identifier	taxonID	type	CVterm	format	language	title	description	additionalInformationURL	UsageTerms	rights	Owner	contributor	creator	bibliographicCitation
343C87A3FFE8FFF7FF783F43FE12672E.text	343C87A3FFE8FFF7FF783F43FE12672E.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Aromobatidae Grant, Frost, Caldwell, Gagliardo, Haddad, Kok, Mittel, Noonan, Schargel & Wheeler 2006	<div><p>Family Aromobatidae Grant, Frost, Caldwell, Gagliardo, Haddad, Kok, Mittel, Noonan, Schargel &amp; Wheeler, 2006</p> <p>Anomaloglossus baeobatrachus (Boistel &amp; Massary, 1999) is found throughout French Guiana and the state of Amapá, and may be a species complex (Fouquet et al. 2019 a, 2019b). The specimens from Amapá are recovered in a different clade in comparison with the clade formed by specimens from the type locality (Saint Eugène, French Guiana). Moreover, what is called An. baeobatrachus in the literature has two markedly different phenotypes, one with endotrophic (as observed from topotypes) and the other one with exotrophic tadpoles, morphologically indistinguishable from each other (Fouquet et al. 2019 a, 2019b). The populations with exotrophic tadpoles have signs of past hybridization and more investigation is necessary to clarify their taxonomic status (Fouquet et al. 2019a). Although both phenotypes occur in Amapá (Fouquet et al. 2019a), we chose to consider all the records under the name An. baeobatrachus until the situation is clarified.</p> <p>Two problematic species appeared among the records, namely Anomaloglossus beebei (Noble, 1923) and Allobates marchesianus (Melin, 1941). Anomaloglossus beebei is an endangered species with a restricted distribution, known only from the Pakaraima region, western Guyana (Cole et al. 2013; IUCN 2022). There are records of An. beebei from seven localities in central and northeastern Amapá (localities 5, 7–8, 11–12, 14–15; Lima 2006a, 2006b, 2008; Queiroz et al. 2011). Allobates marchesianus is probably a species complex distributed in Colombia, Peru, Venezuela, and the Brazilian state of Amazonas (Caldwell et al. 2002). There are also records of Al. marchesianus from central and northeastern Amapá, from five localities (6–8, 14–15; Lima 2006a, 2006b, 2008). According to recent thorough molecular surveys (Fouquet et al. 2019b; Rejaud et al. 2020; Vacher et al. 2020) none of these species occur in the state of Amapá. Besides, we did not have access to any of the vouchers and, due to the complex taxonomic history of the two species (see Caldwell et al. 2002; Kok et al. 2006), we cannot assign these records undoubtedly to a single species and we chose to remove the records from the list. Nonetheless, it is important to note that An. beebei has long been mistaken for Allobates granti Kok, MacCulloch, Gaucher, Poelman, Bourne, Lathrop &amp; Lenglet, 2006 (Kok et al. 2006) and, although there is no record of Al. granti in Amapá, the species is known to inhabit several localities throughout the western border of French Guiana. Thus, at least some of the records of An. beebei may actually correspond to Al. granti.</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/343C87A3FFE8FFF7FF783F43FE12672E	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		Plazi	Taucce, Pedro P. G.;Costa-Campos, Carlos Eduardo;Carvalho, Thiago R.;Michalski, Fernanda	Taucce, Pedro P. G., Costa-Campos, Carlos Eduardo, Carvalho, Thiago R., Michalski, Fernanda (2022): Anurans (Amphibia: Anura) of the Brazilian state of Amapá, eastern Amazonia: species diversity and knowledge gaps. European Journal of Taxonomy 836: 96-130, DOI: https://doi.org/10.5852/ejt.2022.836.1919, URL: http://zoobank.org/86496226-c36d-435c-b9ed-1cee58132e66
343C87A3FFE9FFFEFDD43CCEFC1F615F.text	343C87A3FFE9FFFEFDD43CCEFC1F615F.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Bufonidae Gray 1825	<div><p>Family Bufonidae Gray, 1825</p> <p>A recent study revealed high levels of species diversity within the bufonid genus Amazophrynella (Rojas et al. 2018), and described a new species for Suriname, French Guiana, and Amapá: Amazophrynella teko Rojas, Fouquet, Ron, Hernández-Ruz, Melo-Sampaio, Chaparro, Vogt, Carvalho, Pinheiro, Ávila, Farias, Gordo &amp; Hrbek, 2018. According to their study, it is the only species distributed in Amapá. Vacher et al. (2020) also found only one species of Amazophrynella in their molecular survey, but they identified it as A. manaos Rojas-Zamora, Carvalho, Gordo, Ávila, Farias &amp; Hrbek, 2014 or A. aff. manaos. We assume that the entries A. manaos and A. aff. manaos in their supplemental material is likely an inconsistent nomenclatural update throughout their species list. Both applied names (A. manaos and A. aff. manaos) of Vacher et al. (2020) are undoubtedly conspecific with A. teko. In this context, we treated the records of A. minuta and Amazophrynella sp. 1 from the Amapá National Forest as conspecific with A. teko as well.</p> <p>For more than30 years, Atelopus hoogmoedi was considered a subspecies of Atelopus pulcher (Boulenger, 1882) (Lescure 1974, 1976) or Atelopus spumarius Cope, 1871 (Lescure et al. 1980; Lescure &amp; Marty 2000; Lötters et al. 2002). However, Lötters &amp; Schulte (2005) elevated the taxon to full species level and Noonan &amp; Gaucher (2005) provided molecular support for their decision. The populations from Brazil distributed north of the Amazon River, including Amapá, are currently assigned to A. hoogmoedi (Costa-Campos &amp; Carvalho 2018; Jorge et al. 2020; Silva et al. 2020). Thus, we considered the records of Atelopus barbotini Lescure, 1981 from Lima (2006a, 2006b) and A. spumarius from Queiroz et al. (2011) and Lima (2018) as A. hoogmoedi. According to Vacher et al. (2020), Atelopus flavescens Duméril &amp; Bibron, 1841 is also expected to occur in Amapá. However, since the taxonomic status of the populations from Amapá remains partly ambiguous, we adopted only one of the names in our list (A. hoogmoedi). Although it is probable that A. flavescens occurs indeed in the state of Amapá, further taxonomic studies should clarify this matter.</p> <p>Regarding the genus Rhinella, there are two species of the group of R. granulosa registered in Amapá: Rhinella granulosa (Spix, 1824) (Pereira-Júnior et al. 2013; Ferreira-Lima et al. 2017; Missassi et al. 2017; Lima 2018) and R. major (Costa-Campos &amp; Freire 2019). However, Amapá is contained only within the distribution range of R. major, thus we considered records of R. granulosa to be R. major. Within the group of R. margaritifera, Rhinella martyi Fouquet, Gaucher, Blanc &amp; Vélez- Rodriguez, 2007 is currently considered a junior synonym of Rhinella margaritifera (Laurenti, 1768) (Pereyra et al. 2021), and we considered the records of R. martyi (Silva-e-Silva &amp; Costa-Campos 2018; Pedroso-Santos et al. 2019) as R. margaritifera. We then considered the records of R. margaritifera as Rhinella dapsilis (Myers &amp; Carvalho, 1945), following the same study. Pereyra et al. (2021) recovered Rhinella castaneotica (Caldwell, 1991) paraphyletic, with the specimen from French Guiana more related to Rhinella proboscidea Spix, 1824 than to the probable R. castaneotica sensu stricto from the Brazilian state of Pará. Ferrão et al. (2022) analyzed specimens from both French Guiana and Amapá, recovering them monophyletic and as the sister group of R. castaneotica and Rhinella teotoniensis Ferrão, Souza, Hanken &amp; Lima, 2022. We agree with their conclusions and consider the species from Amapá an unnamed species, which we treat as R. aff. castaneotica.</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/343C87A3FFE9FFFEFDD43CCEFC1F615F	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		Plazi	Taucce, Pedro P. G.;Costa-Campos, Carlos Eduardo;Carvalho, Thiago R.;Michalski, Fernanda	Taucce, Pedro P. G., Costa-Campos, Carlos Eduardo, Carvalho, Thiago R., Michalski, Fernanda (2022): Anurans (Amphibia: Anura) of the Brazilian state of Amapá, eastern Amazonia: species diversity and knowledge gaps. European Journal of Taxonomy 836: 96-130, DOI: https://doi.org/10.5852/ejt.2022.836.1919, URL: http://zoobank.org/86496226-c36d-435c-b9ed-1cee58132e66
343C87A3FFE0FFFEFDF53A1DFD92606C.text	343C87A3FFE0FFFEFDF53A1DFD92606C.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Centrolenidae Taylor 1951	<div><p>Family Centrolenidae Taylor, 1951</p> <p>Vitreorana ritae (Lutz, 1952) is currently a senior synonym of V. oyampiensis (Lescure, 1975) (Cisneros- Heredita 2013). Despite some authors state that this synonymy remains dubious due to the lack of acoustic and molecular data from the type locality (headwaters of the Caiwama River, Amazonas, Colombia) (Fouquet et al. 2019c), we consider the records of V. oyampiensis (as Cochranella oyampiensis; Lima 2006b; 2008) equivalent to V. ritae.</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/343C87A3FFE0FFFEFDF53A1DFD92606C	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		Plazi	Taucce, Pedro P. G.;Costa-Campos, Carlos Eduardo;Carvalho, Thiago R.;Michalski, Fernanda	Taucce, Pedro P. G., Costa-Campos, Carlos Eduardo, Carvalho, Thiago R., Michalski, Fernanda (2022): Anurans (Amphibia: Anura) of the Brazilian state of Amapá, eastern Amazonia: species diversity and knowledge gaps. European Journal of Taxonomy 836: 96-130, DOI: https://doi.org/10.5852/ejt.2022.836.1919, URL: http://zoobank.org/86496226-c36d-435c-b9ed-1cee58132e66
343C87A3FFE0FFFEFE1D3B0CFCFC66DC.text	343C87A3FFE0FFFEFE1D3B0CFCFC66DC.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Craugastoridae Hedges, Duellman & Heinicke 2008	<div><p>Family Craugastoridae Hedges, Duellman &amp; Heinicke, 2008</p> <p>Pristimantis marmoratus (Boulenger, 1900) is currently distributed in the western portion of the Guiana Shield, through Venezuela and Guyana, and its sister clade has a more eastern distribution, occurring in French Guiana and Amapá (Kok et al. 2018). Fouquet et al. (2022b) recently described this clade as Pristimantis crepitaculus Fouquet, Peloso, Jairam, Lima, Mônico, Ernst &amp; Kok, 2022. We considered four out of our five records of P. marmoratus (Lima 2008; 2018; Queiroz et al. 2011; Benício &amp; Lima 2017) as P. crepitaculus. Pristimantis ockendeni (Boulenger 1912) was once thought to occur all over the upper Amazon basin, from southern Peru to Colombia, but it is currently thought to be a species complex with the nominal P. ockendeni currently known only from the type locality, in Peru (Elmer et al. 2007; Elmer &amp; Canatella 2008). Silva e Silva &amp; Costa-Campos (2018) recorded a species with overall morphology similar to P. ockendeni which they identified as P. cf. ockendeni, but they also recorded P. marmoratus. Besides P. crepitaculus, Fouquet et al. (2022b) also mention P. grandoculis from the state of Amapá, a species they revalidated in their study. The main morphological difference between these two species is the tympanum, which is present in the first species and absent in the latter. Thus, we consider the records of Silva e Silva &amp; Costa-Campos (2018) as P. crepitaculus (their P. cf. ockendeni) and P. grandoculis (their P. marmoratus).</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/343C87A3FFE0FFFEFE1D3B0CFCFC66DC	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		Plazi	Taucce, Pedro P. G.;Costa-Campos, Carlos Eduardo;Carvalho, Thiago R.;Michalski, Fernanda	Taucce, Pedro P. G., Costa-Campos, Carlos Eduardo, Carvalho, Thiago R., Michalski, Fernanda (2022): Anurans (Amphibia: Anura) of the Brazilian state of Amapá, eastern Amazonia: species diversity and knowledge gaps. European Journal of Taxonomy 836: 96-130, DOI: https://doi.org/10.5852/ejt.2022.836.1919, URL: http://zoobank.org/86496226-c36d-435c-b9ed-1cee58132e66
343C87A3FFE0FFFEFDF73D9CFC7E641D.text	343C87A3FFE0FFFEFDF73D9CFC7E641D.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Dendrobatidae Cope 1865	<div><p>Family Dendrobatidae Cope, 1865</p> <p>Ranitomeya populations in Amapá have been registered with two different names, Ranitomeya amazonica (Schulte, 1999) (Lima 2018) and Ranitomeya ventrimaculata (Shreve, 1935) (Lima 2006a, 2006b; Queiroz et al. 2011). However, R. amazonica is a species known for decades prior to its description, and has been erroneously identified as several other species, including R. ventrimaculata (for a complete taxonomic history see Brown et al. 2011). Currently, R. ventrimaculata is restricted to Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, and the western portion of the Brazilian state of Amazonas, and until recently the populations of Ranitomeya from eastern Amazonia were assigned to R. amazonica (Brown et al. 2011). Nevertheless, Muell et al. (2022) recovered R. amazonica nested within R. variabilis (Zimmermann &amp; Zimmermann, 1988) and specifically populations from eastern Amazonia were recovered as R. variabilis. Thus, we agree with them and consider Amapá records to be R. variabilis.</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/343C87A3FFE0FFFEFDF73D9CFC7E641D	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		Plazi	Taucce, Pedro P. G.;Costa-Campos, Carlos Eduardo;Carvalho, Thiago R.;Michalski, Fernanda	Taucce, Pedro P. G., Costa-Campos, Carlos Eduardo, Carvalho, Thiago R., Michalski, Fernanda (2022): Anurans (Amphibia: Anura) of the Brazilian state of Amapá, eastern Amazonia: species diversity and knowledge gaps. European Journal of Taxonomy 836: 96-130, DOI: https://doi.org/10.5852/ejt.2022.836.1919, URL: http://zoobank.org/86496226-c36d-435c-b9ed-1cee58132e66
343C87A3FFFCFFE2FD983955FC56628A.text	343C87A3FFFCFFE2FD983955FC56628A.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Eleutherodactylidae Lutz 1954	<div><p>Family Eleutherodactylidae Lutz, 1954</p> <p>Silva e Silva &amp; Costa-Campos (2018) and Pedroso-Santos et al. (2019) recorded Adelophryne gutturosa Hoogmoed &amp; Lescure, 1984 at Cancão Municipal Natural Park, municipality of Serra do Navio, and Reserva Extrativista Beija-Flor-Brilho-de-Fogo, municipality of Pedra Branca do Amapari, respectively. These records belong to the recently described A. amapaensis.</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/343C87A3FFFCFFE2FD983955FC56628A	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		Plazi	Taucce, Pedro P. G.;Costa-Campos, Carlos Eduardo;Carvalho, Thiago R.;Michalski, Fernanda	Taucce, Pedro P. G., Costa-Campos, Carlos Eduardo, Carvalho, Thiago R., Michalski, Fernanda (2022): Anurans (Amphibia: Anura) of the Brazilian state of Amapá, eastern Amazonia: species diversity and knowledge gaps. European Journal of Taxonomy 836: 96-130, DOI: https://doi.org/10.5852/ejt.2022.836.1919, URL: http://zoobank.org/86496226-c36d-435c-b9ed-1cee58132e66
343C87A3FFFCFFE0FDE139A9FB8E64CA.text	343C87A3FFFCFFE0FDE139A9FB8E64CA.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Hylidae Rafinesque 1815	<div><p>Family Hylidae Rafinesque, 1815</p> <p>The population previously identified as Boana multifasciata (Günther, 1859) from the Guiana Shield is currently known to be an unnamed candidate species, inhabiting the Guianas and the Brazilian states of Roraima, Pará and Amapá (Fouquet et al. 2021c) based only on molecular data. We added the molecularbased records from Vacher et al. (2020) and Fouquet et al. (2021c) corresponding to this taxon, as well as the literature records with overall morphology more similar to B. multifasciata. We decided to keep using this name for Amapá populations until more studies clarify their taxonomic status. In the species group of B. semilineata, two species are known to occur in Amapá, Boana diabolica Fouquet, Martinez, Zeidler, Courtois, Gaucher, Blanc, Lima, Souza, Rodrigues &amp; Kok, 2016 and an unnamed species, B. aff. semilineata (Fouquet et al. 2016). Besides these two names, records in Amapá have also been identified as Boana geographica (Spix, 1824) (Lima 2008; Pereira-Júnior et al. 2013; Benício &amp; Lima 2017; Ferreira-Lima et al. 2017) and B. aff. geographica (Lima 2006b). These records could belong either to B. diabolica or B. aff. semilineata, so we chose to consider in our list only the molecular confirmed records (Fouquet et al. 2016; Vacher et al. 2020).</p> <p>Dendropsophus counani Fouquet, Orrico, Ernst, Blanc, Martinez, Vacher, Rodrigues, Ouboter, Jairam &amp; Ron, 2015 has long been confused with Dendropsophus brevifrons (Duellman &amp; Crump, 1974) (Fouquet et al. 2015), and we consider the record of D. brevifrons (Benício &amp; Lima 2017) to be D. counani. Dendropsophus minusculus (Rivero, 1971) is morphologically similar to Dendropsophus branneri (Cochran, 1948), with which D. minusculus has been historically confused (Zina et al. 2014). Dendropsophus minusculus is distributed in northern Brazil and the Guiana Shield, mainly within Amazonia, with some sparse records in northeastern Brazil in the states of Maranhão, Piauí, Ceará, and an isolated record from Bahia, whereas D. branneri inhabits the Atlantic Forest of southeastern and northeastern Brazil (Zina et al. 2014; Frost 2022). Both species seem to have a contact zone in northeastern Brazil, but the state of Amapá is within the distribution range of D. minusculus. Thus, we consider the records of D. branneri (Lima 2006a, 2006b) to be D. minusculus. Orrico et al. (2021) has recently defined the populations with the overall morphology like D. minutus (Peters, 1872) in the Guiana Shield as D. amicorum, and we agreed with them regarding the records of Amapá. It is important to note that, even though the IUCN status of the species is Critically Endangered (CR, IUCN 2022), it was evaluated when it was known only from the type localiy, and the conservation status of D. amicorum is likely to change during next evaluations. Dendropsophus walfordi (Bokermann, 1962) and Dendropsophus nanus (Boulenger, 1889) are also very similar to each other, being even considered as representing a single species (Lutz 1973). Despite being currently considered as separate species (Langone &amp; Basso 1987), these are morphologically and genetically closely related to each other, with D. walfordi being frequently recovered within D. nanus, leaving it paraphyletic (Fouquet et al. 2011; Medeiros et al. 2013; Orrico et al. 2021). Recently, Seger et al. (2021) evaluated the D. nanus - D. walfordi complex with a broad molecular study and defined that D. nanus is the lineage inhabiting Paraguay, northeastern Argentina, and southern Brazil, whereas D. walfordi is the single lineage inhabiting Amazonia. Thus, we decided to adopt the name D. walfordi to records from both species within the state of Amapá. Benício &amp; Lima (2017) recorded Dendropsophus microcephalus (Cope, 1886) and Dendropsophus parviceps (Boulanger, 1882) in the Amapá National Forest. The first species is distributed from southern Mexico to northern South America (Frost 2022) but, although the specimens east of Venezuela have been called D. microcephalus due to morphological similarities, they probably correspond to other species, such as D. minusculus or even Dendropsophus gaucheri (Lescure &amp; Marty, 2000) (V.G.D. Orrico, pers. comm.). Although Benício &amp; Lima (2017) cited both D. minusculus and D. microcephalus, there are no voucher specimens cited in their study. Thus, we decided to remove the record of D. microcephalus from the list until more data from the Amapá National Forest is available to help clarifying the taxonomic status of this population. Moreover, we considered the record of D. microcephalus from Queiroz et al. (2011) as D. minusculus. Dendropsophus parviceps is currently known from Ecuador, Colombia, and the Brazilian state of Amazonas, with related populations from Brazilian states of Acre and Rondônia being recently described as Dendropsophus kamagarini Rivadeneira, Venegas &amp; Ron, 2018 (Rivadeneira et al. 2018). Besides D. parviceps, Benício &amp; Lima (2017) found another species from the group of D. parviceps (sensu Orrico et al. 2021) in the Amapá National Forest, D. brevifrons (that we consider D. counani, see above). As in the previous case concerning D. microcephalus and D. minusculus, we also decided to remove D. parviceps from our list and consider the record as D. counani until additional data is available. The record of Lysapsus laevis (Parker, 1935) from Araújo &amp; Costa-Campos (2015) (as Pseudis laevis) is actually Lysapsus bolivianus (Gallardo, 1961) (Costa-Campos, pers. comm.).</p> <p>There are two species of the group of Osteocephalus buckleyi (sensu Jüngfer et al. 2013) cited for Amapá, O. buckleyi (Boulenger, 1882) (Lima 2008; Queiroz et al. 2011) and O. cabrerai (Cochran &amp; Goin, 1970) (Lima 2006b, 2008; Pedroso-Santos et al. 2019). Dewynter et al. (2019) also found two species of the group of O. buckleyi in French Guiana, both reaching the border with Amapá: O. cabrerai and Osteocephalus helenae (Ruthven, 1919). Vacher et al. (2020) also adopted these two species names in their molecular survey for populations of Osteocephalus from Amapá and French Guiana. Even though the two species were recovered as a single taxonomic entity in their species delimitation analysis, they applied both names to the clade formed by two lineages of Osteocephalus that appear to be morphologically diagnosable to each other and coexist in the Eastern Guiana Shield (see Dewynter et al. 2016). Thus, we consider both O. cabrerai and O. helenae in our list. We did not have access to the voucher specimens of most studies and most of the known previous records do not provide photographs of species of Osteocephalus. As such, we could not be precise about the locations where each of the two species occurs in Amapá. One exception is at Reserva Extrativista Municipal Beija-Flor-Brilho-deFogo, central part of Amapá, from where Pedroso-Santos et al. provided a picture of what they identified as O. cabrerai (Pedroso-Santos et al. 2019: 801, fig. 1.11) and it corresponds to the same morphotype Dewynter et al. (2016) consider O. cabrerai.</p> <p>Scinax garbei (Miranda-Ribeiro, 1926) is a widespread species of the group of S. rostratus distributed throughout the middle and upper Amazon Basin in Venezuela, Ecuador, Colombia, Peru, Bolivia and Brazil (Faivovich et al. 2005; Frost 2022). Although there are records of S. garbei from Amapá (FerreiraLima et al. 2017; Lima 2018; Silva e Silva &amp; Costa-Campos 2018), there is molecular evidence of only Scinax jolyi Lescure &amp; Marty, 2000 inhabiting Amapá (Vacher et al. 2020). Due to the taxonomic complexity of S. garbei (Ron et al. 2018) and the overall morphological similarity between the two species, we consider more plausible that the records of S. garbei in Amapá are indeed S. jolyi. Scinax cruentomma (Duelmann, 1972) is mainly distributed in western Amazonia, but there are a few additional records in other Amazonian regions (Carvalho et al. 2015: fig. 3). Those authors conducted acoustic comparisons between populations from the type locality (Santa Cecilia, Ecuador), the upper Negro River (Amazonas, Brazil), and French Guiana (data derived from Lescure &amp; Marty 2000) and found that the high variation in some of the analyzed call traits indicate that the French Guiana population could represent another, potentially unnamed, species. Therefore, we provisionally assign the Amapá population to S. cf. cruentomma until the taxonomic status of the populations of Scinax bearing a horizontal red streak on the iris from the Eastern Guiana Shield is addressed.</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/343C87A3FFFCFFE0FDE139A9FB8E64CA	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		Plazi	Taucce, Pedro P. G.;Costa-Campos, Carlos Eduardo;Carvalho, Thiago R.;Michalski, Fernanda	Taucce, Pedro P. G., Costa-Campos, Carlos Eduardo, Carvalho, Thiago R., Michalski, Fernanda (2022): Anurans (Amphibia: Anura) of the Brazilian state of Amapá, eastern Amazonia: species diversity and knowledge gaps. European Journal of Taxonomy 836: 96-130, DOI: https://doi.org/10.5852/ejt.2022.836.1919, URL: http://zoobank.org/86496226-c36d-435c-b9ed-1cee58132e66
343C87A3FFFAFFE4FD823955FC5160FE.text	343C87A3FFFAFFE4FD823955FC5160FE.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Leptodactylidae Werner 1896	<div><p>Family Leptodactylidae Werner, 1896</p> <p>Leptodactylus bolivianus Boulenger, 1898 is distributed in the western and central portions of the Amazon Basin in Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Peru and Venezuela (Heyer &amp; de Sá 2011), whereas Leptodactylus guianensis Heyer &amp; de Sá, 2011 is distributed across the Guiana Shield. These two species are morphologically quite similar to each other and, before the description of L. guianensis in 2011, it was commonly confused with L. bolivianus in the literature (Heyer &amp; de Sá 2011). We consider the record of L. cf. bolivianus from Lima (2006b) to be L. guianensis. Gazoni et al. (2021) recently revisited the systematics of the group of L. melanonotus using an integrative approach. One of the taxonomic results was the revalidation of L. intermedius, previously a junior synonym of Leptodactylus petersii Steindachner, 1864. Besides L. petersii, there are records of two other species of the group of L. melanonotus in Amapá: L. wagneri (Lima 2006) and Leptodactylus podicipinus Cope, 1862 (PereiraJúnior et al. 2013; Araújo &amp; Costa 2015; Lima 2018; Costa-Campos &amp; Freire 2019). All records previously associated with L. podicipinus in Amapá should be assigned to L. intermedius. Leptodactylus wagneri is distributed in western Amazonia and the records in eastern Amazonia correspond either to L. intermedius (see Gazoni et al. 2021) or to unnamed species, treated here as Leptodactylus sp., endemic to the Eastern Guiana Shield (Carvalho et al. in press). Leptodactylus leptodactyloides (Andersson, 1945) is widely distributed in Amazonia but reported in Amapá for the first time in this study. The species was confirmed to occur at one location (Comunidade Ariri), within the municipality of Macapá, based on DNA-barcoded individuals (Carvalho et al. in press).</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/343C87A3FFFAFFE4FD823955FC5160FE	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		Plazi	Taucce, Pedro P. G.;Costa-Campos, Carlos Eduardo;Carvalho, Thiago R.;Michalski, Fernanda	Taucce, Pedro P. G., Costa-Campos, Carlos Eduardo, Carvalho, Thiago R., Michalski, Fernanda (2022): Anurans (Amphibia: Anura) of the Brazilian state of Amapá, eastern Amazonia: species diversity and knowledge gaps. European Journal of Taxonomy 836: 96-130, DOI: https://doi.org/10.5852/ejt.2022.836.1919, URL: http://zoobank.org/86496226-c36d-435c-b9ed-1cee58132e66
343C87A3FFFAFFE5FD8E3BBEFCAF62C8.text	343C87A3FFFAFFE5FD8E3BBEFCAF62C8.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Microhylidae Gunther 1858	<div><p>Family Microhylidae Günther, 1858</p> <p>The only species of the genus Elachistocleis known to occur in the state of Amapá is Elachistocleis helianneae Caramaschi, 2010 (Jowers et al. 2021). We considered the record of Elachistocleis sp. from Pereira-Júnior et al. (2013) to be E. helianneae based on the distribution and the overall morphology of the specimens (Costa-Campos, pers. obs.) and calls (Marinho et al. 2018).</p> <p>Fouquet et al. (2021b) showed in their integrative study that Otophryne pyburni is probably restricted to the western portion of the Guiana Shield, and that the populations of Otophryne inhabiting French Guiana and the Brazilian states of Amapá and Pará belong to an unconfirmed candidate species related to Otophryne robusta Boulenger, 1900. Therefore, we chose to consider the records of O. pyburni in Amapá as O. cf. robusta until more studies arise to evaluate its taxonomic status, confirming or contradicting this candidate species.</p> <p>Synapturanus zombie Fouquet, Leblanc, Fabre, Rodrigues, Menin, Courtois, Dewynter, Hölting, Ernst, Peloso &amp; Kok, 2021 was recently described from French Guiana with one population recorded in the municipality of Oiapoque, northern Amapá (locality 46, Fig. 10) and a second potential population in the upper Rio Calçoene (2.3734° N, 51.3782° W; Fouquet et al. 2021a). We did not add this locality to the map because of the uncertainty on the population identity according to the original publication. We have found records of Synapturanus mirandaribeiroi Nelson &amp; Lescure, 1975 from three localities in the Tumucumaque Mountains National Park (localities 5–7; Lima 2008). The two species have previously been confused with each other and have close distribution ranges, with one of the records from Tumucumaque (locality 5) very close to the Mitaraka massif, French Guiana, one of the localities with known populations of S. mirandaribeiroi (Fouquet et al. 2021). We then consider the records from the Tumucumaque Park (Lima 2008) as S. mirandaribeiroi, but we are aware that some of these records may actually be S. zombie Fouquet, Leblanc, Fabre, Rodrigues, Menin, Courtois, Dewynter, Hölting, Ernst, Peloso &amp; Kok, 2021. Finally, we have an unvouchered record of S. zombie from the municipality of Serra do Navio, with only a picture (Fig. 9G). Although the picture is slightly out of focus, it is possible to see one important diagnostic character distinguishing this species from S. mirandaribeiroi: the dorsum with numerous orange spots and blotches (dorsum with diffuse mottled pattern in S. mirandaribeiroi). Therefore, we consider the photograph-based record of S. zombie in Serra do Navio, extending the distribution of this species to the central portion of Amapá, more than 250 km southeast from its type locality (Itoupé, French Guiana; 3.0230° N, 53.0955° W).</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/343C87A3FFFAFFE5FD8E3BBEFCAF62C8	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		Plazi	Taucce, Pedro P. G.;Costa-Campos, Carlos Eduardo;Carvalho, Thiago R.;Michalski, Fernanda	Taucce, Pedro P. G., Costa-Campos, Carlos Eduardo, Carvalho, Thiago R., Michalski, Fernanda (2022): Anurans (Amphibia: Anura) of the Brazilian state of Amapá, eastern Amazonia: species diversity and knowledge gaps. European Journal of Taxonomy 836: 96-130, DOI: https://doi.org/10.5852/ejt.2022.836.1919, URL: http://zoobank.org/86496226-c36d-435c-b9ed-1cee58132e66
