The Amphibia of Trinidad

J. Kenny
{"title":"The Amphibia of Trinidad","authors":"J. Kenny","doi":"10.2307/1442340","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Compared with the other vertebrate groups the Amphibia of the island of Trinidad are relatively poorly known. There have been four surveys of the group, one in the last century and the others in the earlier part of the present. The earliest is that of MOLE & URICH (1894) in which twelve species are listed and a brief account given of the breeding habits of one species, and another species listed later in the same source. Approximately thirty years later Roux (1926) examined a collection made by KUGLER and reported fourteen species. A year later LUTZ (1927) visited the island and made a collection listing fourteen species giving brief notes on their distribution. Apart from these references, which are essentially nothing more than lists of species, there has been only one comprehensive study of the group, that of PARKER (1933) which was based on collections made by URICH and VESEY-FITZGERALD, in which twentythree species are listed and in which a key to identification is presented. A year later PARKER (1934) reviewed a minor taxonomic problem and described a new species of Gastrotheca from the island. There are, of course, scattered references to Trinidad amphibia in the literature falling generally into two groups, those dealing with limited collections or particular aspects of life histories of individual species and those in which particular groups of species are being reviewed. In the former category are the papers of BEEBE (1952), DITMARS (1941), GANS (1956), KENNY (1956 and 1966) and in the latter those of DUELLMAN (1956), DUNN (1949), FUNKHOUSER (1957), GALLARDO (1961 and 1965), PARKER (1937) and RIVERO (1961). There is no doubt that there is need for a general study and review of the Amphibia of the island. Since PARKER’S study was published, the names of nine of the twenty-three species have been altered in one way or another, some even at the generic level, while two hitherto unrecorded species have been found. Apart from this, however, there has been surprisingly little recorded on general life histories of the Trinidad species or of mainland representatives of these species. Admittedly some species are comparatively well known but these are mostly forms with peculiar life histories or habits, for example Pipa pipa, Pseudis paradoxus and possibly Bufo marinus, which would attract the attention of herpetologists. Nevertheless, the bulk of the species remain nothing more than names in taxonomic reviews. While the adult forms may be fairly well known taxonomically, most of the tadpoles are still unknown. A search of the literature, both of Trinidad forms as well as mainland forms has revealed descriptions only of three forms.","PeriodicalId":227099,"journal":{"name":"Studies on the Fauna of Curaçao and other Caribbean Islands","volume":"18 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1970-12-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"108","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studies on the Fauna of Curaçao and other Caribbean Islands","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2307/1442340","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 108

Abstract

Compared with the other vertebrate groups the Amphibia of the island of Trinidad are relatively poorly known. There have been four surveys of the group, one in the last century and the others in the earlier part of the present. The earliest is that of MOLE & URICH (1894) in which twelve species are listed and a brief account given of the breeding habits of one species, and another species listed later in the same source. Approximately thirty years later Roux (1926) examined a collection made by KUGLER and reported fourteen species. A year later LUTZ (1927) visited the island and made a collection listing fourteen species giving brief notes on their distribution. Apart from these references, which are essentially nothing more than lists of species, there has been only one comprehensive study of the group, that of PARKER (1933) which was based on collections made by URICH and VESEY-FITZGERALD, in which twentythree species are listed and in which a key to identification is presented. A year later PARKER (1934) reviewed a minor taxonomic problem and described a new species of Gastrotheca from the island. There are, of course, scattered references to Trinidad amphibia in the literature falling generally into two groups, those dealing with limited collections or particular aspects of life histories of individual species and those in which particular groups of species are being reviewed. In the former category are the papers of BEEBE (1952), DITMARS (1941), GANS (1956), KENNY (1956 and 1966) and in the latter those of DUELLMAN (1956), DUNN (1949), FUNKHOUSER (1957), GALLARDO (1961 and 1965), PARKER (1937) and RIVERO (1961). There is no doubt that there is need for a general study and review of the Amphibia of the island. Since PARKER’S study was published, the names of nine of the twenty-three species have been altered in one way or another, some even at the generic level, while two hitherto unrecorded species have been found. Apart from this, however, there has been surprisingly little recorded on general life histories of the Trinidad species or of mainland representatives of these species. Admittedly some species are comparatively well known but these are mostly forms with peculiar life histories or habits, for example Pipa pipa, Pseudis paradoxus and possibly Bufo marinus, which would attract the attention of herpetologists. Nevertheless, the bulk of the species remain nothing more than names in taxonomic reviews. While the adult forms may be fairly well known taxonomically, most of the tadpoles are still unknown. A search of the literature, both of Trinidad forms as well as mainland forms has revealed descriptions only of three forms.
特立尼达的两栖动物
与其他脊椎动物群相比,特立尼达岛的两栖类相对来说鲜为人知。对这个群体进行了四次调查,一次是在上个世纪,另一次是在本世纪初。最早的是MOLE & URICH(1894),其中列出了12个物种,并简要介绍了其中一个物种的繁殖习性,后来在同一来源中列出了另一个物种。大约30年后,Roux(1926)检查了KUGLER收集的标本,报告了14种。一年后,卢茨(1927)访问了该岛,并收集了14个物种,并简要说明了它们的分布。除了这些参考文献(基本上只是物种列表)之外,只有PARKER(1933)对该群体进行了一次全面的研究,该研究基于URICH和VESEY-FITZGERALD的收集,其中列出了23个物种,并提供了识别的关键。一年后,PARKER(1934)审查了一个较小的分类学问题,并描述了来自该岛的胃腹蝇的一个新种。当然,文献中零星地有关于特立尼达两栖动物的文献,这些文献一般分为两类,一类是关于个别物种的有限收集或生活史的特定方面,另一类是关于特定物种群体的研究。前一类是BEEBE(1952)、DITMARS(1941)、GANS(1956)、KENNY(1956和1966)的论文,后一类是DUELLMAN(1956)、DUNN(1949)、FUNKHOUSER(1957)、GALLARDO(1961和1965)、PARKER(1937)和RIVERO(1961)的论文。毫无疑问,有必要对岛上的两栖类进行全面的研究和审查。自从帕克的研究发表以来,23个物种中有9个物种的名字以这样或那样的方式发生了变化,有些甚至在属级上发生了变化,同时发现了两个迄今未被记录的物种。然而,除此之外,关于特立尼达物种或这些物种的大陆代表的一般生活史的记录却少得惊人。诚然,有些种类相对来说比较为人所知,但这些大多是具有特殊生活史或习性的形式,例如琵琶,伪琵琶,可能还有Bufo marinus,它们会引起爬虫学家的注意。然而,大部分物种在分类学评论中仅仅是名字而已。虽然成年蝌蚪在分类学上已经相当为人所知,但大多数蝌蚪仍然是未知的。对特立尼达形式和大陆形式的文献进行搜索,只发现了三种形式的描述。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信