Research Article
Print
Research Article
Herpetofauna of the Northwest Amazon forest in the state of Maranhão, Brazil, with remarks on the Gurupi Biological Reserve
expand article infoMarco Antonio de Freitas, Ruhan Saldanha Vieira§, Omar Machado Entiauspe-Neto|, Samantha Oliveira e Sousa, Tayse Farias#, Alanna Grazieli Sousa, Geraldo Jorge Barbosa de Moura¤
‡ Instituto Chico Mendes de Conservação da Biodiversidade (ICMBio), Buíque, Brazil
§ Instituto Chico Mendes de Conservação da Biodiversidade (ICMBio), Tefé, Brazil
| Universidade Federal do Rio Grande, Rio Grande, Brazil
¶ Universidade de Ensino Superior do Sul do Maranhão (UNISULMA), Imperatriz, Brazil
# Centro Universitário do Estado do Pará (CESUPA), Belém, Brazil
¤ Universidade Federal Rural de Pernambuco (UFRPE), Recife, Brazil
Open Access

Abstract

Understanding the biodiversity of an area is the first step for establishing effective interventions for conservation, especially when it comes to herpetofauna, since 4.1% and 9.2%, respectively, of Brazilian amphibians and reptiles are endangered. The aim of this study is to identify the composition of the herpetofauna occurring in the Northwest Amazonian state of Maranhão, with a focus on the Gurupi Biological Reserve and surrounding areas. Samples were collected between May 2012 and October 2013 (18 months), through pitfall traps, time constrained active search, and opportunistic encounters, and these records were supplemented by specimens collected by third parties and by bibliographic records. A total of 131 species were recorded: 31 species of amphibians and 100 species of reptiles (six testudines, 30 lizards, two amphisbaenas, 60 snakes and two alligators), including some species new to the state of Maranhão and the northeast region of Brazil. This inventory contributes to the knowledge of the herpetofauna for the Belém Endemism Center, the most devastated region of the Brazilian Amazon, and considered poorly sampled.

Keywords

Amphibians, Belém Center of Endemism, inventory, new records, reptiles

Introduction

Conservation units in the Amazon (National Parks, ecological stations, extractive reserves, national forests, biological reserves, etc.) are of fundamental importance for the conservation of biodiversity in this biome (Peres 2005; Silva 2005).

With regard to formulating effective management plans, it is of fundamental importance for biodiversity conservation to know the composition of the fauna and flora. Faunal lists, especially in regions that represent sampling gaps and that refer to groups with a high percentage of endangered species should be emphasized (Peres 2005).

In this context, regarding the herpetofauna, there are in Brazil 1080 known species of amphibians and 773 species of reptiles of which 4.1% and 9.2% are endangered, respectively (Costa and Bérnils 2015; Segalla et al. 2016).

Biodiversity inventories enable us to identify the degree of regional endemism, new trigger points, new species and the actual conservation status of the species recorded, besides enriching regional and national scientific collections (Moura et al. 2014).

It is noteworthy that species lists are highly important for our understanding of the environmental conservation, since the occurrence of bioindicator species (either opportunistic or vulnerable) can be used to determine the effects of environmental disturbance in the area, and therefore, pave a way to efficient interventions and conservation policies (Brown and Freitas 2002).

The state of Maranhão is known for its rich biodiversity (Martins and Oliveira 2011), lack of researchers and extensive sampling gaps, especially regarding the herpetofauna in the Amazon biome of northwestern Maranhão.

Among the indicators of the need for wildlife studies in Maranhão are the articles of the last decades that describe new species in Amazonia, especially in the eastern Amazon (Caramaschi 2010; Vaz-Silva et al. 2015), as well as the few publications, concentrated mainly on snakes (Cunha and Nascimento 1993; Freitas et al. 2014), lizards (Avila-Pires and Vitt 1998; Avila-Pires 1995; Freitas et al. 2013) and anurans (Andrade et al. 2003; Rodrigues et al. 2003; Andrade et al. 2011; Barreto et al. 2011; Miranda et al. 2012; Miranda et al. 2013; Matavelli et al. 2013; Freitas et al. 2014b, c, d; Vaz-Silva et al. 2015).

This study aims to record the composition of amphibians and reptiles of the REBIO Gurupi and adjacent regions of the northwest Amazon of Maranhão state, a conservation unit of utmost importance, composing the largest and last block of continuous forests in the Belém Endemism Center (Martins and Oliveira 2011).

Materials and methods

Study Area: The Gurupi Biological Reserve (03°58'32"S 46°46'52"W) (Figure 1), was created by Law 95 614 1988 and occupies an original area of 341,650 hectares in the municipalities of Bom Jardim, Centro Novo do Maranhão and São João do Caru, in the state of Maranhão (IBAMA 2006). The climate is humid type B2, with moderate water deficit in the summer, average annual rainfall exceeding 2,000 and average temperature greater than 24°C, with the soil type being argisoil (Martins and Oliveira 2011). This work was performed and focused only in Gurupi and the adjacent rainforests of the State of Maranhão, northwest Amazon.

Sampling: Samples were collected between May 2012 and October 2013 (18 months), with pitfall traps, time constrained active search, and opportunistic encounters in the forested areas and access roads to REBIO (road killed individuals). They also included those collected by third parties and bibliographic records.

Figure 1.

Map with the location of the study area, in the Gurupi Biological Reserve, Maranhão, Brazil.

The pitfall traps were composed of seven lines of five buckets (60 L) connected by a plastic canvas with a length of 10m, totaling 70 meters of intercept lines (Line 1: 03°59'14"S, 46°47'53"W; Line 2: 03°59'11"S, 46°47'50"W; Line 3: 03°59'05 “S, 46°47'27"W; Line 4: 03°59'06"S, 46°47'25 “W; Line 5: 03°59'07"S, 46° 47'15"W; Line 6: 03°59'03"S, 46°47'04"W; Line 7: 03°58'32"S, 46°46'52"W), each line was about 3 km distant from one another. Traps were open around the clock for five days during each sampling campaign. These were concentrated in the rainy season, December 2012, January and May 2013, totaling an effort of 5400 hours/ bucket.

The time-constrained active search was conducted over three campaigns for three nights in December 2012, January and May 2013, by a team made up of five collectors, totaling an effort of 135 man hours according to the methodologies of Martins and Oliveira (1998), and Bernarde and Abe (2006). The search was concentrated in the area adjacent to aquatic environments near the southern tip of REBIO Gurupi (04°00'20"S, 46°46'41"W).

The collected amphibians were euthanized by applying lidocaine ointment (lidocaine) on the ventral region and the reptiles through overdosing with ether (Callefo 2002; Franco and Salomão 2002). All specimens were fixed with 10% formalin and then preserved in 70% ethanol.

Voucher specimens were deposited in the collection of Herpetology and Paleontology of the Federal Rural University of Pernambuco CHP-UFRPE (tumble numbers in Appendix 1) and the University of São Paulo Museum of Zoology MZUSP (tumble numbers in Appendix 1). Important bibliographic databases added to this work were Cunha and Nascimento (1993) for snakes, Avila-Pires (1995) for lizards and Barreto et al. (2011) for amphibians and reptiles.

Data analysis: In order to evaluate the efficiency of the collection effort in the analyzed fragment, species rarefaction curves were constructed with 1000 randomizations generated based on the data matrix of the relationship between richness and abundance (ICE index) through the statistical program Ecosim version 7.0 (Gotelli and Enstminger 2003).

Results

A total of 131 species composing the local herpetofauna was recorded: 31 species of amphibians (seven families) and 100 species of reptiles, which included six testudines, 30 lizards, two amphisbaenians, 60 snakes and two crocodylians (Figure 3, 4).

Figure 3.

Some amphibians and reptiles recorded in the Gurupi Biological Reserve, Maranhão, Brazil. A Adelphobates galactonotus B Phyllomedusa vaillanti C Lithodytes lineatus D Leptodactylus paraensis E Ctenophryne geayi F Platemys platicephala G Paleosuchus trigonatus H Cercosaura argulus. Photo credit of P. trigonatus (G) belong to Eloisa Mendonça and M. A. de Freitas for others.

Figure 4.

Some amphibians and reptiles recorded in the Gurupi Biological Reserve, Maranhão, Brazil. A Leposoma percarinatum B Neusticurus bicarinatus C Coleodactylus septentrionalis D Cnemidophorus cryptus E Stenocercus dumerilii F Phrynonax poecilonotus G Rhinobothryum lentiginosum H Sibynomorphus mikanii septentrionalis I Micrurus spixii martiusi J Rhinella gildae. Photo credits of P. poecilonotus (F) belong to Eloisa Mendonça, R. lentiginosum (G) to Saymon Albuquerque and M. A. de Freitas for others.

Of the 131 species recorded for the northwest Amazon in Maranhão, 78 species (62%) were recorded in this study and 53 (38%) included results from previously published data (Cunha and Nascimento 1993; Avila-Pires 1995; Barreto et al. 2011).

Discussion

The Belém Endemism Center (EC) is the smallest among the eight EC in the Amazon region, and has the largest loss of forest cover, with about 70% of its total area already destroyed (Silva et al. 2005; Fearnside 2006).

The diversity of amphibians and reptiles of the Belém Endemism Center is very high, as in other endemic centers, especially those of the eastern Amazon region, such as the ECs Guyana, Xingu and Tapajós: 85 species of snakes further down the Amazon River, in Santarem, state of Pará at EC Tapajós (Frota et al. 2005); 62 species of amphibians and reptiles in the Biological Reserve Tapirape, also at Pará, in the EC Xingu (Bernardo et al. 2012); 71 species of amphibians in the National Forest of Carajás, also at the EC Xingu (Pinheiro et al. 2012); 175 species of amphibians and reptiles in the National Forest of Saracá-Taquera, in theEC Guiana at Pará (Morato et al. 2014.); 53 species of snakes for the National Forest of Caxiuanã (at the EC Xingu (Santos-Costa et al. 2015); 78 species of amphibians and reptiles in the northern part of the state of Maranhão (Barreto et al. 2011). It is noteworthy that the last of these studies includes species of open areas, which are present due to the strong influence of Cerrado vegetation in northern Maranhão, as seen in the inventory of Miranda et al. (2012), which lists 42 species of reptiles for the coastal region of Maranhão, which is characterized by open vegetation and the predominance of coastal dunes.

The species richness of REBIO Gurupi is second only to the richness sampled in the National Forest of Saracá-Taquera in northern Pará, located in the Guyana Endemism Center, more than 1000 km from REBIO Gurupi (Morato et al. 2014).

Regarding sampling efficiency, the collection effort and methods used were not effective, as not all niches were sampled. As a result, the curve implied 33 amphibian species and 78 reptile species at the site. As the curves did not reach an asymptote, we believe that site has potential for species that have not yet been recorded. This is borne out by the additional 58 species not found during the field work but recorded in the literature for the area (Cunha and Nascimento 1993; Avila-Pires 1995; Barreto et al. 2011) (Figure 2). Regarding collection methods, pitfall traps yielded only 33 species of the 78 found in the field, chiefly amphibians, frogs, and fossorial lizards.

Figure 2.

Thinning curves representing the accumulated richness of species of frogs and lizards at REBIO Gurupi. The richness was recorded by passive and active collection between December 2012 and May 2013. The center line is the average (randomizing 1000 times) and the lines on the side represent the associated standard deviation.

Conclusion

Since only 38% of the recorded species included in this inventory were obtained from literature (Table 1), it is possible to ascertain that our sampling reflects a great share of the total herpetofauna from Northwestern Maranhão. With this richness, the Gurupi Biological Reserve stands out as a biodiversity hotspot in the Amazon, reinforcing the need for its protection, and its position as the most important restricted use conservation unit of the Belém Endemism Center.

Herpetofauna recorded between May 2012 and October 2013 in the Gurupi Biological Reserve, Maranhão, Brazil. (Type of record: EO = Opportunistic Encounter; BA = Constrained active search; Pitfalls = pitfall trap, DS = secondary data).

* First occurrence for the state of Maranhão and northeast Brazil.

** Species endemic to the Belém center of endemism.

FAMILY SPECIES TYPE OF RECORD
Bufonidae Rhinella gildae Vaz-Silva, Maciel, Bastos & Pombal Jr, 2015** EO - DS (Vaz-Silva et al. 2015)
Rhinella marina (Linnaeus, 1758) EO/Pitfalls/BA
Craugastoridae Pristimantis fenestratus (Steindachner, 1864) BA
Dendrobatidae Adelphobates galactonotus (Steindachner, 1864)** BA
Hylidae Dendropsophus marmoratus (Laurenti, 1768) EO
Dendropsophus cf. minusculus DS (Barreto et al. 2011)
Dendropsophus nanus (Boulenger, 1889) DS (Barreto et al. 2011)
Dendropsophus minutus (Peters, 1872) DS (Barreto et al. 2011)
Dendropsophus rubicundulus (Reinhardt & Lütken, 1862) DS (Barreto et al. 2011)
Hypsiboas boans (Linnaeus, 1758) EO
Hypsiboas fasciatus (Günther, 1859 “1858”) DS (Barreto et al. 2011)
Hypsiboas punctatus (Schneider, 1799) BA
Hypsiboas multifasciatus (Günther, 1859) DS (Barreto et al. 2011)
Osteocephalus taurinus Steindachner, 1862 BA
Scinax fuscomarginatus (A. Lutz, 1925) DS (Barreto et al. 2011)
Scinax nebulosus (Spix, 1824) DS (Barreto et al. 2011)
Scinax ruber (Laurenti, 1768) EO
Sphaenorhynchus lacteus (Daudin, 1800) DS (Benício et al. 2011)
Trachycephalus typhonius (Linnaeus, 1758) EO
Phyllomedusa hypochondrialis (Daudin, 1800) DS (Barreto et al. 2011)
Phyllomedusa vaillantii Boulenger, 1882 * BA (Freitas et al. 2014)
Leptodactylidae Adenomera andreae (Müller, 1923) BA/Pitfalls/EO
Leptodactylus fuscus (Schneider, 1799) EO
Leptodactylus mystaceus (Spix, 1824) BA/Pitfalls/EO
Leptodactylus rhodomystax Boulenger, 1884 (Sá et al. 2014)
Leptodactylus paraensis Heyer, 2005 ** - EO
Leptodactylus troglodytes A. Lutz, 1926 EO
Leptodactylus gr latrans DS (Barreto et al. 2011)
Lithodytes lineatus (Schneider, 1799)* (Freitas et al. 2014)
Leiuperidae Physalaemus cuvieri Fitzinger, 1826 BA/Pitfalls
Microhylidae Ctenophryne geayi Mocquard, 1904 * (Freitas et al. 2014)
Chelidae Platemys platycephala (Schneider, 1792) * EO
Geoemydidae Rhinoclemmys punctularia (Daudin, 1801) EO
Kinosternidae Kinosternon scorpioides (Linnaeus, 1766) EO
Podocnemididae Podocnemis unifilis Troschel, 1848 EO
Testudinidae Chelonoidis carbonarius (Spix, 1824) EO
Chelonoidis denticulatus (Linnaeus, 1766) EO
Alligatoridae Caiman crocodilus (Linnaeus, 1758) EO
Paleosuchus trigonatus (Schneider, 1801) * EO
Dactyloidae Dactyloa punctata (Daudin, 1802) BA
Norops fuscoauratus (D’Orbigny, 1837) BA/Pitfalls/EO
Norops tandai (Ávila-Pires, 1995) DS (Ávila-Pires 1995)
Gekkonidae Hemidactylus mabouia (Moreau de Jonnès, 1818) EO
Gymnophthalmidae Micrablepharus maximiliani (Reinhardt & Luetken, 1862) EO
Cercosaura argulus Peters, 1863 (Freitas et al. 2013)
Cercosaura ocellata Wagler, 1830 DS (Ávila-Pires 1995)
Colobosaura modesta (Reinhardt & Luetken, 1862) DS (Ávila-Pires 1995)
Arthrosaura reticulata (O’Shaughnessy, 1881) DS (Ávila-Pires 1995)
Leposoma percarinatum Muller, 1923 * Pitfalls
Neusticurus bicarinatus (Linnaeus, 1758)** DS (Ávila-Pires 1995)
Iguanidae Iguana iguana (Linnaeus, 1758) EO
Leiosauridae Enyalius leechii (Boulenger, 1885) DS (Ávila-Pires 1995)
Mabuyidae Copeoglossum nigropunctatum (Spix, 1825) Pitfalls
Phyllodactylidae Thecadactylus rapicauda (Houttuyn, 1782) EO
Polychrotidae Polychrus acutirostris Spix, 1825 DS (Ávila-Pires 1995)
Polychrus marmoratus (Linnaeus, 1758) EO
Sphaerodactylidae Coleodactylus septentrionalis (Vanzolini, 1980)** Pitfalls
Gonatodes humeralis (Guichenot, 1855) Pitfalls/BA
Teiidae Ameiva ameiva (Linnaeus, 1758) Pitfalls/EO/BA
Cnemidophorus cryptus Cole & Dessauer, 1993 * EO
Kentropyx calcarata Spix, 1825 Pitfalls/BA
Salvator merianae (Duméril & Bibron, 1839) EO/BA
Tupinambis teguixin (Linnaeus, 1758) DS (Ávila-Pires 1995)
Dracaena guianensis Daudin, 1801 DS (Ávila-Pires 1995)
Tropiduridae Plica umbra (Linnaeus, 1758) Pitfalls
Stenocercus dumerilii (Steindachner, 1867)** Pitfalls
Tropidurus hispidus (Spix, 1825) EO/BA
Uracentron azureum (Linnaeus, 1758) DS (Ávila-Pires 1995)
Uranoscodon superciliosus (Linnaeus, 1758) BA
Amphisbaenidae Amphisbaena alba Linnaeus, 1758 DS (Barreto et al. 2011)
Amphisbaena amazonica Vanzolini, 1951 EO
Typhlopidae Amerotyphlops brongersmianus (Vanzolini, 1976) Pitfalls
Aniliidae Anilius scytale (Linnaeus, 1758) EO
Boidae Boa constrictor Linnaeus, 1758 EO
Corallus hortulanus (Linnaeus, 1758) EO
Epicrates cenchria (Linnaeus, 1758) EO
Eunectes murinus (Linnaeus, 1758) DS
(Cunha and Nascimento 1993)
Colubridae Chironius carinatus (Linnaeus, 1758) EO
Chironius exoletus (Linnaeus, 1758) EO
Chironius fuscus (Linnaeus, 1758) DS
(Cunha and Nascimento 1993)
Chironius multiventris Schmidt & Walker, 1943 DS
(Cunha and Nascimento 1993)
Chironius scurrulus (Wagler in Spix, 1824) DS
(Cunha and Nascimento 1993)
Drymarchon corais (Boie, 1827) EO
Drymoluber dichrous (Peters, 1863) DS
(Cunha and Nascimento 1993)
Leptophis ahaetulla (Linnaeus, 1758) EO
Mastigodryas bifossatus (Raddi, 1820) DS
(Cunha and Nascimento 1993)
Colubridae Mastigodryas boddaerti (Sentzen, 1796) EO
Oxybelis aeneus (Wagler in Spix, 1824) DS (Barreto et al. 2011)
Oxybelis fulgidus (Daudin, 1803) EO
Phrynonax poecilonotus (Peters, 1867)* EO
Rhinobothryum lentiginosum (Scopoli, 1785) * EO
Spilotes pullatus (Linnaeus, 1758) EO
Tantilla melanocephala (Linnaeus, 1758) Pitfalls
Dipsadidae Atractus alphonsehogei Cunha & Nascimento, 1983 DS
(Cunha and Nascimento 1983)
Atractus schach (Boie, 1827) DS
(Cunha and Nascimento 1993)
Atractus snethlageae Cunha & Nascimento, 1983 DS
(Cunha and Nascimento 1993)
Dipsas catesbyi (Sentzen, 1796) EO
Dipsas variegata (Duméril, Bibron & Duméril, 1854) DS
(Cunha and Nascimento 1993)
Erythrolamprus aesculapii (Linnaeus, 1766) DS
(Cunha and Nascimento 1993)
Erythrolamprus cobella (Linnaeus, 1758) DS
(Cunha and Nascimento 1993)
Erythrolamprus miliaris chrysostomus (Griffin, 1916) DS
(Cunha and Nascimento 1993)
Erythrolamprus oligolepis (Boulenger, 1905) DS
(Cunha and Nascimento 1993)
Erythrolamprus poecilogyrus (Wied, 1825) EO
Sibon nebulatus (Linnaeus, 1758) DS
(Cunha and Nascimento 1993)
Sibynomorphus mikanii septentrionalis Cunha, Nascimento & Hoge, 1980 ** EO (Freitas et al. 2014)
Imantodes cenchoa (Linnaeus, 1758) DS
(Cunha and Nascimento 1993)
Leptodeira annulata (Linnaeus, 1758) EO/BA
Helicops angulatus (Linnaeus, 1758) DS (Barreto et al. 2011)
Hydrops martii (Wagler in Spix, 1824) DS
(Cunha and Nascimento 1993)
Pseudoeryx plicatilis (Linnaeus, 1758) DS
(Cunha and Nascimento 1993)
Philodryas olfersii (Liechtenstein, 1823) EO
Philodryas viridissima (Linnaeus, 1758) EO
Clelia plumbea (Wied, 1820) EO
Oxyrhopus melanogenys Cunha & Nascimento, 1983 BA
Oxyrhopus petolarius (Reuss, 1834) EO
Pseudoboa coronata Schneider, 1801 DS
(Cunha and Nascimento 1993)
Pseudoboa neuwiedii (Duméril, Bibron & Duméril, 1854) EO
Pseudoboa nigra (Duméril, Bibron & Duméril, 1854) EO
Siphlophis cervinus (Laurenti, 1768) DS
(Cunha and Nascimento 1993)
Taeniophallus quadriocellatus Santos-Jr, Di-Bernardo & Lema, 2008 DS
(Cunha and Nascimento 1993)
Dipsadidae Xenodon merremii (Wagler in Spix, 1824) EO
Xenodon severus (Linnaeus, 1758) DS
(Cunha and Nascimento 1993)
Elapidae Micrurus filiformis (Günther, 1859) DS
(Cunha and Nascimento 1993)
Micrurus hemprichii (Jan, 1858) DS
(Cunha and Nascimento 1993)
Micrurus lemniscatus lemniscatus (Linnaeus, 1758) DS
(Cunha and Nascimento 1993)
Micrurus spixii martiusi Schmidt, 1953 ** BA
Micrurus surinamensis (Cuvier, 1817) DS
(Cunha and Nascimento 1993)
Viperidae Bothrops atrox (Linnaeus, 1758) BA/EO
Bothrops brazili Hoge, 1954 DS
(Cunha and Nascimento 1993)
Bothrops taeniatus Wagler in Spix, 1824 DS
(Cunha and Nascimento 1993)
Lachesis muta (Linnaeus, 1766) DS
(Cunha and Nascimento 1993)

Acknowledgments

We thank the colleagues who supported the field activities, particularly the head of the Gurupi Biological Reserve, Evane Alves Lisboa for her support with housing, fuel, and vehicles used in the research. We are also deeply indebted to Anne Taffin d’Heursel Baldisseri for conducting an English grammar revision. We also thank Eloisa Mendonça for a few photographic records and for supporting the team in the field. Saymon Albuquerque is thanked for photographic records and Diego Mendes for building the map. This research was carried out under collecting license SISBIO/ ICMBio 36669-1. We also thank four anonymous reviewers and the editor Aaron Bauer for valuable comments on the manuscript.

References

  • Ávila-Pires TCS, Vitt LJ (1998) A new species of Neusticurus (Reptilia: Gymnophthalmidae) from the Rio Juruá, Acre, Brazil. Herpetologica 54: 235–245.
  • Ávila-Pires TCS (1995) Lizards of Brazilian Amazonia (Reptilia: Squamata). Zoologische Verhandelingen 299(1): 1–706.
  • Andrade GV, Alves MR, Santos CL (2011) Distribution extension of Hypsiboas punctatus (Schneider, 1799) In the Maranhão State, Brazil (Anura, Hylidae). Herpetotropicos 6: 11–13.
  • Barreto L, Ribeiro LES, Nascimento MC (2011) Caracterização da herpetofauna em áreas da Amazônia do Maranhão. In: Martins MB, Oliveira TG (Eds) Amazônia Maranhense, diversidade e conservação. Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi, Belém, 204–217.
  • Bernardo PH, Guerra-Fuentes RA, Matiazzi W, Zaher H (2012) Checklist of Amphibians and Reptiles of Reserva Biológica do Tapirapé, Pará, Brazil. Check List 8(5): 839–846. https://doi.org/10.15560/8.5.839
  • Brown KS Jr, Freitas AVL (2002) Diversidade Biológica no Alto Juruá: Avaliação, Causas e Manutenção. In: Cunha MC, Almeida MB (Eds) Enciclopédia da Floresta: O Alto Juruá: Práticas e Conhecimentos das Populações. Companhia das Letras, São Paulo-SP, 33–42.
  • Costa HC, Bérnils RS (Org.) (2015) Répteis Brasileiros: Lista de espécies. Herpetologia Brasileira 4(3): 74–84.
  • Cunha OR, Nascimento FP (1993) Ofídios da Amazônia. As cobras da região Leste do Pará. Boletim Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi. Zoologia 9: 1–191.
  • Callefo MEV (2002) Anfíbios. In: Aurichio P, Salomão MG, Souza AM (Eds) Técnicas de preparação de vertebrados. Terra Brasilis, 43–73.
  • Caramaschi U (2010) Notes on the taxonomic status of Elachistocleis ovalis (Schneider, 1799) and description of five new species of Elachistocleis Parker, 1927 (Amphibia, Anura, Microhylidae). Boletim do Museu Nacional, Zoologia 527: 1–30.
  • de Sá RO, Grant T, Camargo A, Heyer WR, Ponssa ML, Stanley E (2014) Systematics of the neotropical genus Leptodactylus Fitzinger, 1826 (Anura: Leptodactylydae): Phylogeny, the relevance of non-molecular evidence, and species accounts. South American Journal of Herpetology 9: 1–128. https://doi.org/10.2994/SAJH-D-13-00022.1
  • Franco FL, Salomão MG (2002) Répteis. Coleta e preparação de répteis para coleções científicas: considerações iniciais. In: Aurichio P, Salomão MG, Souza AM (Eds) Técnicas de preparação de vertebrados, Terra Brasilis, Arujá, 77–125.
  • Freitas MA, Sousa SOE, Vieira RS, Farias T, Moura GJB (2013) First record of Cercosaura argulus (Peters, 1863) (Squamata: Gymnophthalmidae) for the state of Maranhão, Brazil. Check List 9(6): 1541–1542. https://doi.org/10.15560/9.6.1541
  • Freitas MA, Almeida BJ, Almeida MSM, Danin TS, Moura GJB (2014a) Rediscovery and first record of Sibynomorphus mikanii septentrionalis (Cunha, Nascimento, Hoge 1980), (Squamata; Serpentes) for the state of Pará. Check List 10(5): 1246–1248. https://doi.org/10.15560/10.5.1246
  • Freitas MA, Dias IR, Farias T, Sousa SOE, Vieira RS, Moura GJB, Uhlig V (2014b) First record of Ctenophryne geayi Mocquard, 1904 (Amphibia: Anura) for the state of Maranhão, Brazil. Check List 10(3): 585–587. https://doi.org/10.15560/10.3.585
  • Freitas MA, Farias T, Sousa SOE, Vieira RS, Moura GJB, Dias IR (2014c) First record of Lithodytes lineatus (Schneider, 1799) (Anura: Leptodactylidae) in northeastern Brazil. Check List 10(3): 615–617. https://doi.org/10.15560/10.3.615
  • Freitas MA, Farias T, Sousa SOE, Vieira RS, Moura GJB, Uhlig V (2014d) First record of Phyllomedusa vaillantii Boulenger, 1882 (Amphibia: Anura) for the state of Maranhão, Brazil. Herpetology Notes 7: 457–459.
  • Frota JG, Santos-Jr. AP, Chalkids HM, Guedes AG (2005) The snakes of the lower Amazon, west of the state of Pará, Brazil (Squamatas). Porto Alegre. Biociências 13(2): 211–220.
  • IBAMA (2006) Plano de manejo da reserva biológica do Gurupi. São Luiz, 350 pp.
  • Macial AO (2003) Geographic Distribution. Stenocercus dumerilii. Herpetological Review 34(4): 385–386.
  • Martins M, Oliveira ME (1998) Natural history of snakes in forests of the Manaus region, Central Amazonia, Brazil. Herpetological Natural History 6: 78–150.
  • Martins MB, Oliveira TG (2011) Amazônia maranhense, Diversidade e conservação (1st edn). Museu Goeldi, Belém, 328 pp.
  • Miranda JP, Matos RF, Scarpa FM, Rocha CFD (2013) New record and distribution extension of Siphonops paulensis (Gymnophiona: Siphonopidae) in the state of Maranhão, Northeastern Brazil. Herpetology Notes 6: 327–329.
  • Morato SAA, Calixto PO, Mendes LR, Gomes R, Galatti U, Trein FL, Oliveira FS, Ferreiras GN (2014) Guia fotográfico de identificação da herpetofauna da Floresta Nacional de Saracá-Taquera, Estado do Pará. Curitiba: STCP Engenharia de Projetos Ltda, Porto Trombetas: MRN – Mineração Rio do Norte S.A., 213 pp.
  • Moura CCM, Moura GJB, Lisboa EBF, Luz VLF (2014) Distribuição geográfica e considerações ecológicas sobre a fauna de Testudines da Região Nordeste do Brasil. Sitientibus serie Ciencias Biologicas (SCB) 14: 1–20. https://doi.org/10.13102/scb236
  • Matavelle R, Campos AM, Mendonça MA, Andrade GV (2013) New records of anurans in the state of Maranhão, Brazil: Hypsiboas boans (Linnaeus, 1758) (Hylidae) and Leptodactylus syphax Bokermann, 1969 (Leptodactylidae). Check List 9: 899–901. https://doi.org/10.15560/9.4.899
  • Peres CA (2005) Porque precisamos de megareservas na Amazônia. Natureza & Conservação 3(1): 8–16.
  • Pinheiro LC, Youszef OCB, Galatti U, Neckel – Oliveira S, Santos-Costa MC (2012) Amphibians from southeastern state of Pará: Carajás Region, northern Brazil. Check List 8(4): 693–702. https://doi.org/10.15560/8.4.693
  • Rodrigues MT, Andrade GV, Lima JD (2003) A New Species of Amphisbaena from State of Maranhão: Brazil (Squamata, Amphisbaenidae). Phyllomedusa, 21:21–26, 2003.Santos-Costa MC, Maschio GF, Prudente ALC (2015) Natural history of snakes from Floresta Nacional de Caxiuanã, eastern Amazonia. Brazil Herpetology Notes 8: 69–98.
  • Segalla MV, Caramaschi U, Cruz CAG, Garcia PCA, Grant T, Haddad CFB, Langone P (2016) Brazilian amphibians – List of species. http://www.sbherpetologia.org.br [accessed on 15 July 2016]
  • Silva M (2005) O programa brasileiro de unidades de conservação. Megadiversidade 1(1): 22–26.
  • Silva JMC, Rylands AB, Fonseca GAB (2005) O destino das áreas de endemismo da Amazônia. Megadiversidade. Belo Horizonte 1(1): 124–131.
  • Vaz-Silva W, Maciel NM, Bastos RP, Pombal JP Jr (2015) Revealing two new species o the Rhinella margarifera species group (Anura, Bufonidae): an enigmatic taxonomic group of Neotropical toads. Herpetologica 71(3): 212–222. https://doi.org/10.1655/HERPETOLOGICA-D-14-00039

Appendix 1

Specimens examined

Rhinella marina CHP-UFRPE 1810 – Rhinella gildae CHP-UFRPE 1848 Leptodactylus paraensis CHP-UFRPE 1811-1845 – Leptodactylus petersii MZUSP – 154062 – Lithodytes lineatus CHP-UFRPE 1815 – Leptodactylus mystaceus CHP-UFRPE 1838-44-1863-64-1878 – Physalaemus cuvieri CHP-UFRPE 1834-37 – Pristimantes fenestratus CHP-UFRPE 1862-2042, MZUSP 154061 – Phyllomedusa vaillantii CHP-UFRPE 1874-2621 – Hypsiboas punctatus CHP-UFRPE 1877 – Ctenophryne geayi CHP-UFRPE 1820-1859-1876 – Scinax ruber CHP-UFRPE 1816 – Dentropsophus marmoratus CHP-UFRPE 1818 – Trachycephalus tyfonius CHP-UFRPE 1824-25 – Adenomera andreae MZUSP 154063-69 Cercosaura argulus CHP-UFRPE 2622 – Amphisbaena amazonica CHP-UFRPE 2065 – Plica umbra CHP-UFRPE 1826-28-1873 – Iguana iguana CHP-UFRPE 1870 – Micrablepharus maximiliani CHP-UFRPE 1866-69 – Norops fuscoauratus CHP-UFRPE 1817-1865 – Tropidurus hispidus CHP-UFRPE 1846 – Copeoglosum nigropunctatum CHP-UFRPE 1832-33 – Gonatodes humeralis CHP-UFRPE 1821-23 – Coleodactylus septentrionalis CHP-UFRPE 1819 – Uranoscodon superciliosus CHP-UFRPE 1813 – Polychrus marmoratus CHP-UFRPE 1856 – Kentropys calcarata CHP-UFRPE 1830-31-MZUSP 104280 – Leposoma percarinatum MZUSP 104278 – Stenocercus dumerilii MZUSP 104279 – Cnemidophorus cryptus MZUSP 104281 – Salvator merianae MZUSP-MTR 23332 – Platemys platicephala CHP-UFRPE 1814 – Kinosternum scorpioides CHP-UFRPE 2126 – Amerotyphlops brongersmianus CHP-UFRPE 1850 - Anilius scytale CHP-UFRPE 1860 - Boa constrictor CHP-UFRPE 2439 – Corallus hortulanus CHP-UFRPE 2457 – Spilotes pullatus CHP-UFRPE 1873 – Leptophis ahaetulla CHP-UFRPE 2267 – Tantila melanocephala CHP-UFRPE 1829 – Sibynomorphus mikanii septentrionalis CHP-UFRPE 1858-2234-38 – Oxyrhopus pelotarius CHP-UFRPE 2220 – Oxyrhopus melanogenys CHP-UFRPE 1829 – Pseudoboa nigra CHP-UFRPE 1852-53 – Pseudoboa newiedii CHP-UFRPE 1860 – Erythrolamprus poecilogyrus CHP-UFRPE 1875-1851 – Leptodeira annulata CHP-UFRPE 1847 – Philodryas olfersii CHP-UFRPE 1854 – Dipsas catesbyi CHP-UFRPE 1872 – Micrurus spixii martiusi CHP-UFRPE 1812 – Bothrops atrox CHP-UFRPE 1855.