&lt;b&gt;A second record of the Eastern Spadefoot Toad (Amphibia: Anura: Megophryidae: &lt;I&gt;Leptobrachium bompu&lt;/I&gt; Sondhi &amp; Ohler, 2011) with a note on its morphological variations and natural history&lt;/b&gt;

Bhaskar Saikia,Ilona J Kharkongor,Bikramjit Sinha

doi:10.11609/jott.3300.9.9.10692-10696

<b>A second record of the Eastern Spadefoot Toad (Amphibia: Anura: Megophryidae: <I>Leptobrachium bompu</I> Sondhi & Ohler, 2011) with a note on its morphological variations and natural history</b>

Bhaskar Saikia, Ilona J Kharkongor + Show 1 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.3300.9.9.10692-10696

Copy DOI

Abstract

A single male specimen of Leptobrachium bompu was collected from Talle Valley Wildlife Sanctuary, Lower Subansiri District, Arunachal Pradesh in 2015. This is the first report of this species after its original description in 2011 based on a male specimen. The present collection locality is about 200km from the type locality. Additional notes on morphological variations have added to the much-needed study on the intra-specific variation of the species.

Highlights

The megophryid genus Leptobrachium Tschudi (1838) was established with hasselti as the type species
The tibia length is more than 40% of the snout vent length (SVL) as per the original description, which is consistent with our specimen as well; the only difference is that the tibia of our specimen (41.9% of SVL) is shorter vis-à-vis the snout vent length than the holotype (44.5%)
The specimen was collected from a location with similar geographical landscape to the type locality (Image 3), other than the fact that both the places are in Arunachal Pradesh, northeastern India

Summary

Introduction

The megophryid genus Leptobrachium Tschudi (1838) was established with hasselti as the type species This genus is represented by three species in India - L. smithi, L. rakhinensis and L. bompu (Frost, 2016). Two years after the description of L. smithi, Sengupta et al (2001) had put the previously reported L. hasselti in India [Pillai. Wogan (2012) contradicted Sengupta et al (2001) and put the previously reported L. hasselti [Pillai & Chanda (1979) and Chanda (1994)] as L. rakhinensis. & Chanda (1979) and Chanda (1994)] under L. smithi. Wogan (2012) contradicted Sengupta et al (2001) and put the previously reported L. hasselti [Pillai & Chanda (1979) and Chanda (1994)] as L. rakhinensis. Dutta et al (2013) has refuted the claim of Wogan (2012) after comparing the morphological characters of the population of L. smithi collected from northeastern India. Mathew & Sen (2009) reported that the specimen of L. smithi deposited at Zoological Survey of India, Shillong by Sengupta agrees with the description given by Pillai & Chanda (1979) for the Leptobrachium specimens reported

Methods

Findings

Conclusion