551 AAGARDA 7706-12, 7747, 7760-61, 7765, 7799, 7802, 7804-05, 7824, 7886, 7975, 8056, 8362,
552 8417, 8435, 8437-40, 8450, 8463. Serra Talhada: UFPB 9656, 9659, 9660. Trindade: UFPB 974,
553 9673-77. Piauí: Floriano: UFPI 214-16, 222, 236. Piripiri: UFPB 10340, 10342-46. Rio Grande
554 do Norte: Serra Negra do Norte, Estação Ecológica do Seridó: AAGARDA 5447, 5528, 5583,
555 5689, 6061, 6790. João Câmara: AAGARDA 8913-15, 9806-11; URCA 422, 427, 483-85, 487-
556 88, 493, 498, 501. Macaíba, Escola Agrícola de Jundiaí: AAGARDA 1013-14, 1019-20, 1753-
557 71, 1773, 1776, 1778, 1786-91, 1935, 2495-96, 2583, 3757, 5447, 5528, 5554, 5583, 5689, 6061,
558 6790, 8866-71, 8913-15, 9806-11. Sergipe: Poço Redondo: UFPB 12120-21, 12125-27.
559 Proceratophrys minuta.—BRAZIL: Bahia: Miguel Calmon, Parque Estadual das Sete
564 4021.
80
TABLE 1.—Acoustic parameter of the advertisement calls of species from the Proceratophrys cristiceps group.
Dominant
Species Duration (s) Notes/call Pulses/note Pulses/s Location Source
frequency (Hz)
0.526 ± 0.05 52 ± 5.3 99.2 ± 0.9 1205.9 ± 99.5
P. ararype sp. nov. 1 Crato, CE Present work
(0.430 – 0.648) (42 – 65) (96.8 – 102.7) (1033.6 – 1205.9)
0.570 ± 0.01 45 ± 9.2 80.0 ± 0.9 Planalto do
P. caramaschii 1 860 or 1030 Nunes et al. (2016)
(0.410 – 0.740) (33 – 59) (78.6 – 81.8) Ibiapaba, CE
0.107 ± 0.04 12.2 ± 3.9 1178.0 ± 65.5 Godinho et al.
P. carranca 1 – 10 111.1 – 109.9 Buritizeiro, MG
(0.045 – 0.191) (5 – 21) (1033.6 – 1378.1) (2013)
0.367 ± 0.06 38.7 ± 7.4 106.3 ± 3.1 948.2 ± 66.7 Santana et al.
P. concavitympanum 1 Aripuanã, MT
(0.230 – 0.500) (23 – 51) (100 – 112.3) (851.0 – 1116.4) (2010)
0.278 ± 0.04 30.9 ± 4.8 110.9 ± 5.2 819.2 ± 62.2 Espigão do Santana et al.
P. concavitympanum 1
(0.178 – 0.326) (19 – 37) (100.7 – 119.3) (754.3 – 874.5) Oeste, RO (2010)
0.660 ± 0.05 57.5 ± 6.0 89.5 ± 1.2 940 ± 20 Feira de Nunes & Jucá
P. cristiceps 1
(0.520 – 0.790) (46 – 69) (87.4 – 91.9) (900 – 990) Santana, BA (2006)
900 Serra do Cipó, Eterovick &
P. cururu 0.600 – 1.000 1 40 45
(600 – 1000) MG Sazima (1998)
0.104 ± 0.15 99.3 ± 4.4 10.2 ± 1.4 1005.9 ± 28.4 Chapada dos Martins & Giaretta
P. goyana 1 – 34
(0.071 – 0.195) (83.3 – 120.5) (7 – 18) (937.3 – 1125.0) Veadeiros, GO (2013)
0.270 ± 0.01 21.3 ± 1.2 1250.2 ± 49.9 Chapada dos
P. huntingtoni 1 78 – 95 Ávila et al. (2012)
(0.200 – 0.320) (19.0 – 25.0) (1095.0 – 1344.5) Guimarães, MT
0.245 ± 0.03 20.5 ± 2.5 1343.0 ± 73.7 Brasileiro et al.
P. moratoi 1 81 – 85 Itirapina, SP
(0.185 – 0.307) (15 – 26) (1174 – 1444) (2008)
0.207 ± 0.02 17.5 ± 1.5 1348.7 – 86.6 Brasileiro et al.
P. moratoi 1 82 – 84 Botucatu, SP
(0.146 – 0.238) (12 – 20) (1153 – 1420) (2008)
0.232 ± 0.02 19 ± 3.0 1440 ± 50 Martins e Giaretta
P. moratoi 1 77 – 86 Ituiutaba, MG
(0.181 – 0.268) (14 – 23) (1406 – 1594) (2012)
0.253 ± 0.04 19 ± 2.0 1327 ± 108 Martins e Giaretta
P. moratoi 1 69 – 78 Uberlândia, MG
(0.179 – 0.335) (14 – 23) (1219 – 1464) (2012)
P. rotundipalpebra 0.093 ± 0.04 1 – 24 9.3 ± 1.7 101.0 ± 8.9 1287 ± 54.4 Chapada dos Martins & Giaretta
81
(0.050 – 0.200) (5 – 19) (78.1 – 130.4) (1125.0 – 1453.1) Veadeiros, GO (2013)
6.4 ± 0.9 107.7 ± 6.2 1133.8 ± 93.3 Caldas Novas, Martins & Giaretta
P. vielliardi 0.059 ± 0.08 3 – 20
(4 – 9) (95.6 – 118.8) (1022.0 – 1291.0) GO (2011)
82
TABLE 2.—Information of all specimens examined in the molecular section of this study (16s rRNA and Rhodopsin).
Genbank
Species Municipality, State Voucher Accession number Reference
Rhodopsin 16S
Proceratophrys ararype sp. nov. Crato, Ceará CHUFPE156 XXX KX858852 This study
Proceratophrys ararype sp. nov. Crato, Ceará CHUFPE152 XXX KX858854 This study
Proceratophrys ararype sp. nov. Crato, Ceará CHUFPE160 XXX KX858853 This study
Proceratophrys ararype sp. nov. Crato, Ceará AAGARDA2736 XXX KX855986 This study
Proceratophrys ararype sp. nov. Crato, Ceará AAGARDA2741 XXX KX855987 This study
Proceratophrys concavitympanum Aripuanã, Mato Grosso FMT-A 11698 XXX KX858855 This study
Proceratophrys concavitympanum Palmas, Tocantins AF1094 KF214207 FJ685694 Amaro et al. 2009
Proceratophrys moratoi Itirapina, São Paulo CFBH6515 KF214213 FJ685689 Amaro et al. 2009
Proceratophrys tupinamba Ilha Grande, Rio de Janeiro MNRJ54541 KF214236 KF214158 Dias et al. 2013
Proceratophrys goyana Petrolina de Goiás, Goiás AF1188 KF214210 FJ685697 Amaro et al. 2009
Proceratophrys mantiqueira Araponga , Minas Gerais MZUFV10139 KF214222 KF214143 Dias et al. 2013
Proceratophrys avelinoi Misiones, Argentina DB1246 KF214204 FJ685691 Amaro et al. 2009
Proceratophrys laticeps Linhares, Espírito Santo MTR12156 KF214211 FJ685698 Amaro et al. 2009
Proceratophrys boiei São Paulo, São Paulo AF1587 KF214206 FJ685693 Amaro et al. 2009
Proceratophrys itamari Campos do Jordão, São Paulo MZUSP135186 KF214226 KF214147 Dias et al. 2013
Proceratophrys izecksohni Paraty, Rio de Janeiro MNRJ64584 KF214235 KF214157 Dias et al. 2013
Proceratophrys belzebul São Sebastião, São Paulo MTR9456 KF214233 KF214233 Dias et al. 2013
Proceratophrys melanopogon São José do Barreiro, São Paulo TG3295 KF214228 KF214149 Dias et al. 2013
Proceratophrys pombali Bertioga, São Paulo AF1988 KF214223 KF214148 Dias et al. 2013
Proceratophrys cururu Cardeal Mota, Minas Gerais FSFL580 KF214209 FJ685696 Amaro et al. 2009
Proceratophrys appendiculata São Sebastião, São Paulo MNRJ53936 KF214231 FJ685690 Amaro et al. 2009
Proceratophrys bigibbosa Misiones, Argentina DB2313 KF214205 FJ685692 Amaro et al. 2009
Proceratophrys renalis Brejo da Madre de Deus, Pernambuco ZUFRJ8682 KF214213 FJ685700 Amaro et al. 2009
Proceratophrys schirchi Santa Tereza, Espírito Santo 371 KF214214 FJ685701 Amaro et al. 2009
Proceratophrys cristiceps Macaíba, Rio Grande do Norte AAGARDA1754 - KX855989 This study
83
Proceratophrys cristiceps Crato, Ceará AAGARDA2739 XXX KX855993 This study
Proceratophrys cristiceps Crato, Ceará AAGARDA2740 XXX KX855992 This study
Proceratophrys cristiceps Crato, Ceará AAGARDA2735 XXX KX855990 This study
Proceratophrys cristiceps Crato, Ceará AAGARDA2736 - KX855986 This study
Proceratophrys cristiceps Crato, Ceará AAGARDA2738 - XXX This study
Proceratophrys cristiceps Crato, Ceará AAGARDA2741 - KX855987 This study
Proceratophrys cristiceps Crato, Ceará UnB_GRC_21987 - XXX This study
Proceratophrys cristiceps Crato, Ceará UnB_GRC_22131 - XXX This study
Proceratophrys cristiceps Crato, Ceará UnB_GRC_22955 - XXX This study
Proceratophrys minuta Miguel Calmon, Bahia MZUSP146499 KF214215 JX982965 Teixeira-Jr et al. 2012
Proceratophrys redacta Morro do Chapéu, Bahia MZUSP150266 KF214216 JX982967 Teixeira-Jr et al. 2012
Odontophrynus americanus Poços de Caldas, Minas Gerais AF665 KF214201 FJ685686 Amaro et al. 2009
Macrogenioglottus alipioi Jussari, Bahia AF919 KF214199 FJ685684 Amaro et al. 2009
Cycloramphus acangatan Cotia, São paulo AF1605 KF214198 FJ685683 Amaro et al. 2009
84
TABLE 3.—Measurements (mm) of specimens of Proceratophrys ararype.
85
TABLE 4.—Uncorrected p-distances of 16S mitochondrial fragment gene of the new species described Proceratophrys ararype
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
1 KX855986 P. ararype sp. nov.
2 KX855987 P. ararype sp. nov. 0.000
3 KX858854 P. ararype sp. nov. 0.002 0.002
4 KX858852 P. ararype sp. nov. 0.002 0.002 0.000
5 KX858853 P. ararype sp. nov. 0.002 0.002 0.000 0.000
6 FJ685683 C. acangatan 0.122 0.122 0.124 0.124 0.124
7 FJ685684 M. alipioi 0.105 0.105 0.107 0.107 0.107 0.127
8 FJ685686 O. americanus 0.088 0.088 0.090 0.090 0.090 0.112 0.063
9 FJ685689 P. moratoi 0.046 0.046 0.049 0.049 0.049 0.134 0.112 0.095
10 FJ685691 P. avelinoi 0.071 0.071 0.073 0.073 0.073 0.134 0.095 0.085 0.071
11 FJ685692 P. bigibbosa 0.076 0.076 0.078 0.078 0.078 0.134 0.098 0.083 0.076 0.041
12 FJ685693 P. boiei 0.076 0.076 0.078 0.078 0.078 0.139 0.088 0.090 0.071 0.068 0.068
13 FJ685694 P. concavitympanu TO 0.012 0.012 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.124 0.105 0.085 0.054 0.071 0.076 0.076
14 FJ685696 P. cururu 0.080 0.080 0.083 0.083 0.083 0.132 0.098 0.078 0.071 0.046 0.039 0.066
15 FJ685697 P. goyana 0.066 0.066 0.068 0.068 0.068 0.127 0.088 0.078 0.066 0.054 0.039 0.049
16 FJ685698 P. laticeps 0.071 0.071 0.073 0.073 0.073 0.120 0.080 0.071 0.059 0.044 0.039 0.051
17 FJ685700 P. renalis 0.090 0.090 0.093 0.093 0.093 0.144 0.100 0.085 0.076 0.059 0.056 0.063
18 FJ685701 P. schirchi 0.083 0.083 0.085 0.085 0.085 0.132 0.078 0.076 0.066 0.063 0.061 0.076
19 JX982965 P. minuta 0.085 0.085 0.088 0.088 0.088 0.124 0.110 0.090 0.095 0.078 0.056 0.093
20 JX982967 P. redacta 0.090 0.090 0.093 0.093 0.093 0.124 0.110 0.090 0.100 0.076 0.054 0.093
21 KF214143 P. mantiqueira 0.068 0.068 0.071 0.071 0.071 0.127 0.100 0.073 0.063 0.039 0.037 0.066
22 KF214144 P. pombali 0.080 0.080 0.083 0.083 0.083 0.129 0.085 0.085 0.068 0.054 0.049 0.054
86
23 KF214147 P. itamari 0.071 0.071 0.073 0.073 0.073 0.127 0.090 0.073 0.063 0.039 0.034 0.056
24 KF214149 P. melanopogon 0.076 0.076 0.078 0.078 0.078 0.137 0.100 0.080 0.076 0.046 0.046 0.068
25 KF214151 P. appendiculata 0.063 0.063 0.066 0.066 0.066 0.127 0.088 0.073 0.051 0.044 0.039 0.049
26 KF214154 P. belzebul 0.073 0.073 0.076 0.076 0.076 0.129 0.100 0.083 0.061 0.051 0.051 0.063
27 KF214157 P. izecksohni 0.073 0.073 0.076 0.076 0.076 0.127 0.095 0.073 0.068 0.034 0.029 0.061
28 KF214158 P. tupinamba 0.061 0.061 0.063 0.063 0.063 0.124 0.090 0.071 0.056 0.041 0.037 0.051
29 KX858855 P. concavitympanum MT 0.041 0.041 0.044 0.044 0.044 0.132 0.105 0.095 0.068 0.071 0.073 0.085
30 KX855989 P. cristiceps RN 0.085 0.085 0.088 0.088 0.088 0.127 0.093 0.088 0.083 0.078 0.078 0.098
31 KX855993 P. cristiceps CE 0.085 0.085 0.088 0.088 0.088 0.127 0.093 0.088 0.083 0.078 0.078 0.098
32 KX855990 P. cristiceps CE 0.088 0.088 0.090 0.090 0.090 0.129 0.095 0.090 0.085 0.080 0.080 0.100
33 KX855992 P. cristiceps CE 0.085 0.085 0.088 0.088 0.088 0.127 0.093 0.088 0.083 0.078 0.078 0.098
34 XXXXXX P. cristiceps CE_21987 0.085 0.085 0.088 0.088 0.088 0.127 0.093 0.088 0.083 0.078 0.078 0.098
35 XXXXXX P. cristiceps CE_22131 0.085 0.085 0.088 0.088 0.088 0.127 0.093 0.088 0.083 0.078 0.078 0.098
36 XXXXXX P. cristiceps CE_22955 0.088 0.088 0.090 0.090 0.090 0.129 0.090 0.090 0.085 0.080 0.080 0.095
87
TABLE 4.—(continued) Uncorrected p-distances of 16S mitochondrial fragment gene of the new species described
12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
1 KX855986 P. ararype sp. nov.
2 KX855987 P. ararype sp. nov.
3 KX858854 P. ararype sp. nov.
4 KX858852 P. ararype sp. nov.
5 KX858853 P. ararype sp. nov.
6 FJ685683 C. acangatan
7 FJ685684 M. alipioi
8 FJ685686 O. americanus
9 FJ685689 P. moratoi
10 FJ685691 P. avelinoi
11 FJ685692 P. bigibbosa
12 FJ685693 P. boiei
13 FJ685694 P. concavitympanu TO 0.076
14 FJ685696 P. cururu 0.066 0.078
15 FJ685697 P. goyana 0.049 0.063 0.037
16 FJ685698 P. laticeps 0.051 0.068 0.024 0.032
17 FJ685700 P. renalis 0.063 0.088 0.032 0.044 0.037
18 FJ685701 P. schirchi 0.076 0.083 0.056 0.063 0.051 0.066
19 JX982965 P. minuta 0.093 0.083 0.073 0.068 0.068 0.090 0.071
20 JX982967 P. redacta 0.093 0.088 0.078 0.076 0.071 0.093 0.076 0.027
21 KF214143 P. mantiqueira 0.066 0.073 0.027 0.046 0.034 0.049 0.054 0.073 0.071
22 KF214144 P. pombali 0.054 0.080 0.039 0.037 0.039 0.056 0.061 0.078 0.083 0.037
88
23 KF214147 P. itamari 0.056 0.071 0.024 0.041 0.024 0.046 0.049 0.068 0.066 0.010 0.032
24 KF214149 P. melanopogon 0.068 0.080 0.034 0.049 0.037 0.059 0.059 0.080 0.078 0.022 0.034 0.017
25 KF214151 P. appendiculata 0.049 0.063 0.039 0.041 0.029 0.044 0.049 0.063 0.071 0.039 0.044 0.029
26 KF214154 P. belzebul 0.063 0.073 0.041 0.049 0.037 0.051 0.061 0.073 0.080 0.041 0.046 0.032
27 KF214157 P. izecksohni 0.061 0.073 0.024 0.037 0.029 0.046 0.049 0.063 0.061 0.010 0.032 0.005
28 KF214158 P. tupinamba 0.051 0.061 0.037 0.039 0.032 0.041 0.049 0.061 0.068 0.037 0.041 0.032
29 KX858855 P. concavitympanum MT 0.085 0.046 0.080 0.071 0.076 0.095 0.088 0.080 0.088 0.073 0.076 0.073
30 KX855989 P. cristiceps RN 0.098 0.088 0.076 0.088 0.068 0.078 0.071 0.059 0.073 0.071 0.080 0.076
31 KX855993 P. cristiceps CE 0.098 0.088 0.076 0.088 0.068 0.078 0.071 0.059 0.073 0.071 0.080 0.076
32 KX855990 P. cristiceps CE 0.100 0.090 0.078 0.090 0.071 0.080 0.073 0.061 0.076 0.073 0.083 0.078
33 KX855992 P. cristiceps CE 0.098 0.088 0.076 0.088 0.068 0.078 0.071 0.059 0.073 0.071 0.080 0.076
34 XXXXXX P. cristiceps CE_21987 0.098 0.088 0.076 0.088 0.068 0.078 0.071 0.059 0.073 0.071 0.080 0.076
35 XXXXXX P. cristiceps CE_22131 0.098 0.088 0.076 0.088 0.068 0.078 0.071 0.059 0.073 0.071 0.080 0.076
36 XXXXXX P. cristiceps CE_22955 0.095 0.090 0.078 0.085 0.071 0.080 0.073 0.056 0.071 0.073 0.078 0.078
89
TABLE 4.—(continued) Uncorrected p-distances of 16S mitochondrial fragment gene of the new species described
24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35
1 KX855986 P. ararype sp. nov.
2 KX855987 P. ararype sp. nov.
3 KX858854 P. ararype sp. nov.
4 KX858852 P. ararype sp. nov.
5 KX858853 P. ararype sp. nov.
6 FJ685683 C. acangatan
7 FJ685684 M. alipioi
8 FJ685686 O. americanus
9 FJ685689 P. moratoi
10 FJ685691 P. avelinoi
11 FJ685692 P. bigibbosa
12 FJ685693 P. boiei
13 FJ685694 P. concavitympanu TO
14 FJ685696 P. cururu
15 FJ685697 P. goyana
16 FJ685698 P. laticeps
17 FJ685700 P. renalis
18 FJ685701 P. schirchi
19 JX982965 P. minuta
20 JX982967 P. redacta
21 KF214143 P. mantiqueira
22 KF214144 P. pombali
90
23 KF214147 P. itamari
24 KF214149 P. melanopogon
25 KF214151 P. appendiculata 0.046
26 KF214154 P. belzebul 0.049 0.017
27 KF214157 P. izecksohni 0.017 0.034 0.037
28 KF214158 P. tupinamba 0.044 0.007 0.020 0.032
29 KX858855 P. concavitympanum MT 0.083 0.063 0.073 0.076 0.061
30 KX855989 P. cristiceps RN 0.083 0.063 0.076 0.076 0.066 0.093
31 KX855993 P. cristiceps CE 0.083 0.063 0.076 0.076 0.066 0.093 0.000
32 KX855990 P. cristiceps CE 0.085 0.066 0.078 0.078 0.068 0.095 0.002 0.002
33 KX855992 P. cristiceps CE 0.083 0.063 0.076 0.076 0.066 0.093 0.000 0.000 0.002
34 XXXXXX P. cristiceps CE_21987 0.083 0.063 0.076 0.076 0.066 0.093 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.000
35 XXXXXX P. cristiceps CE_22131 0.083 0.063 0.076 0.076 0.066 0.093 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.000
36 XXXXXX P. cristiceps CE_22955 0.085 0.066 0.078 0.078 0.068 0.090 0.002 0.002 0.005 0.002 0.002 0.002
91
FIGURES
FIG. 1.— Proceratophrys ararype (holotype, adult female, CHUFPE 156, SLV 44.3 mm):
FIG. 2.— Proceratophrys ararype (holotype, adult female, CHUFPE 156, SLV 44.3 mm):
(A) lateral view of the head; ventral views of (B) hand and (C) foot. Photos: B.F. Santos.
92
FIG. 3.— Live specimens of Proceratophrys ararype from Crato Municipality, Ceará
State, Brazil: (A) adult female (holotype, CHUFPE 156) from Mata do Clube Recreativo
Grangeiro, and (B) male calling at Sítio Caianas. Photos: P.M.S. Nunes (A); I.J. Roberto (B).
FIG. 4.— Advertisement call of Proceratophrys ararype: (A) oscillogram and (B)
93
FIG. 5.— Geographic distribution of Proceratophrys ararype.
94
FIG. 6.— Phylogenetic relationship among Proceratophrys, inferred through a Bayesian
analysis based on the 16S mitochondrial gene. Values above branches indicate posterior
95
FIG. 7.— Bayesian species tree topology (based on the 16S and rhodopsin genes). Values
above branches indicate posterior probabilities. Scale bar represents number of substitutions per
site.
96
Artigo III. Mângia, S., Koroiva, R., Oliveira, E.F., Leite, F.S.F., Del-Grande, M.L., Napoli,
M.F., Juncá, F.A., Santana, D.J. and Garda, A.A. Speciation in dwarf Proceratophrys (Miranda-
Ribeiro, 1920) from the sky islands of Chapada Diamantina, Bahia, Brazil.
97
Speciation in dwarf Proceratophrys (Miranda-Ribeiro, 1920) from the sky islands of Chapada
Sarah Mângia1,*, Eliana Faria Oliveira2, Ricardo Koroiva2, Felipe Sá Fortes Leite3, Maria Lúcia
Del-Grande4, Marcelo Felgueiras Napoli5, Flora Acuña Juncá6, Diego José Santana2, and Adrian
Antonio Garda7
1
Universidade Federal da Paraı́ ba, Departamento de Sistemática e Ecologia, João Pessoa, PB,
Brazil
2
Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso do Sul, Centro de Ciências Biológicas e da Saúde,
Brazil
6
Universidade Estadual de Feira de Santana, Departamento de Ciências Biológicas, Feira de
98
Abstract. The genus Proceratophrys is currently composed by 38 species. Only two of
them, P. minuta and P. redacta, occur in the highland areas at the northern portion of the
Espinhaço Mountain Range (EMR), known as Chapada Diamantina. The Chapada Diamantina
represents a set of disjoint mountains, with isolated peaks at higher elevations. We found three
new populations that fit criteria to be considered candidate species from Campo Formoso,
Pindobaçu, and Palmeiras Municipalities, aside from those recently described for Chapada
taxonomy of highland populations of Proceratophrys in the region. Our results show that each
mountaintop studied to herein in the Chapada Diamantina contain restricted lineages, separated
by warmer and more xeric valleys, which may act as gene flow barriers. We consider each one as
distinct species, except the population from Pindobaçu Municipality, which must be studied
99
Introduction
Molecular data has help uncover morphologically cryptic species in many species groups
(Prado et al., 2012; Werneck et al., 2012; Costa et al., 2012; Giugliano et al., 2013; Machado et
al., 2014). In amphibians, which have highly conserved morphologies, molecular data has
assisted in the recognition of new and cryptic species as well (e.g. Garda et al., 2010; Vences et
al., 2012; Dias et al., 2013; de Sá et al., 2015; Santana et al., 2015; Fouquet et al., 2016).
Currently, the integration of more than one database (such as DNA sequences, morphology,
acoustic, behavior, etc.) has proved to be an efficient way to discover and validate new species
(e.g. Guicking et al., 2009; Vasconcelos et al., 2012; Gehara et al., 2013).
al., manuscript 1), three species were recently described using molecular data combined with
morphological, morphometric, and osteological characteristics (Teixeira et al., 2012; Dias et al.,
2013). These descriptions demonstrate that the genus Proceratophrys possesses a rich cryptic
diversity still uncovered, highlighting the need for taxonomic review (Dias et al., 2013). The 38
species of Proceratophrys are usually grouped in three species complex based only on external
morphological similarities (Giaretta et al., 2000; Prado and Pombal, 2008). However, gene trees
for the genus present two main clades (Teixeira et al., 2012; Dias et al., 2013). The first is
1937), P. minuta Napoli, Cruz, Abreu & Del Grande, 2011, and P. redacta Teixeira, Amaro,
Recoder, Vechio & Rodrigues, 2012. The other clade encompasses the remaining species of
Proceratophrys. Thus, the monophyly of the morphological groups is not supported by molecular
data.
Proceratophrys minuta and P. redacta occur in few highland areas at the northern
Espinhaço Mountain Range (EMR). Proceratophrys minuta is known from two localities, Miguel
100
Calmon and Palmeiras Municipalities (Napoli et al., 2011), both in Bahia State and 160 km apart.
Proceratophrys redacta is known only from Morro do Chapéu, Bahia State (Teixeira et al.,
2012). The EMR extends from the southern Minas Gerais until central region of Bahia State. It is
formed by inselbergs, which can reach about 1,000m asl (Derby, 1906). Characterized by a great
outcrops, gallery forests, cloudy forests, savannas, and floodplain grasslands (Kamino et al.,
2008). The northern portion of the EMR, popularly known as Chapada Diamantina, represents a
set of disjoint mountains, with isolated peaks at higher elevations (Rocha et al., 2005). These
clusters of mountains in which environmental conditions at the mountain tops differ markedly
from those in the intervening valleys are termed sky islands (Shepard and Burbrink, 2008). When
P. redacta was described, Teixeira et al. (2012) suggested that the disjoint distribution of P.
minuta at Miguel Calmon and Palmeiras Municipalities, with P. redacta in the middle, deserves
further investigation in order to verify their specific identity, because lowlands covered with
Recently, we found three new populations in Campo Formoso, Pindobaçu, and Palmeiras
Municipalities. Herein, based on molecular, morphometric and morphological data, we revise the
examined for comparisons are housed at the following collections: Coleção Herpetológica da
morphological structures of Cruz and Napoli (2010), Teixeira et al. (2012), Brandão et al. (2013),
and Mângia et al. (2014). Measurements of adult specimens follows Prado and Pombal-Jr. (2008)
and are in millimeters: snout-vent length (SVL), head length (HL), head width (HW), distance
from the interocular crest to the tip of snout (DICS), internarial distance (IND), eye-nostril
distance (END), eye diameter (ED), upper eyelid width (UEW), interorbital distance (IOD), thigh
length (THL), tibia length (TL), foot + tarsus length (FL), and forearm and hand length (FHL).
DNA (mtDNA) and the nuclear gene (nuDNA) rhodopsin from three individuals (Table 1). We
extracted genomic DNA from muscle and/or liver samples using the phenol-chloroform protocol
(Sam Brooks et al., 1989). We used the 16Sa/16Sb primer of Palumbi (1996), following PCR
conditions described by Costa el al. (2016). For the nuclear gene rhodopsin, we used the primers
Rhod1A and Rhod1C (Bossuyt and Milinkovitch 2000). PCR conditions for amplification
consisted of 1× buffer, dNTP at 0.2 mM, each primer at 0.2 µM, MgCl2 at 2mM, 1U Taq
polymerase, and 2 µl of template DNA, in a total reaction volume of 25 µl. We used the
following PCR cycling program: 94°C for 2 min, followed by 35 cycles of 94°C for 30 s, 59°C
for 1 min, and 72°C for 1 min, and concluding with a 5 min extension at 72°C. We purified PCR
products with Ethanol/Sodium Acetate and sequenced at ABI 3730 XL DNA Analyzer (Applied
102
Biosystems, Foster City, California (CA)). Resulting sequences were edited by aligning forward
and reverse reads in the Geneious Pro v9.1.2 program using the MUSCLE algorithm with default
parameters (Edgar, 2004). The final dataset was 590 bp for 16S and 350 bp for rhodopsin, which
For Bayesian phylogenetic analysis, we included 16S and rhodopsin sequences from other
determined the model of nucleotide substitution for each gene with jModelTest (Darriba et al.
2012) using the Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC). The best-fit models were HKY + I for 16S
and K80 + I for rhodopsin. We performed a Bayesian phylogenetic analysis for 16S and for
rhodopsin using BEAST v1.8 software (Drummond et al. 2012). We ran 30 million generations,
sampling every 1,000 steps using a Yule Process prior tree. We checked for stationarity by
visually inspecting trace plots and ensuring that all values for effective sample size (ESS) were
above 200 in Tracer v1.5 (Rambaut and Drummond 2007). We calculated genetic distances
(uncorrected p-values) for both genes using Mega v 6.06 (Tamura et al. 2013).
Results
Both topologies generated from mitochondrial and nuclear markers (16S and rhodopsin)
the populations from Campo Formoso, Pindobaçu, and Palmeiras Municipalities (Figs. 1 and 2).
Each population from Chapada Diamantina was recovered as a distinct lineage corresponding to a
specific mountain top. However, the relationship among these lineages is different for each
marker. The topology of the mtDNA 16S tree (Fig. 1) recovered the lineage from Palmeiras as
sister of P. redacta, and the lineage from Pindobaçu as sister of P. minuta. Proceratophrys
103
cristiceps was recovered as the outgroup to these four lineages, while the remaining lineage from
Campo Formoso is sister to the clade formed by the previous species. The nuclear marker
rhodopsin recovered two well-defined clades among these lineages. The first is formed by P.
cristiceps and Campo Formoso lineages as sister of Pindobaçu lineage, and the second by P.
Genetic distance among lineages from Chapada Diamantina for 16S mtDNA ranges from
2 to 8% uncorrected p-distance, except between the lineages of Pindobaçu and P. minuta (Table
2). However, the genetic distance between the population of Pindobaçu and P. minuta for
rhodopsin is 3%.
As each lineage corresponds to specific mountain blocks that are separated by warmer and
more xeric valleys, which may act as gene flow barriers, we considered each one as distinct
species (see below comments about Pindobaçu population). Furthermore, we also observed
morphological differences among these lineages that produced diagnostic characters (see
Taxonomic accounts
Holotype - UFBA 6721, adult male, collected at the Riacho do Dandá (11°26'S, 40°33'W, ca. 800
m above sea level), Parque Estadual das Sete Passagens (an environmental State protected area),
Miguel Calmon Municipality, Bahia State, Brazil, on 22 November 2006, by Rafael Oliveira de
Paratypes - MNRJ 75410 (ex-UFBA 6229, adult female), 75411 (ex-UFBA 6230, adult male),
collected at Parque Estadual das Sete Passagens, Miguel Calmon Municipality, Bahia State,
Brazil, on 22–25 July 2006, by A. Xavier, M.B. Santos, and R. Burger; UFBA 6287, adult male,
104
collected on 12–16 October 2006, by A.L. Xavier, D. Cruz, M. Camardelli, P.M. Fonseca, and
R.O. Abreu; UFBA 6289 (adult male), 6290 (adult female), collected on 12–16 October 2006, by
A.L. Xavier, D. Cruz, M. Camardelli, P.M. Fonseca, and R.O. Abreu; UFBA 6356–6358 (adult
males), 6353–6355 (adult females), MNRJ 75417 (ex-UFBA 6351), UFBA 6349, 6350, 6352
(juveniles), collected on 23 July 2006, by A.L. Xavier, D. Cruz, M. Camardelli, P.M. Fonseca,
and R.O. Abreu; MNRJ 75412–75416 (adult males, ex-UFBA 6718, 6722, 6723, 6726, 6728
[stained and cleared], respectively), UFBA 6716, 6720, 6725, 6727 (adult males), 6724 (adult
female), 6717, 6719 (juveniles), collected on 18–23 November 2006, by A.L. Xavier, D. Cruz,
M. Camardelli, P.M. Fonseca, R.O. Abreu, and W. Fahning; UFBA 7156, 7158 (adult males),
7155, 7157 (juveniles), collected on 20 January 2007, by A. Xavier, D. Cruz, R.A. Abreu, N.
Diagnosis (modified from Napoli et al. 2011) - Diagnosed by the following combination of
characters: (1) small size (adult males SVL 20.4–25.2 mm, adult females 28.3–31.9 mm); (3)
presence of not fused and pointed warts on upper eyelid border, the largest tubercle in the middle
more projected than lateral tubercles; (4) snout rounded from above, vertical or oblique in profile;
(5) a complete sagittal ridge of warts extending from eyelid to sacral region; (6) presence of a
inter-ocular ridge of warts complete or not organized in a row, extending to the border of each
eyelid; (7) eyelid and ocular-dorsal ridge contact point at the posterior third of the eyelid and (8)
outer metacarpal tubercle single or partially grooved; (9) ventral region cream without spots.
Geographic distribution - Proceratophrys minuta was known from Miguel Calmon and
Palmeiras Municipalities, Bahia State. Here, we restrict the occurrence of the species only to the
type locality (Miguel Calmon) (Fig. 3). The population from Palmeiras corresponds to a new
105
Proceratophrys redacta Teixeira, Amaro, Recoder, Vechio and Rodrigues, 2012
Holotype - MZUSP 150266, an adult male, field number MTR 22579, collected at Morro do
Chapéu Municipality, Bahia State, Brazil (11º35'26.02"S, 41º12'32.87"W, 1254 m a.s.l., datum
WGS-84), by M. Teixeira Jr, F. Dal Vechio, I. Prates, R.P. Damasceno and M.T. Rodrigues, on
30 December 2011.
Paratopotypes - MZUSP 150263, 150264, 150265, 150268, 150269, adult males, field numbers
MTR 22474, 22554, 22564, 22582, 22583; MZUSP 150267, adult female, field number MTR
Paratypes - MZUSP 150272, an adult male, field number MTR 22628; MZUSP 150270, 150271,
150273 adult females, field numbers MTR 22623, MTR 22626, MTR 22629. All from an old
Diagnosis - (modified from Teixeira-Jr. et al. 2012) - Diagnosed by the following combination
of characters: (1) small size (26.9–29.7 mm of SVL in males; 33.6–34.9 mm of SVL in females);
(2) snout rounded from above and vertical in profile; (3) presence of not fused and rounded warts
on upper eyelid border, (4) an incomplete sagittal ridge of warts extending from eyelid to sacral
region, interrupted at pre-sacral region; (5) eyelid and ocular-dorsal ridge contact point at the
posterior third of the eyelid; (6) one row of small, pointed, and not fused tubercles in the forearm.
Geographical distribution - Proceratophrys redacta is known only from the type locality (Morro
Proceratophrys minuta Napoli, Cruz, Abreu and Del Grande, 2011 (part).
Figures 4–6
106
Holotype - AAGARDA 6915, adult female, collected at Trilha das Águas Claras, Morrão, Parque
41º29'32"W; ca. 950 m a.s.l.), on January 2013 by F.M. Magalhães, F.A. Juncá, and A.A. Garda.
AAGARDA 6705, AAGARDA 6741, AAGARDA 6814, AAGARDA 6815, AAGARDA 6944,
AAGARDA 6971 (adult females), and AAGARDA 6813 (juvenile) collected with the holotype.
Paratypes – Morro do Pai Inácio, Palmeiras Municipality, Bahia State (12º27'45"S; 41º28'30"W,
ca. 840 m a.s.l.), UFBA 10755 collected on 28 September 2006, and UFBA 10751-10754
Diagnosis - Diagnosed by the following combination of characters: (1) small size (19.3 – 24.5 mm
in males, 26.8 – 32.6 mm in females); (2) snout rounded in dorsal and ventral views, obtuse and
vertical in profile; (3) presence of not fused and pointed warts on upper eyelid border (L 3,1/5,4;
R 3,1/5,4); (4) an incomplete sagittal ridge of warts extending from eyelid to sacral region,
interrupted at pre-sacral region; (5) eyelid and ocular-dorsal ridge contact point at the posterior
third of the eyelid; (6) one row of small and pointed tubercles in the forearm; (7) ventral region
Comparisons with other species - Proceratophrys “Palmeiras” sp. nov. is promptly distinguished
cuspidate palpebral and rostral appendages (present in those species, single, short and multi-
107
P. moheringi, P. phyllostomus, P. pombali, P. sanctaritae, P. subguttata and P. tupinamba by
differs by lacking postocular swellings (present). Proceratophrys “Palmeiras” sp. nov. presents
not fused and pointed warts on upper eyelid border (fused with small points in P. goyana, P.
strussmannae, P. carranca, P. branti and P. concavitympanum; small, rounded and not fused in
vielliardi and P. moratoi; conical and pointed in P. bagnoi; enlarged, pointed and with the largest
tubercle in the middle more projected than lateral tubercles in P. minuta; small and rounded in P.
redacta; multiple short and pointed expansions in P. schirchi). By having an incomplete sagittal
ridge of warts extending from eyelid to sacral region, P. “Palmeiras” sp. nov. can be
absent in P. vielliardi). From P. bagnoi, P. dibernardoi and P. goyana, P. “Palmeiras” sp. nov.
differs by the presence of only one row of tubercles in the forearm (two rows in P. bagnoi and P.
dibernardoi, tubercles not organized in rows in P. goyana). Proceratophrys “Palmeiras” sp. nov.
also differs from P. bagnoi by the eyelid and ocular-dorsal ridge contact point at the posterior
third of the eyelid (medial in P. bagnoi). From P. bagnoi, P. branti, P. carranca, P. redacta, and
P. strussmannae, P. “Palmeiras” sp. nov. differs by the presence of ventral region cream without
spots (dark spots in P. branti and P. carranca, vermiculations in P. bagnoi, gular region blackish,
scattered small, dark-brown dots in the chest in P. redacta, and in the chest and belly in P.
strussmannae).
108
Description of holotype - Head wider than long, head length 30% of SVL, snout rounded in
dorsal and ventral views (Fig. 4), obtuse and slightly vertical in profile (Fig. 5A); nares elliptical
and prominent, canthal crests marked, prominent and covered by small tubercles, no preocular
crests; eye directed anterolateraly, eye diameter 38% of head length; palpebral appendage short,
28% of the head length, eyelid with pointed, elongated and not fused warts, nine warts in the left
eyelid and ten in the right; indistinct tympanum; vomerine teeth in two short rows between the
choannae; frontoparietal crest poorly developed, region between the frontoparietal crest shallow;
ocular-dorsal ridge of warts interrupted at pre-sacral constriction region, and the coccyx end
region with tubercles; two parallel rows of warts in the supra-scapulae region; interocular ridge of
warts present but not organized in a row; the ocular-dorsal ridge and eyelid contact is in the
posterior third region. Dorsal surface, including flanks, arms and legs, with various warts of
different sizes and shapes, one row of very close and pointed forearm tubercles; ventral surfaces,
except hands and feet, covered by numerous small, rounded, uniform warts. Finger lengths I > II
< III > IV (Fig. 5B); interdigital webbing absent; inner metacarpal tubercle large and elliptical;
outer metacarpal tubercle large, single, in a shape of a upside down heart (partially grooved);
scarce small rounded supernumerary tubercles; subarticular tubercles large, nearly rounded,
grooved anteriorly and posteriorly. Thigh length longer than tibia length, the sum of thigh and
tibia lengths 13% of snout-vent length; toe lengths I < II < III < IV > V; inner metatarsal tubercle
large, elliptical, spatulated; outer metatarsal tubercle small, rounded; scarce small rounded
supernumerary tubercles; subarticular tubercles large, nearly rounded, grooved anteriorly and
Measurements of holotype (mm) - SVL 28.8; HL 12.3; HW 8.5; DICS 6.4; IND 1.3; END 2.6;
ED 2.9; UEW 3.5; IOD 2.5; THL 12.7; TL 10.6; FL 17.0; FHL 15.6
109
Color in life - Based on color photographs of the holotype and a paratype (Fig. 6).
Proceratophrys “Palmeiras” sp. nov. presents a variation of the dorsal coloration pattern. The
dorsal color pattern is marbled with several shades of light brown and cream on a dark brown
Color in preservative - Based on the type series. The dorsal surface is dark brown. Two
individuals (AAGARDA 6705, adult female; AAGARDA 6812, adult male) present light brown
spots in the arms and dorsal region. Ventral surface background color cream.
Variation - The number of tubercles on the upper eyelid vary from seven to ten among the
individuals of the type series, and between the eyelids in the same individual. All individuals do
not present a complete ocular-dorsal ridge of warts. However, in some individuals (AAGARDA
6705, AAGARDA 6814, AAGARDA 6971, adult females and AAGARDA 6912, adult male) is
possible to observe this adornment in the dorsal region, even with an interruption of the tubercles
at pre-sacral region. The outer metacarpal tubercle can be completely divided in two
(AAGARDA 6705, AAGARDA 6741, AAGARDA 6791, adult females, AAGARDA 6913,
adult male, AAGARDA 6813, juvenile). Variation in the dorsal and ventral background colors
were described above (color in life and in preservative items). Descriptive statistics of
Natural History - The holotype and type series from Palmeiras Municipality were collected using
pitfall traps in a gallery forest at rock fields, with a stream nearby. The series from Morro do Pai
Inácio were collected in a gallery forest on 01 May 2006 and from September to October of 2006.
The individuals were emitting advertisement calls positioned on the leaf litter and always near (1-
Geographic distribution - Proceratophrys “Palmeiras” sp. nov. is known only from the type
locality at Chapada Diamantina, Palmeiras Municipality, Bahia State, Brazil (Fig. 3).
110
Proceratophrys “Campo Formoso” sp. nov.
Figures 7–9
Holotype - UFMG 6225 (adult female), Campo Formoso Municipality, Bahia State
C. Rievers.
Paratopotypes – UFMG 6224 (adult female), UFMG 6220 (juvenile) collected with the holotype.
Diagnosis – Diagnosed by the following combination of characters: (1) small to medium size
(37.7 – 40.4mm in females); (2) snout rounded in dorsal and ventral views, obtuse and vertical in
profile; (3) absence of prominent warts on upper eyelid border; (4) absence of inter-ocular and
ocular-dorsal ridge of warts (5) dorsal skin smooth, with short and few warts concentrated in the
inter-ocular region and in the upper eyelid; (6) canthal crest poorly developed; (7) one row of
small, rounded and not fused tubercles in the forearm; (8) presence of a prominent rounded
Comparisons with other species – Proceratophrys “Campo Formoso” sp. nov. is promptly
diagnosed from all species of Proceratophrys by the presence of a smooth dorsal skin (dorsum
scattered with several small pointed and/or rounded granules in other Proceratophrys), by the
presence of a small and rounded tubercle in the buccal commissure (longer, prominent and
generally triangular), and by the absence of palpebral ornamentation (presence of single uni-
cuspidate palpebral appendage, postocular swellings or a large marginal row of tubercles in the
eyelid).
ridge of warts differs Proceratophrys “Campo Formoso” sp. nov. from P. bagnoi, P. goyana and
dibernardoi and P. goyana, P. “Campo Formoso” sp. nov. differs by the presence of only one
row of tubercles in the forearm (two rows in P. bagnoi, P. concavitypanum, P. cristiceps and P.
dibernardoi, tubercles not organized in rows in P. goyana). The presence of ventral region cream,
without spots or vermiculations, differs P. “Campo Formoso” sp. nov. from P. branti, P.
carranca, P. redacta and P. strussmannae (dark spots in P. branti and P. carranca, gular region
blackish, scattered small, dark-brown dots in the chest in P. redacta, and in the chest and belly in
P. strussmannae).
Description of holotype - Head wider than long, head length 28% of SVL, snout rounded in
dorsal and ventral views (Fig. 7), obtuse and vertical in profile (Fig. 8A); nares elliptical and
prominent, canthal crests poorly marked and smooth, no preocular crests; eye directed
anterolateraly, eye diameter 19% of head length and 51% of the palpebral appendage; eyelid
without prominent warts; indistinct tympanum; vomerine teeth in two short rows between the
choannae; frontoparietal crests poorly developed; region between frontoparietal crests shallow;
absence of inter-ocular and ocular-dorsal ridge of warts. Dorsal surface smooth, without
prominent warts, one row of rounded and not fused forearm tubercles, reaching the hands; ventral
surfaces, except hands and feet, covered by numerous small, rounded, uniform warts. Finger
lengths I > II < III > IV (Fig. 8B); interdigital webbing absent; inner metacarpal tubercle large
and elliptical; outer metacarpal divided in two oval parts; scarce small rounded supernumerary
tubercles; subarticular tubercles large, nearly rounded, grooved anteriorly and posteriorly. Thigh
length longer than tibia length, the sum of thigh and tibia lengths 14.7% of snout-vent length; toe
lengths I < II < III < IV > V; inner metatarsal tubercle large, elliptical, espatulated; outer
112
metatarsal tubercle small, rounded, presence of a prominent rounded tubercle on the tarsus;
scarce small rounded supernumerary tubercles; subarticular tubercles large, nearly rounded,
Color in life of the holotype - Based on photographs of the holotype (Fig. 9). Dorsal background
color grey, maculated with irregular stains dark-brown and cream looking like dead leaves. Three
cream bands from eye to upper lip. One transverse cream band in the inter-ocular region. Two
transverse dark-brown bars on the tibia. Fingers, toes and ventral surface are cream.
Color in preservative of the holotype – Dorsal background color light-grey, maculated with
irregular stains dark-grey. One transverse light-grey band in the inter-ocular region. Three light-
grey bands from eye to upper lip. Two transverse grey bars on the tibia. Fingers, toes and ventral
Measurements of holotype (mm) - SVL 37.7; HL 10.7; HW 15.3; DICS 7.0; IND 1.8; END 3.4;
ED 4.4; UEW 4.1; IOD 2.1; THL 14.4; TL 12.5; FL 19.6; FHL 15.9.
Variation – Specimens are congruent with respect to morphological characters. The dorsal
background color varies in adult specimens from grey to cream. The irregular stains in the dorsal
Geographic distribution - Proceratophrys “Campo Formoso” sp. nov. is known only from the
type locality at Chapada Diamantina, Campo Formoso Municipality, Bahia State, Brazil (Fig. 3).
Proceratophrys sp.
Figures 10–11
113
Diagnosis - Diagnosed by the following combination of characters: (1) small size (23.6 – 26.0 mm
in males, 30.3 – 33.9 mm in females); (2) snout rounded in dorsal and ventral views, obtuse and
vertical in profile; (3) presents enlarged, pointed, not fused, and with the largest tubercle in the
middle more projected than lateral tubercles on the upper eyelid border (L 4,1/5,3; R 4,1/5,3); (4)
presence of a prominent row of tubercles from the middle of the eye to the arm insertion; (5) a
complete sagittal ridge of warts extending from eyelid to sacral region, connected at pre-sacral
region; (6) eyelid and ocular-dorsal ridge contact point at the posterior third of the eyelid; (7) one
row of small and pointed tubercles in the forearm (or not organized in row); (8) ventral region
cream without spots (males present gular and chest region scattered with brown spots).
cuspidate palpebral and rostral appendages (present in those species, single, short and multi-
lacking postocular swellings (present). Proceratophrys sp. presents enlarged, pointed, not fused,
and with the largest tubercle in the middle more projected than lateral tubercles (fused with small
rounded and not fused in P. cururu and P. rotundipalpebra; slightly fused without appendage in
P. huntingtoni, P. vielliardi and P. moratoi; conical and pointed in P. bagnoi; small and rounded
114
in P. redacta; multiple short and pointed expansions in P. schirchi). By having a complete
sagittal ridge of warts extending from eyelid to sacral region, Proceratophrys sp. can be
redacta, and absent in P. vielliardi). From P. bagnoi and P. dibernardoi, Proceratophrys sp.
differs by the presence of only one row of tubercles in the forearm or not organized in row (two
rows in P. bagnoi and P. dibernardoi). Proceratophrys sp. also differs from P. bagnoi by the
eyelid and ocular-dorsal ridge contact point at the posterior third of the eyelid (medial in P.
Proceratophrys sp. differs by the presence of ventral region cream without spots, males with
brown spots in the gular and chest region (dark spots in P. branti and P. carranca, vermiculations
in P. bagnoi, gular region blackish, scattered small, dark-brown dots in the chest in P. redacta,
prominent row of tubercles from the middle of the eye to the arm insertion (absent or tubercles
with the same size of the other from the body not organized in row in P. “Palmeiras”). From P.
redacta, Proceratophrys sp. can also be distinguished by its smaller size in adult males (SVL
Comments. Although the uncorrected p-distance for rhodopsin between Proceratophrys sp. and
P. minuta is 3%, the uncorrected p-distance for 16S is 0% and so far we have not found
morphologic characteristics that distinguish them. Because we do not have enough material to
access diagnostic characters to distinguish these two populations, we choose to keep the
Discussion
115
Much of the species diversity of Proceratophrys from Chapada Diamantina is unknown,
what may have important implications for conservation because many genetically distinct taxa
have small ranges and usually are restricted to single mountaintops (Salerno et al. 2012;
Firkowski et al. 2016). Proper identification and recognition of independent evolutionary lineages
is imperative to conserve biodiversity (Shepard et al., 2011). Despite its importance for
conservation, northern Espinhaço in the Bahia State (Chapada Diamantina) remains virtually
discrepant, especially related to the temperature and humidity. This disparity promotes a sky
island situation (He and Jiang, 2014), and may create barriers to gene flow. Some amphibians
occurring in mountain ranges present such pattern of distribution, such as the Plethodon
salamanders in the Ouachita Mountains, United States (Shepard and Burbrink, 2008), treefrogs of
the genus Tepuhyla in the Tepuis, northern South America (Salerno et al., 2012), and species of
the genus Brachycephalus and Melanophryniscus from Serra da Mar, in the southern Brazilian
Atlantic Forest (Firkowski et al., 2016). Our study is the first to indicate a similar pattern for
Chapada Diamantina. Although many species are recognized for this area, it is unknown if these
mountains act as sky islands for other anuran species in this region. Some groups deserve special
attention such as the recently described Bokermannohyla species (Lugli and Haddad, 2006a,
2006b, Napoli and Juncá, 2006, Leite et al., 2012), which present similar distribution patterns.
This type of information is essential for efficient conservation initiatives because many species at
Correspondence between genetic and morphological data can easily support the
recognition of species or lineages as distinct taxa, and provide insights into patterns of
morphological diversification during the evolutionary history of this clade. However, in some
116
cases, speciation is not accompanied by morphological changes, because the intraspecific
recognition is not always visual. This might be the case of Proceratophrys sp. “Pindobaçu”,
which we have not observed morphological differences with respect to P. minuta (see comments
above). Besides that, the mechanisms that generate cryptic speciation are still unknown (Bickford
et al. 2007). Thus, integrative taxonomy approaches are required and recommended once the use
of various sources of characters may provide a better resolution of the taxonomic and
References
Bickford, D., D.J. Lohman, N.S. Sodhi, P.K.L. Ng, R. Meier, K. Winker, K.K. Ingram, I. Das.
2007. Cryptic species as a window on diversity and conservation. Trends in Ecology &
Evolution. 22:148–155.
Bossuyt, F., M.C. Milinkovitch. 2000. Convergent adaptive radiations in Madagascan and Asian
ranid frogs reveal covariation between larval and adult traits. Proceedings of the National
Brandão, R.A., U. Caramaschii, W. Vaz-Silva, L.A. Campos. 2013. Three new species of
Costa, H.C., D.J. Santana, F. Leal, R. Koroiva, P.C.A. Garcia. 2016. A new species of Helicops
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1655/HERPETOLOGICA-D-15-00059.
Costa, W.J.E.M., P.F. Amorim, J.L.O. Mattos. 2012. Species delimitation in annual killifishes
117
(Cyprinodontiformes: Rivulidae): implications for taxonomy and conservation.
Cruz, C.A.G., M.F. Napoli. 2010. A new species of smooth horned frog, genus Proceratophrys
Darriba, D., G.L. Taboada, R. Doallo, D. Posada. 2012. jModelTest 2: more models, new
de Sá, F.P., C. Canedo, M.L. Lyra, C.F.B. Haddad. 2015. A new species of Hylodes (Anura,
Derby, O.A. 1906. The Serra do Espinhaço, Brazil. The Journal of Geology. 14(5):374–401.
Dias, P.H.S., R.C. Amaro, A.M.P.T. Carvalho-e-Silva, M.T. Rodrigues. 2013. Two new species
http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.3682.2.5.
Drummond, A.J., M.A. Suchard, D. Xie, A. Rambaut. 2012. Bayesian Phylogenetics with
BEAUti and the BEAST 1.7. Molecular Biology and Evolution 29:1969–1973. Doi:
http://dx.doi.org/doi:10.1093/molbev/mss075.
Edgar, R.C. 2004. MUSCLE: Multiple sequence alignment with high accuracy and high
Firkowski, C.R., M.R. Bornschein, L.F. Ribeiro, M.R. Pie. 2016. Species delimitation, phylogeny
Fouquet, A., D. Loebmann, S. Castroviejo-Fisher, J.M. Padial, V.G.D. Orrico, M.L. Lyra, I.J.
Roberto, P.J.R. Kok, C.F.B. Haddad, M.T. Rodrigues. 2012. From Amazonia to the
118
Atlantic Forest: molecular phylogeny of Phyzelaphryninae frogs reveals unexpected
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ympev.2012.07.012.
Frost, D.R. 2016. Amphibian Species of the World: an Online Reference. Version 6.0 Access: 12
Garda, A.A., D.J. Santana, V.D. São-Pedro. 2010. Taxonomic characterization of Paradoxical
Gehara, M.C., C. Canedo, C.F.B. Haddad, M. Vences. 2013. From widespread to microendemic:
14(5):973–982.
Giaretta, A.A., P.S. Bernarde, M.N.D.C. Kokubum. 2000. A new species of Proceratophrys
(Anura: Leptodactylidae) from the Amazon rain forest. Journal of Herpetology. 173–178.
Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1565412.
Giugliano, L.G., C. de Campos Nogueira, P.H. Valdujo, R.G. Collevatti, G.R. Colli. 2013.
Scripta. 42:473–487.
Guicking, D., U. Joger, M. Wink. 2009. Cryptic diversity in a Eurasian water snake (Natrix
Kamino, L.H.Y., A.T. Oliveira-Filho, J.R. Stehmann. 2008. Relações florísticas entre as
Leite, F.S.F., T.L. Pezzuti, P.C.A. Garcia. 2012. A new species of the Bokermannohyla
pseudopseudis group from the Espinhaço range, central Bahia, Brazil (Anura: Hylidae).
Herpetologica. 68(3):401–409.
Leite, F.S.F., F.A. Juncá, P.C. Eterovick. 2008. Status do conhecimento, endemismo e
176.
Lugli, L., C.F. Haddad. 2006a. A new species of the Bokermannohyla pseudopseudis group from
Lugli, L., C.F. Haddad. 2006b. New species of Bokermannohyla (Anura, Hylidae) from Central
Machado, T., V.X. Silva, M.J.D.J Silva. 2014. Phylogenetic relationships within Bothrops
Mângia, S.; D.J. Santana, C.A.G. Cruz, R.N. Feio. 2014. Taxonomic revision of Proceratophrys
Napoli, M.F., C.A.G. Cruz, R.O. Abreu, M.L. Del-Grande. 2011. A new species of
(Amphibia: Anura: Hylidae) from Chapada Diamantina, state of Bahia, Brazil. Zootaxa.
1244:57–68.
Palumbi, S., A. Martin, S. Romano, W.O. Mcmillan, L. Stice, G. Grabowski. 2002. The simple
Prado, G.M., J.P. Pombal-Jr. 2008. Espécies de Proceratophrys Miranda–Ribeiro, 1920 com
Prado, C.P.A., C.F.B. Haddad, K.R. Zamudio. 2012. Cryptic lineages and Pleistocene population
http://www.webcitation.org/6mjItaSRx.
Rocha, W.J.S.F., J.M. Chaves, C.C. Rocha, J.B. Lobão. 2005. Unidades de paisagem da Chapada
F.A., Funch, L., Rocha, W., Ed., Brasília, Ministério do Meio Ambiente.
Salerno, P.E., S.R. Ron, J.C. Señaris, F.J. Rojas- Runjaic, B.P. Noonan, D.C. Cannatella. 2012.
Ancient tepui summits harbor young rather than old lineages of endemic frogs. Evolution.
66(10):3000–3013.
Sam Brooks, J., E.F. Fritsch, T. Maniatis. 1989. Molecular cloning: A laboratory manual, Cold
Santana, D.J., A.B. Barros, R. Pontes, R.N. Feio. 2015. A New Species of Glassfrog Genus
Herpetologica. 71(4):289–298.
121
Shepard, D.B., F.T. Burbrink. 2008. Lineage diversification and historical demography of a sky
island salamander, Plethodon ouachitae, from the Interior Highlands. Molecular Ecology.
17(24):5315–5335.
Shepard, D.B., K.J. Irwin, F.T. Burbrink. 2011. Morphological differentiation in ouachita
Evolutionary Genetics Analysis version 6.0. Molecular Biology and Evolution 30:2725–
Teixeira-Jr, M., R.C. Amaro, R.S. Recoder, F.D. Vechio, M.T. Rodrigues. 2012. A new dwarf
Vasconcelos, R., A. Perera, P. Geniez, D.J. Harris, S. Carranza. 2012. An integrative taxonomic
revision of the Tarentola geckos (Squamata, Phyllodactylidae) of the Cape Verde Islands.
Vences, M., M.C. Gehara, J. Kohler, F. Glaw. 2012. Description of a new Malagasy treefrog
(Boophis) occurring syntopically with its sister species, and a plea for studies on non-
Werneck, F.P., T. Gamble, G.R. Colli, M.T. Rodrigues, J.J.W. Sites. 2012 Deep diversification
and long-term persistence in the South American 'dry diagonal': integrating continent-
122
Appendix
Specimens examined
16487-89, 16591-600.
Aripuanã: MZUFV 9552, 9554-56; Paranaíta: ZUEC 14505-06, 16011-15, 16719, 21201. PARÁ.
Piranhas: UFBA 8-9, 43; Traipu, Serra da Mão: UFAL 8968, 9035-36, 9043, 9196, 9510, 9656.
BAHIA. Caetité: UFMG 5851; Paulo Afonso: UFPB 12114, 12119, 12122-23, 12128. CEARÁ.
Aiuaba: AAGARDA 5111, 5132. URCA 7366, 7385, 7393, 7396, 7408, 7416, 7418. Barbalha:
URCA 4293, 4571. Baturité: UFC3722. Crateús: URCA 4744. General Sampaio: UFC 5351.
Itapipoca: AAGARDA 9817, 10453-55. Ipu: UFPB 6117-19, 6121, 6123, 6125. Jaguaribe:
AAGARDA 10176-79, 10286, 10398-402. Milagres: URCA 106, 142-43. Pacajus: UFC 4562.
Paracuru: URCA 5773-74. Pentecoste: UFC 5001, 5018-19, 5193. São Gonçalo do Amarante:
URCA 5669, 5775, 5860. Santa Quitéria: UFPB 10651, 10753-58. Serra das Almas: UFC 32,
131, 213, 224, 3319, 3464, 3467-68, 3470. Serra de Ibiapaba: UFPB 6117-26. Ubajara, Parque
Nacional de Ubajara: AAGARDA 10672, 10695, 10698-99, 10703, 10707-09, 10782, 10796,
10907, 10909, 10911-14, 10961, 10974, 10981, 10983. Várzea da Conceição: UFPB 9661, 9665,
9667. PARAÍBA. Araruna: UFPB 8427, 8438, 8447, 8451, 8453, 8456, 8465, 8467, 8469, 8487;
Boa vista: UFPB 1573-81; Cabaceiras: UFPB 6691-94, 11271, 11274; São José dos Cordeiros:
UFPB 5866. PERNAMBUCO. Arco Verde: UFPB 9678-82, 9684, 9686-88, 9692, 9701;
123
Betânea: UFC 3331; Bezerros: UFPB 7098; Exú: URCA 1462-63, UFPB 7214-17; Nascente:
UFPB 9670; Ouricuri: URCA 2988-89; Parque Nacional do Catimbau: AAGARDA 7706-12,
7747, 7760-61, 7765, 7799, 7802, 7804-05, 7824, 7886, 7975, 8056, 8362, 8417, 8435, 8437-40,
8450, 8463; Serra Talhada: UFPB 9656, 9659, 9660; Trindade: UFPB 974, 9673-77. PIAUÍ.
Floriano: UFPI 214-16, 222, 236; Piripiri: UFPB 10340, 10342-46; Ribeiro Gonçalves: URCA
2358. RIO GRANDE DO NORTE. ESEC Seridó: AAGARDA 5447, 5528, 5583, 5689, 6061,
6790. João Câmara: AAGARDA 8913-15, 9806-11; URCA 422, 427, 483-85, 487-88, 493, 498,
501. Macaíba, Escola Agrícola de Jundiaí: AAGARDA 1013-14, 1019-20, 1753-71, 1773, 1776,
1778, 1786-91, 1935, 2495-96, 2583, 3757, 5447, 5528, 5554, 5583, 5689, 6061, 6790, 8866-71,
Proceratophrys minuta: BRAZIL. BAHIA. Miguel Calmon, Parque Estadual das Sete Passagens:
Proceratophrys redacta: BRAZIL. BAHIA. Morro do Chapéu: PUC-MG 7910-11, 7913; UFMG
6049-57.
Proceratophrys schirchi: BRAZIL. MINAS GERAIS. Santa Maria do Salto: PUC-MG 4021.
124
Figures
Figure 1. Bayesian tree topology obtained from mitochondrial 16S gene. Posterior probability
Figure 2. Bayesian tree topology obtained from nuclear (rhodopsin) gene. Posterior probability
125
Figure 3. Geographic distribution of Proceratophrys from Chapada Diamantina, Bahia State,
Brazil.
Figure 4. Proceratophrys “Palmeiras” sp. nov. (holotype, adult female, AAGARDA 6915, SLV
28.8 mm): (A) dorsal and (B) ventral views. Photos: B.F. Santos.
126
Figure 5. Proceratophrys “Palmeiras” sp. nov. (holotype, adult female, AAGARDA 6915, SLV
28.8 mm): (A) lateral view of the head; ventral views of (B) hand and (C) foot. Photos: B.F.
Santos.
Figure 6. Live specimens of Proceratophrys “Palmeiras” sp. nov.: (A) adult female (holotype,
AAGARDA 6915), and (B) adult individual from the type series, from Palmeiras Municipality,
127
Figure 7. Proceratophrys “Formoso” sp. nov. (holotype, adult female, UFMG 6225, SLV 37.7
mm): (A) dorsal and (B) ventral views. Photos: B.F. Santos.
Figure 8. Proceratophrys “Formoso” sp. nov. (holotype, adult female, UFMG 6225, SLV 37.7
mm): (A) lateral view of the head; ventral views of (B) hand and (C) foot. Photos: B.F. Santos.
128
Figure 9. Live specimens of Proceratophrys “Formoso” sp. nov.: (A) adult female (holotype,
UFMG 6225), and (B) adult female (UFMG 6224) from Campo Formoso Municipality, Bahia
Figure 10. Proceratophrys sp. (adult male, UFMG 6055, SLV 26.0 mm): (A) dorsal and (B)
129
Figure 11. Live specimens of Proceratophrys sp.: adult females from Pindobaçu Municipality,
130
Table 1. Information of all specimens examined in the molecular section of this study (16s rRNA and Rhodopsin).
Genbank
Species Municipality, State Voucher accession number Reference
Rhodopsin 16S
Proceratophrys “Palmeiras” sp. nov. Palmeiras, Bahia AAGARDA6705 * * This study
Proceratophrys “Pindobaçu” sp. nov. Pindobaçu, Bahia FSFL4802 * * This study
Proceratophrys “ Campo Formoso” sp. nov. Campo Formoso, Bahia FSFL4837 * * This study
Proceratophrys concavitympanum Aripuanã, Mato Grosso * * KX858855 This study
Proceratophrys concavitympanum Palmas, Tocantins AF1094 KF214207 FJ685694 Amaro et al. 2009
Proceratophrys moratoi Itirapina, São Paulo CFBH6515 KF214212 FJ685689 Amaro et al. 2009
Proceratophrys tupinamba Ilha Grande, Rio de Janeiro MNRJ54541 KF214236 KF214158 Dias et al. 2013
Proceratophrys goyana Petrolina de Goiás, Goiás AF1188 KF214210 FJ685697 Amaro et al. 2009
Proceratophrys mantiqueira Araponga, Minas Gerais MZUFV10139 KF214222 KF214143 Dias et al. 2013
Proceratophrys avelinoi Misiones, Argentina DB1246 KF214204 FJ685691 Amaro et al. 2009
Proceratophrys laticeps Linhares, Espírito Santo MTR12156 KF214211 FJ685698 Amaro et al. 2009
Proceratophrys boiei São Paulo, São Paulo AF1587 KF214206 FJ685693 Amaro et al. 2009
Proceratophrys itamari Campos do Jordão, São Paulo MZUSP135186 KF214226 KF214147 Dias et al. 2013
Proceratophrys izecksohni Paraty, Rio de Janeiro MNRJ64584 KF214235 KF214157 Dias et al. 2013
Proceratophrys belzebul São Sebastião, São Paulo MTR9456 KF214233 KF214233 Dias et al. 2013
Proceratophrys melanopogon São José do Barreiro, São Paulo TG3295 KF214228 KF214149 Dias et al. 2013
Proceratophrys pombali Bertioga, São Paulo AF1988 KF214223 KF214148 Dias et al. 2013
Proceratophrys cururu Cardeal Mota, Minas Gerais FSFL580 KF214209 FJ685696 Amaro et al. 2009
Proceratophrys appendiculata São Sebastião, São Paulo MNRJ53936 KF214231 FJ685690 Amaro et al. 2009
Proceratophrys bigibbosa Misiones, Argentina BD2313 KF214215 FJ685692 Amaro et al. 2009
Proceratophrys renalis Brejo Madre de Deus, Pernambuco ZUFRJ8682 KF214213 FJ685700 Amaro et al. 2009
Proceratophrys schirchi Santa Tereza, Espírito Santo 371 KF214214 FJ685701 Amaro et al. 2009
Proceratophrys cristiceps Macaíba, Rio Grande do Norte AAGARDA1754 KX855989 This study
Proceratophrys minuta Miguel Calmon, Bahia MZUSP146499 KF214215 JX982965 Teixeira-Jr et al. 2012
Proceratophrys redacta Morro do Chapéu, Bahia MZUSP150266 KF214216 JX982967 Teixeira-Jr et al. 2012
131
Odontophrynus americanus Poços de Caldas, Minas Gerais AF665 KF214201 FJ685686 Amaro et al. 2009
Macrogenioglottus alipioi Jussari, Bahia AF919 KF214199 FJ685684 Amaro et al. 2009
Cycloramphus acangatan Cotia, São Paulo AF1605 KF214198 FJ685683 Amaro et al. 2009
* Submitted in Genbank (numbers not available yet)
Table 2. Uncorrected p-distances of mtDNA 16S (inferior diagonal) and nuDNA rhodopsin (superior diagonal) among Proceratophrys
cristiceps, P. minuta, P. redacta, Proceratophrys sp. “Pindobaçu”, P. “Campo Formoso” sp. nov., and P. “Palmeiras” sp. nov.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
1) P. cristiceps - 0.03 0.02 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.03
2) P. minuta 0.06 - 0.00 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.00
3) P. redacta 0.07 0.03 - 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.00
4) P. schirchi 0.07 0.07 0.08 - 0.03 0.03 0.02
5) P. sp. “Pindobaçu” 0.06 0.00 0.03 0.07 - 0.00 0.03
6) P. “Campo Formoso” sp. nov. 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.07 - 0.03
7) P. “Palmeiras” sp. nov. 0.07 0.03 0.03 0.07 0.04 0.07 -
132
Table 3. Measurements (mm) of specimens of Proceratophrys minuta, P. redacta, P. “Palmeiras” sp. nov., P. sp. “Pindobaçu”, and P.
P. minuta P. redacta P. “Palmeiras” sp. nov. Proceratophrys sp. P. “Formoso” sp. nov.
Males (n=18) Females (n=6) Males (n=6) Males (n=4) Males (n=3) Females (n=4) Males (n=4) Females (n=3) Females (n=2)
22.7 ± 1.2 30.3 ± 1.5 28.4 24.3 ± 1.2 31.8 ± 1.9 34.4 23.8 ± 1.2 31.2 ± 1.9 24.3 ± 1.2
SLV
20.4 – 25.2 28.3 – 31.9 26.9 – 29.7 23.6 – 26.0 30.3 – 34.0 33.5 – 34.9 23.6 – 26.0 30.3 – 34.0 23.6 – 26.0
11.1 ± 0.6 14.5 ± 1.1 13.0 11.1 ± 0.5 14.1 ± 0.8 15.7 11.0 ± 0.5 14.5 ± 0.8 11.1 ± 0.5
HW
10.4 – 12.9 13.5 – 16.1 12.2 – 13.8 10.7 – 11.8 13.2 – 14.6 15.2 – 16.2 10.7 – 11.8 13.2 – 14.6 10.7 – 11.8
9.6 ± 0.4 12.1 ± 0.6 11.6 8.9 ± 1.7 9.7 ± 0.7 13.3 8.4 ± 1.7 9.9 ± 0.7 8.9 ± 1.7
HL
9.0 – 10.4 11.5 – 13.0 10.8 – 12.4 11.4 – 7.4 8.9 – 10.2 2.7 – 14.1 7.4 – 11.4 8.9 – 10.2 11.4 – 7.4
5.5 ± 0.2 7.0 ± 0.1 5.5 ± 0.2 7.0 ± 0.1 5.5 ± 0.2
DICS * * * *
5.1 – 5.7 6.9 – 7.1 5.1 – 5.7 6.9 – 7.1 5.1 – 5.7
1.7 ± 0.3 2.3 ± 0.2 1.9 1.6 ± 0.2 1.6 ± 0.2 2.1 1.6 ± 0.2 1.6 ± 0.2 1.6 ± 0.2
IND
1.4 – 2.5 2.0 – 2.5 1.7 – 2.2 1.4 – 1.8 1.4 – 1.8 2.0 – 2.5 1.4 – 1.8 1.4 – 1.8 1.4 – 1.8
2.1 ± 0.2 2.7 ± 0.3 2.5 2.3 ± 0.2 2.8 ± 0.5 2.9 2.3 ± 0.2 2.9 ± 0.5 2.3 ± 0.2
END
1.5 – 2.5 2.5 – 3.1 2.4 – 2.6 2.2 – 2.6 2.3 – 3.3 2.7 – 3.1 2.2 – 2.6 2.3 – 3.3 2.2 – 2.6
2.9 ± 0.2 3.7 ± 0.1 4.1 2.9 ± 0.3 3.3 ± 0.1 4.6 2.9 ± 0.3 3.9 ± 0.1 2.9 ± 0.3
ED
2.7 – 3.2 3.5 – 3.8 3.7 – 4.4 2.6 – 3.3 3.1 – 3.4 4.5 – 4.7 2.6 – 3.3 3.1 – 3.4 2.6 – 3.3
3.4 ± 0.3 4.3 ± 0.3 3.4 3.7 ± 0.4 4.6 ± 0.4 4 3.8 ± 0.3 4.9 ± 0.4 3.7 ± 0.4
UEW
3.0 – 3.8 3.9 – 4.7 3.3 – 3.7 3.2 – 4.0 4.2 – 4.9 3.8 – 4.2 3.2 – 4.0 4.2 – 4.9 3.2 – 4.0
2.7 ± 0.2 3.3 ± 0.3 3 2.1 ± 0.3 2.5 ± 0.1 3.4 2.1 ± 0.3 2.5 ± 0.1 2.1 ± 0.3
IOD
2.3 – 3.0 3.0 – 3.7 2.4 – 3.4 1.8 – 2.3 2.4 – 2.5 3.1 – 3.8 1.8 – 2.3 2.4 – 2.5 1.8 – 2.3
9.9 ± 0.5 12.9 ± 0.7 12.1 10.3 ± 0.5 12.4 ± 0.5 13.9 10.2 ± 0.5 12.1 ± 0.5 10.3 ± 0.5
THL
8.8 – 10.5 12.0 – 13.7 11.3 – 12.8 9.9 – 11.1 12.0 – 12.9 13.1 – 14.5 9.9 – 11.1 12.0 – 12.9 9.9 – 11.1
8.8 ± 0.3 11.5 ± 0.7 10.2 9.0 ± 0.5 11.4 ± 0.4 12 9.2 – 0.5 11.1 ± 0.4 9.0 ± 0.5
TL
8.3 – 9.5 10.5 – 12.3 9.8 – 10.5 8.4 – 9.4 11.1 – 11.8 11.9 – 12.2 8.3 – 9.4 10.1 – 11.8 8.4 – 9.4
14.0 ± 0.4 18.1 ± 0.9 14.4 ± 0.4 18.5 ± 0.5 14.3 ± 0.4 18.4 ± 0.5 14.4 ± 0.4
FL * *
13.2 – 15.0 17.0 – 19.2 14.0 – 15.0 18.1 – 19.0 14.0 – 15.0 18.1 – 19.0 14.0 – 15.0
12.4 ± 0.6 15.6 ± 0.4 12.3 ± 0.7 15.5 ± 0.4 12.4 ± 0.6
FHL * * * *
11.7 – 13.1 16.1 – 15.3 11.7 – 13.1 15.3 – 16.1 11.7 – 13.1
133
Artigo IV. Mângia, S., Oliveira, E.F., Santana, D.J., Koroiva, R. and Garda, A.A. Population
genetics and historical demography of the Caatinga frog Proceratophrys cristiceps (Müller,
134
Population genetics and historical demography of the Caatinga frog Proceratophrys
Sarah Mângia1,*, Eliana F. Oliveira2, Diego José Santana2, Ricardo Koroiva2, Fernando Paiva2,
Adrian A. Garda3
1
Universidade Federal da Paraı́ ba, Departamento de Sistemática e Ecologia, João Pessoa, PB,
Brazil
2
Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso do Sul, Instituto de Biociências, Cidade Universitária,
135
Abstract: The Caatinga is characterized by deciduous xerophytic and thorny vegetation, and by a
severe water deficit caused by intense and unpredictable dry seasons. Around 210,000 years ago,
pulses of moister climate allowed the replacement of part of the semi-arid vegetation of the
Caatinga by forests. These climatic fluctuations during the Pleistocene may have affected the
geographic genetic structure and demographic history on endemic Caatinga taxa. Herein, we
evaluate geographic structure, population genetics, and demographic history of the widespread
widely distributed in the Caatinga, with low levels of genetic diversity for mitochondrial and
nuclear genes. Our results indicate that P. cristiceps experienced significant variation on its
effective population size, with a rapid and recent expansion throughout the upper Pleistocene.
Our data support the hypothesis that the fauna from the Caatinga may have experienced and been
Introduction
The Caatinga biome was first considered a homogeneous landscape poor in biodiversity
(Vanzolini, 1963). This biased view likely contributed to the fact that most studies on Neotropical
biodiversity have focused on Rainforests (Furley and Metcalfe, 2007). The Caatinga is
characterized by deciduous xerophytic and thorny vegetation such as cactus, shrubs, and small
trees, and by a severe water deficit caused by intense and unpredictable dry seasons (Cole, 1960;
Ab’Saber, 1998). These current environmental conditions were not permanent in the past, once
the Caatinga passed through wetter climates associated with humid vegetation during the
Pleistocene (Auler et al., 2004). Around 210,000 years ago, pulses of moister climate allowed the
occurrence of wetter periods and the existence of rainforest migration routes in this xeric domain
are widely recognized based on a variety of evidences (e.g. pollen records – De Oliveira et al.,
1999; dated fossil bats bones – Czaplewski and Cartelle, 1998). However, the precise timing of
that drove phylogeographic patterns of specific taxonomic groups. However, studies focused on
typical species from the Caatinga are unusual and the knowledge about the processes that drove
the diversification of its biota is still scarce (e.g. Nascimento et al., 2013; Magalhães et al., 2014;
Werneck et al., 2015; Thomé et al., 2016; Fonseca et al., manuscript submitted; São Pedro et al.,
manuscript in prep). Some studies on rainforests have evoked climatic variations during the
Pleistocene as a key driver of the origin and maintenance of local biodiversity (Carnaval and
Moritz, 2008; Damasceno et al., 2014). Most the studies, however, have shown that the
diversification is older, and that the Pleistocene climatic fluctuations affected mostly the
demographic history (Maciel et al., 2010; Prado et al., 2012; Werneck et al., 2012; Nascimento et
al., 2013; Oliveira et al., 2015; Werneck et al., 2015; Gehara et al., manuscript submitted). Thus,
study the taxonomic groups typical from the Caatinga is paramount to understand when and
Proceratophrys cristiceps (Müller, 1983) is an anuran typical from the Caatinga and is
widely distributed in this domain (Mângia et al., manuscript 1). This species has an explosive-
breeding behavior and uses temporary or permanent sandy bottom streams as a reproductive site.
During the dry season, individuals bury themselves, emerging after the first rains to reproduce.
Herein, we evaluate the geographic structure and the genetic diversity of P. cristiceps within the
Caatinga domain. Given that the Caatinga is predicted to have expanded and contracted in
137
response to Pleistocene climatic fluctuations (Wang et al., 2004), we examine historical
demography of P. cristiceps in order to test for corresponding increases and decreases in effective
population size.
Caatinga biome and adjacent areas (Figure 1). We extracted genomic DNA from muscle or liver
samples using the phenol-chloroform protocol (Sam Brooks et al., 1989). We used polymerase
chain reaction (PCR) to amplify four loci. Details about loci, primers and PCR protocols are
listed in Table 1. PCR products were delivered to Macrogen (Seoul, Korea) for sequencing. First,
we sequenced all individual for one mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) gene (16S). For nuclear genes
(nuDNA), we sequenced a subset of individuals (49 for POMC, 42 for CRYb, and 35 for
rhodopsin), which we chosen to represent a wide geographic range within the Caatinga domain.
We checked and edited the resulting sequences by aligning forward and reverse reads in
Geneious 9.1.2 with MUSCLE algorithm using default parameters (Edgar, 2004). We found gaps
in 16S gene and to avoid possible bias we removed them using Gblocks program (Castresana,
pair of alleles for nuclear genes, we used the PHASE algorithm (Stephens et al., 2001)
implemented in the DnaSP 5.10 software (Librado and Rozas, 2009) using default options. We
considered in the following analyses only samples with probability of pairs of alleles in
heterozygosity higher than 80%. We deposited all sequences in GenBank (access numbers not
available yet).
138
Population structure
or more populations along its distribution. We used GENELAND 4.0.3 program (Guillot et al.,
2005a,b) implemented in R platform (R Development Core Team 2014). This analysis evaluates
the presence of population structure in a group of geo-referenced haplotypic data by inferring and
locating genetic discontinuities. We used two different haplotype data set, one with just nuDNA
data and another with both mtDNA and nuDNA data. The most probable number of population
units (k) was determined by a Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) method, with 10 repetitions
We calculated haplotype number (h), haplotype diversity (Hd), and nucleotide diversity
(π) for each molecular marker using DnaSP 5.10 program (Librado and Rozas, 2009). In order to
explore the relationship among haplotypes, we estimated haplotype networks for each marker in
Haploviewer (Salzburger et al., 2011) using Bayesian gene trees constructed in BEAST v.1.8
software (Drummond et al., 2012). To generate gene trees, we selected the model of nucleotide
substitution for each gene based on the Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC) with jModelTest
(Darriba et al., 2012). The best-fit models were K80 for 16S and rhodopsin, JC for CRYb, and
HKY + I for POMC. Then, we performed a run with 3 x 106 generations, sampling every 1,000
steps using a Yule Process prior tree. We checked for stationarity by visually inspecting trace
plots and ensuring that all values for effective sample size were above 200 in Tracer v1.5
(Rambaut and Drummond, 2007). The first 20% of sampled genealogies were discarded as burn-
in and the most credible clade was inferred with TreeAnnotator. To visualize the posterior
139
probabilities values on the nodes, we used FigTree 1.4.3.
(http://tree.bio.ed.ac.uk/software/figtree/).
Historical demography
responses dating to this period. In order to investigate the demographic process and estimate the
effective population sizes (Ne) through time in P. cristiceps, we used three approaches. First, we
calculated Tajima’s D, which allows the rejection of a null hypothesis, and if a population has
been stable through time, this statistic is expected to be zero. Negative values are expected if a
population has experienced growth, as rare alleles are more numerous than expected, while
positive values will be recovered if rare alleles have been eliminated following bottleneck
(Tajima, 1989). We estimated Tajima’s D for all genes with 1,000 simulations in DnaSP 5.10
software (Librado and Rozas, 2009). We also constructed a mismatch distribution analysis in
DnaSP 5.10. Populations that have experienced recent and rapid expansion are expected to show
Skyline Plot (BSP) (Drummond et al., 2005) implemented on BEAST v.1.8 software (Drummond
et al., 2012). We used the same parameters that used to construct haplotype networks. Due to the
lack of fossil calibration for this group, we used the substitution rate estimated for 16S
mitochondrial gene of 2.8 x 10-9 substitutions/site/year suggested for some amphibian species
(Lymberakis et al., 2007; Moriarty-Lemmon et al., 2007). We evaluated the BSP with constant
substitution model, two groups, 150 million of generations with 10% of burn- in. Using the
140
function Bayesian Skyline Reconstruction in Tracer software, we built the graphic that shows the
Results
Population structure
We obtained a final nuclear DNA dataset of 238 bp for CRYb, 454 bp for POMC, and
351 bp for rhodopsin. The gene16S preserved around 93% (485 bp) of its original size, after gap
exclusion in Gblock. Using two different haplotype datasets, one with just nuDNA data and
another with both mtDNA and nuDNA data, GENELAND analyses detected only one cluster (k
= 1; Fig. 2).
presenting no geographic structure and extremely low levels of genetic diversity (Table 2 and
Fig. 3). The central haplotype H1 is the most frequent in P. cristiceps, containing 84 individuals
The three nuclear DNA showed higher levels of genetic diversity than the 16S mtDNA,
however, the values are still considered low (Table 2). These genes also presented one haplotype
Historical demography
The Tajima’s D test recovered negative values for the 16S mtDNA, CRYb, POMC, and
rhodopsin. However, it was significant only for 16S mtDNA (Table 2), which indicates a recent
population expansion. The graphics of the mismatch distribution showed a unimodal distribution
141
for all genes (Fig. 4), which indicates additional evidence that the population has experienced
recent and rapid expansion. The BSP analysis revealed an expansion around 220 thousands of
Discussion
We also observed that the most common haplotype in mtDNA for P. cristiceps is found all over
the species distribution. These results contradict what is usually observed for widely distributed
species, which face allopatric speciation and may be genetically structured in a geographic
pattern. Geomorphological barriers, such as rivers (e.g. Pellegrino et al., 2005, Kaefer et al.,
2013) and mountains ranges (e.g. Shepard and Burbrink, 2008; Firkowski et al., 2016; Mângia et
al., manuscript 3), are usually responsible for such patterns of geographic structure.
Climatic oscillations or climatic gradients may also act in different latitudes, altitudes, and
ecotone zones, which directly affect the genetic structure of some widely distributed species (e.g.
Hypsiboas albopunctatus - Prado et al., 2012; Cnemidophorus ocellifer – Oliveira et al., 2015;
Pleurodema diplolister - Thomé et al., 2016). For the Caatinga, the São Francisco River (Faria et
al., 2013; Nascimento et al., 2013; Werneck et al., 2015), the Espinhaço mountain range (Thomé
et al., 2016), the middle São Francisco Dunes region (Passoni et al. 2008; Siedchlag et al. 2010)
and some refugee areas (Werneck et al., 2011), have been identified as barriers, which act
none of these processes and events seems to have affected the genetic structure of P. cristiceps.
Despite its widespread occurrence, we recovered one single population for P. cristiceps with no
142
Population expansions following Pleistocene climatic fluctuations are known for several
groups of organisms around the globe (e.g. Kokita and Nohara, 2011; Qu et al., 2011; Myers et
al., 2013). Our results indicate that Proceratophrys cristiceps effective population size changed
during this period, with a rapid and recent expansion during the upper Pleistocene. We also found
low levels of haplotype diversity and a star-shape pattern in haplotype network for 16S, typical of
populations that passed through a recent expansion (Avise, 2009). Our results are consistent with
recent studies on widespread Caatinga lineages that have showed population expansions (e.g.
Oliveira et al., 2015; Werneck et al., 2015; Thomé et al., 2016; São Pedro et al., manuscript in
prep; Gehara et al., manuscript submitted), or short coalescent times/branch lengths during the
Pleistocene (e.g. Werneck et al., 2012; Recoder et al., 2014). In contrast, some studies have
reported population contractions (e.g. Magalhães et al., 2014) or stable population sizes during
climatic fluctuations (e.g. Nascimento et al., 2011; Faria et al., 2013). Our results, along with the
studies cited above, revealed that the Caatinga fauna, as well as the domain itself, were likely
The explosive breeding behavior of P. cristiceps might be a favorable natural history trait
during drastic climatic changes. This type of reproduction is common in other species (e.g.
Dermatonotus muelleri, Physalaemus spp., Pleurodema diplolister) typical from arid regions as
the Caatinga (Nomura et al., 2009; Gally and Zina, 2013; Souza and Ávila, 2015). Examine the
demographic histories and phylogeographic structures of these taxa, which shared the geographic
distributions with P. cristiceps, would contribute with comparative studies that will assist to
rewrite the historical climate change in Caatinga, as well as the effects of past events on the
143
References
19(1/2):51–69.
Auler, A.S., X. Wang, R.L. Edwards, H. Cheng, P.S. Cristalli, P.L. Smart, D.A. Richards. 2004.
Avise, J.C. 2009. Phylogeography: retrospect and prospect. Journal of Biogeography. 36:3– 15.
Bielejec F., A. Rambaut, M.A. Suchard, P. Lemey. 2011. SPREAD: spatial phylogenetic
Bossuyt, F., M.C. Milinkovitch. 2000. Convergent adaptive radiations in Madagascan and Asian
ranid frogs reveal covariation between larval and adult traits. Proceedings of the National
Carnaval, A.C., C. Moritz. 2008. Historical climate modelling predicts patterns of current
Castresana, J. 2000. Selection of Conserved Blocks from Multiple Alignments for Their Use in
Cole, M.M. 1960. Cerrado, caatinga and pantanal: the distribution and origin of the savanna
Czaplewski, N.J., C. Cartelle. 1998. Pleistocen bats from cave deposits in Bahia, Brazil. Journal
of Mammalogy. 79:784e803.
Damasceno, R., M.L. Strangas, A.C. Carnaval, M.T. Rodrigues, C. Moritz. 2013. Revisiting the
144
Fonseca, E.M., M.C. Gehara, F.P. Werneck, F.M. Lanna, G.R. Colli, J.W. Sites Jr, M.T.
De Oliveira, P.E., A.M.F. Barreto, K. Suguio. 1999. Late Pleistocene/Holocene climatic and
vegetational history of the Brazilian Caatinga: the fossil dunes of the middle São Francisco
Dolman, G., B. Phillips. 2004. Single copy nuclear DNA markers characterized for comparative
185–187.
Drummond, A.J., M.A. Suchard, D. Xie, A. Rambaut. 2012. Bayesian Phylogenetics with
BEAUti and the BEAST 1.7. Molecular Biology and Evolution. 29:1969–1973.
Drummond, A.J., A. Rambaut, B.E.T.H. Shapiro, O.G. Pybus. 2005. Bayesian coalescent
inference of past population dynamics from molecular sequences. Molecular biology and
evolution. 22(5):1185–1192.
Edgar, R.C. 2004. MUSCLE: Multiple sequence alignment with high accuracy and high
Faria M.B., F.F. Nascimento, J.A. de Oliveira, C.R. Bonvicino. 2013. Biogeographic
Firkowski, C.R., M.R. Bornschein, L.F. Ribeiro, M.R. Pie. 2016. Species delimitation, phylogeny
Furley, P.A., S.E. Metcalfe. 2007. Dynamic changes in savanna and seasonally dry vegetation
1644.
Gehara, M., A.A. Garda, F.P. Werneck, E.F. Oliveira, E.M. Fonseca, F. Camurugi, F.M.
Magalhães, F.M. Lanna, J.W. Sites Jr, R. Marques, R. Silveira-Filho, V.A. São Pedro, G.R.
Guillot, G., A. Estoup, F. Mortier, J.F. Cosson. 2005a. A Spatial Statistical Model for Landscape
Guillot G., F. Mortier, A. Estoup. 2005b. Geneland: a computer package for landscape genetics.
Harpending, H.C., M.A. Batzer, M. Gurven, L.B. Jorde, A.R. Rogers, S.T. Sherry. 1998. Genetic
1967.
Kaefer, I.L., B.M. Tsuji-Nishikido, E.P. Mota, I.P. Farias, A.P. Lima. 2013. The early stages of
Kokita, T., K. Nohara. 2011 Phylogeography and historical demography of the anadromous fish
Leucopsarion petersii in relation to geological history and oceanography around the Japanese
Lemey P., A. Rambaut, J.J. Welch, M.A. Suchard. 2010. Phylogeography takes a relaxed random
walk in continuous space and time. Molecular Biology and Evolution. 27:1877–1885.
146
Librado, P., J. Rozas. 2009. DnaSP v5: a software for comprehensive analysis of DNA
Maciel, N.M., RG. Collevatti, G.R. Colli, E.F. Schwartz. 2010. Late Miocene diversification and
phylogenetic relationships of the huge toads in the Rhinella marina (Linnaeus, 1758) species
Magalhães, I.L., U. Oliveira, F.R. Santos, T.H. Vidigal, A.D. Brescovit, A.J. Santos. 2014.
Strong spatial structure, Pliocene diversification and cryptic diversity in the Neotropical dry
Mângia, S., D.J. Santana, A.C. Sant’Anna, A.A. Garda. Manuscript in prep. Taxonomic revision
Brazilian Caatinga.
Mângia, S., E.F. Oliveira, R. Koroiva, F.S.F. Leite, M.L. Del-Grande, M.F. Napoli, F.A. Juncá,
(Miranda-Ribeiro, 1920) from the sky islands of Chapada Diamantina, Bahia, Brazil.
Moriarty-Lemmon E., A.R. Lemmon, D.C. Cannatella. 2007. Geological and climatic forces
Evolution. 61:2086–2103.
Myers, E.A., J.A. Rodriguez-Robles, D.F. Denardo, R.E. Staub, A. Stropoli, S. Ruane, F.T.
Colonization process of the Brazilian common vesper mouse, Calomys expulsus (Cricetidae,
Nascimento, F.F., A. Lazar, A.N. Menezes, … C.R. Bonvicino. 2013. The role of historical
Nomura, F., D.C. Rossa-Feres, F. Langeani. 2009. Burrowing behavior of Dermatonotus müelleri
(Anura, Microhylidae) with reference to the origin of the burrowing behavior of Anura.
Oliveira, E.F., M. Gehara, V.A. São Pedro, X. Chen, E.A. Myers, F.T. Burbrink, ... F.J. Arias.
2015. Speciation with gene flow in whiptail lizards from a Neotropical xeric biome.
Palumbi, S.R. 1996. Nucleic acids II: The Polymerase Chain Reaction. In: Hillis, D.M., C. Moritz
and B.K. Mable (Eds.) Molecular Systematics. Sinauer, Sunderland, MA, pp. 205–247.
Passoni, J.C., M.L. Benozzati, M.T. Rodrigues. 2008. Phylogeny, species limits, and
evolution. 46(2):403–414.
Pellegrino, K., M.T. Rodrigues, A.N. Waite, M. Morando, Y.Y. Yassuda, J.W. Sites. 2005.
Squamata): genetic structure coincides with river systems in the Brazilian Atlantic Forest.
148
Prado, C., C.F. Haddad, K.R. Zamudio. 2012. Cryptic lineages and Pleistocene population
Qu, Y., X. Luo, R. Zhang, G. Song, F. Zou, F. Lei. 2011. Lineage diversification and historical
evolutionary history of the eastern Himalayas. Bmc Evolutionary Biology. 11: 174.
Rambaut, A., A.J. Drummond. 2007. BEAST: bayesian evolutionary analysis by sampling trees.
Recoder, R.S., F. Werneck, M. Teixeira, G.R. Colli, J.W. Sites, M.T. Rodrigues. 2014.
Geographic variation and systematic review of the lizard genus Vanzosaura (Squamata,
Salzburger, W., G.B. Ewing, A.Von Haeseler. 2011. The performance of phylogenetic algorithms
Sam Brooks, J., E.F. Fritsch, and T. Maniatis. 1989. Molecular cloning: A laboratory manual,
São Pedro, V.A., E.F. Oliveira, M.C. Gehara, G.C. Costa, F.T. Burbrink, G.R. Colli, M.T.
Shepard, D.B., F.T. Burbrink. 2008. Lineage diversification and historical demography of a sky
island salamander, Plethodon ouachitae, from the Interior Highlands. Molecular Ecology.
17(24):5315–5335.
Siedchlag, A.C., M.L. Benozzati, J.C. Passoni, M.T. Rodrigues. 2010. Genetic structure,
149
Nothobachia (Squamata, Gymnophthalmidae) as inferred from mitochondrial DNA
Sousa, J.G.G., R.W. Ávila. 2015. Body size, reproduction and feeding ecology of Pleurodema
Stephens, M., N.J. Smith, P. Donnelly. 2001. A New Statistical Method for Haplotype
Reconstruction from Population Data. The American Journal of Human Genetics. 68:978–
989.
Tajima, F. 1989. Statistical methods to test for nucleotide mutation hypothesis by DNA
Talavera, G., J. Castresana. 2007. Improvement of Phylogenies after Removing Divergent and
56:564–577.
Alexandrino. 2016. Recurrent connections between Amazon and Atlantic forests shaped
Vanzolini, P.E. 1963. Problemas faunísticos do Cerrado. In: Simpósio Sobre o Cerrado (ed. M.G.
Vieites, D. R., M.S. Min, D.B. Wake. 2007. Rapid diversification and dispersal during periods of
Wang, X.F., A.S. Auler, R.L Edwards, H. Cheng, P.S. Cristalli, P.L. Smart, D.A. Richards, C.C.
Shen. 2004. Wet periods in northeastern Brazil over the past 210 kyr linked to distant climate
cryptic diversity of saxicolous Tropiduridae lizards endemic to the semiarid Caatinga. BMC
Werneck, F.P., C. Nogueira, G.R. Colli, J.W. Sites Jr, G.C. Costa. 2012. Climatic stability in the
Biogeography. 39:1695–1706.
151
Table 1. Information on primers used in the present study.
Sequence
Marker Primers Reference
5’-3’
Table 2. Genetic statistics for each locus sequenced for Proceratophrys cristiceps from the
Caatinga Biome in Northeastern Brazil.
Locus L (bp) N S H Hd π Tajima’s D P-value
16S 485 109 19 19 0.392 0.00112 -2.41418 <0.01**
CRYb 238 84* 5 7 0.706 0.00420 -0.00098 >0.10
POMC 454 98* 6 10 0.708 0.00256 -0.00933 >0.10
Rhodopsin 351 70* 5 6 0.565 0.00247 -0.37092 >0.10
L: length in base pairs; N: sample size, S: number of polymorphic sites, H: number of haplotypes; Hd: haplotype
diversity; π: nucleotide diversity.
*Phased sequences.
**Significant.
152
Figure Captions
Figure 1. Distribution of sampled localities for Proceratophrys cristiceps in the Caatinga Biome
153
Figure 2. Plot of the number of populations simulated from the posterior distribution obtained
with GENELAND for Proceratophrys cristiceps in the Caatinga Biome, Northeastern Brazil.
Figure 3. Bayesian haplotype network showing the genetic structure of Proceratophrys cristiceps
154
Figure 4. Mismatch distribution for each gene showing the demographic history of
Figure 5. Demographic history through time (in years) of Proceratophrys cristiceps determined
by the Bayesian skyline plot. The black line represents the median population size, and the grey
155
Table S1. Samples of Proceratophrys cristiceps used in this study. For each sample is presented
map code number (see Figure 1), locality, state, and mtDNA and nuDNA haplotypes (see Figure
3).
Map Holotypes
Specimen Locality State
code 16S POMC CRYb RHO
1 AAGARDA_7747 PARNA Catimbau PI H4 H3 (2) H1 (2) H4 (2)
1 AAGARDA_7760 PARNA Catimbau PI H5 H10, H1 H6 (2) H4 (2)
2 AAGARDA_11208 PARNA Confusões PI H11 H8 (2) H1 (2) *
2 AAGARDA_11209 PARNA Confusões PI H11 H8 (2) H1 (2) H4 (2)
2 AAGARDA_11212 PARNA Confusões PI H12 H8 (2) H1 (2) H4 (2)
2 AAGARDA_11485 PARNA Confusões PI H12 * * H4 (2)
2 AAGARDA_11486 PARNA Confusões PI H12 * * *
2 AAGARDA_11487 PARNA Confusões PI H12 * * *
3 CHUNFPI_1397 Floriano PI H14 * H1 (2) H4 (2)
3 CHUNFPI_1398 Floriano PI H14 H3 (2) H1 (2) H4 (2)
4 UnB_GRC_19531 Piripiri PI H17 * * *
4 UnB_GRC_19845 Piripiri PI H17 H1 (2) H1 (2) H4 (2)
2 AAGARDA_11207 PARNA Confusões PI H1 H3 (2) * H4 (2)
2 AAGARDA_11210 PARNA Confusões PI H1 H8 (2) * *
2 AAGARDA_11211 PARNA Confusões PI H1 H3 (2) * *
4 UnB_GRC_19659 Piripiri PI H1 H5, H1 * *
4 UnB_GRC_19839 Piripiri PI H1 * * *
4 UnB_GRC_19844 Piripiri PI H1 * * *
4 UnB_GRC_20201 Piripiri PI * H1 (2) * *
5 AAGARDA_2735 Crato CE H2 H3 (2) H6, H3 H1 (2)
6 AAGARDA_10286 Jaguaribe CE H6 H3 (2) H6 (2) H4 (2)
7 AAGARDA_10694 PARNA Ubajara CE H7 H1 (2) H1 (2) H4 (2)
7 AAGARDA_10979 PARNA Ubajara CE H7 * * *
7 AAGARDA_10696 PARNA Ubajara CE H8 H1, H2 H1, H7 H3, H4
7 AAGARDA_10981 PARNA Ubajara CE H9 H5, H3 * H4, H6
7 AAGARDA_10980 PARNA Ubajara CE H10 H3, H4 * H4, H6
8 AAGARDA_11828 Quixadá CE H13 * * *
9 FSCHUFPB_843 Santa Quitéria CE H16 H3 (2) H1 (2) H4 (2)
5 UnB_GRC_22955 Crato CE H19 * H6, H3 *
5 UnB_GRC_21987 Crato CE H18 * * H3, H4
5 AAGARDA_2739 Crato CE H1 H3 (2) H2 (2) H5 (2)
5 AAGARDA_2738 Crato CE H1 H3 (2) * *
5 UnB_GRC_22131 Crato CE H1 * H1, H3 H3 (2)
6 AAGARDA_10176 Jaguaribe CE H1 H3 (2) * *
6 AAGARDA_10177 Jaguaribe CE H1 H3 (2) * *
156
6 AAGARDA_10178 Jaguaribe CE H1 * * *
6 AAGARDA_10179 Jaguaribe CE H1 * * *
6 AAGARDA_10399 Jaguaribe CE H1 * * *
6 AAGARDA_10400 Jaguaribe CE H1 * H1, H2 H3, H4
6 AAGARDA_10401 Jaguaribe CE H1 H3 (2) * *
6 AAGARDA_10402 Jaguaribe CE H1 * * *
7 AAGARDA_10646 PARNA Ubajara CE H1 H1, H3 * *
7 AAGARDA_10672 PARNA Ubajara CE H1 * * *
7 AAGARDA_10695 PARNA Ubajara CE H1 * * *
7 AAGARDA_10796 PARNA Ubajara CE H1 * * *
7 AAGARDA_10849 PARNA Ubajara CE H1 * * *
8 AAGARDA_11826 Quixadá CE H1 H3 (2) H2 (2) H4 (2)
8 AAGARDA_11829 Quixadá CE H1 * * *
7 AAGARDA_10678 PARNA Ubajara CE H1 * * *
10 FRD_681_UFPB Várzea da Conceição CE H1 H3, H7 H1 (2) *
11 FRD_959_UFPB Trindade CE H1 * * *
9 FSCHUFPB_388 Santa Quitéria CE H1 * * *
9 FSCHUFPB_394 Santa Quitéria CE H1 H5, H3 H5 (2) H4 (2)
9 FSCHUFPB_405 Santa Quitéria CE H1 * * *
12 PRC_002 Aquiraz CE H1 H5, H2 H1, H6 *
12 PRC_003 Aquiraz CE H1 * * *
13 SM_02 Pecém CE H1 H4 (2) H1, H7 H3 (2)
14 TEC_1435_UFC Betânea CE H1 * H1, H6 *
15 TEC_1528_UFC Maranguape CE H1 * H3 (2) *
16 TEC_1860_UFC Tabuleiro do Norte CE H1 * * *
17 URCA_5416 Missão Velha CE H1 * H1, H6 *
18 AAGARDA_11910 Milagres CE H1 H3 (2) H1 (2) H3, H4
5 AAGARDA_2740 Crato CE * H3 (2) H1, H6 H1 (2)
5 AAGARDA_2737 Crato CE * H3 (2) H1 (2) *
19 URCA_4949_FB Farias Brito CE * * * H3 (2)
20 AAGARDA_5688 João Câmara RN H3 * * *
21 AAGARDA_5583 ESEC Seridó RN H1 H5 (2) H6 (2) H1, H2
21 AAGARDA_5605 ESEC Seridó RN H1 * * *
21 AAGARDA_5607 ESEC Seridó RN H1 * * *
21 AAGARDA_5679 ESEC Seridó RN H1 * * *
21 AAGARDA_5689 ESEC Seridó RN H1 * * *
21 AAGARDA_5820 ESEC Seridó RN H1 * * H3, H4
21 AAGARDA_5858 ESEC Seridó RN H1 * * H3, H4
21 AAGARDA_5859 ESEC Seridó RN H1 * * *
21 AAGARDA_5977 ESEC Seridó RN H1 H9 (2) * *
157
22 AAGARDA_1754 Macaíba RN H1 * H1, H6 H3, H4
22 AAGARDA_1755 Macaíba RN H1 * * *
22 AAGARDA_1758 Macaíba RN H1 H3, H6 * *
22 AAGARDA_8867 Macaíba RN H1 H5 (2) * *
22 AAGARDA_8868 Macaíba RN H1 * * *
20 AAGARDA_9811 João Câmara RN H1 H3 (2) * *
20 AAGARDA_5553 João Câmara RN H1 H6 (2) * H3, H4
23 SM_12 São José do Brejo da Cruz PB H1 * * *
24 SM_01 Cuité PB H1 H5, H3 H4 (2) H3, H4
23 SM_04 São José do Brejo da Cruz PB H1 * H4 (2) *
23 SM_05 São José do Brejo da Cruz PB H1 * * *
23 SM_06 São José do Brejo da Cruz PB H1 * * *
23 SM_07 São José do Brejo da Cruz PB H1 * * *
23 SM_08 São José do Brejo da Cruz PB H1 * * *
23 SM_09 São José do Brejo da Cruz PB H1 * * *
23 SM_10 São José do Brejo da Cruz PB H1 H1, H2 H6 (2) H3, H4
23 SM_11 São José do Brejo da Cruz PB H1 * * *
23 SM_12 São José do Brejo da Cruz PB H1 * * *
23 SM_13 São José do Brejo da Cruz PB H1 * * *
25 FRD_1011_UFPB Arcoverde PE H15 H5, H3 H1, H6 H4 (2)
1 AAGARDA_7706 PARNA Catimbau PE H1 H5 (2) H1, H6 *
1 AAGARDA_7707 PARNA Catimbau PE H1 * * *
1 AAGARDA_7710 PARNA Catimbau PE H1 H1 (2) * *
1 AAGARDA_7711 PARNA Catimbau PE H1 H1 (2) H1 (2) *
1 AAGARDA_7712 PARNA Catimbau PE H1 * * *
25 FRD_499_UFPB Arcoverde PE H1 * * *
25 FRD_500_UFPB Arcoverde PE H1 * * *
25 FRD_679_UFPB Arcoverde PE H1 * * *
25 FRD_1009_UFPB Arcoverde PE H1 H5 (2) H1, H3 H3, H4
25 FRD_1010_UFPB Arcoverde PE H1 * * *
25 FRD_1021_UFPB Arcoverde PE H1 * * *
25 FRD_1038_UFPB Arcoverde PE H1 * * *
26 FSCHUFPB_318 Poço Redondo SE H1 * * *
26 FSCHUFPB_319 Poço Redondo SE H1 * * *
26 FSCHUFPB_338 Poço Redondo SE H1 H5, H3 H4 (2) *
27 FSCHUFPB_311 Paulo Afonso BA H1 H5 (2) H1, H6 *
27 FSCHUFPB_312 Paulo Afonso BA H1 * * *
27 FSCHUFPB_313 Paulo Afonso BA H1 * * *
27 FSCHUFPB_314 Paulo Afonso BA H1 * * *
27 FSCHUFPB_324 Paulo Afonso BA H1 * * *
158
28 UFMG_254 Caetité BA H1 H3 (2) H6 (2) *
29 SM_03 Catolé do Rocha PB * H1, H3 H2 (2) *
*samples that gene amplification failed; Locality abbreviations: National Park (PARNA), Ecological Station
(ESEC); State abbreviations: Piauí (PI), Ceará (CE), Rio Grande do Norte (RN), Paraíba (PB), Pernambuco (PE),
Sergipe (SE), and Bahia (BA).
159