It was supposed that the current records of Amolops ricketti might be a species complex composed of multiple species. In this study, on the basis of wide sampling, we found that the records of A. ricketti from Yunnan, China, and northern Vietnam actually represent a cryptic species based on morphological and molecular evidence. Amolops shihaitaoi sp. nov. can be distinguished from other members of the A. ricketti species group by its moderate body size (SVL 35.5‒37.3 mm in males and 39.2‒45.7 mm in females); white spines on the temporal region, loreal region, snout, and lips in breeding males but absent in females; overlapping heels; tibiotarsal articulation reaching tip of snout; indistinct longitudinal glandular folds on the skin of the shoulders; presence of supernumerary tubercles below the base of fingers II‒IV, distinct pineal body; presence of vomerine teeth; and absence of vocal sacs. Phylogenetic analysis supports that the new species is sister to Amolops yatseni and the populations from Jingxi, Guangxi and Lào Cai, Vietnam previously reported as A. yatesni also belong to it. Additionally, our results indicate that more cryptic species may exist within the A. ricketti species group, implying that more studies are needed to achieve a complete understanding of the species diversity of this group.

Amolops shihaitaoi sp. nov., Amolops yatseni, new species, Northern Vietnam, Yunnan

The cascade frog genus Amolops Cope, 1865, which occurs throughout Southeast Asia, southern China, and the southern and eastern Himalayas (Yu et al. 2019; Gan et al. 2020a; Frost 2021), currently contains 73 species (Frost 2021). In China, 42 cascade frog species have been reported (AmphibiaChina 2022), and recently they were assigned into eight species groups, including the A. monticola group, A. chayuensis group, A. mantzorum group, A. viridimaculatus group, A. marmoratus group, A. ricketti group, A. daiyunensis group, and A. hainanensis group (Jiang et al. 2021).

Generally, members of same species group within Amolops share a very similar external adult morphology (e.g. A. monticola group), and even some species are more similar in external adult morphology to species of the genus Odorrana Fei, Ye & Huang, 1990 (Stuart et al. 2010), which has heavily hampered our understanding of the species diversity in Amolops (Wu et al. 2020). During the past two decades, many efforts have been conducted to clarify species diversity within Amolops and, notably, a high number of cryptic lineages were discovered. For example, Bain et al. (2003) found six cryptic species in the Rana chloronota complex and one of them was later moved to Amolops [A. daorum (Bain, Lathrop, Murphy, Orlov & Ho, 2003)] by Stuart (2008); Dever et al. (2012) investigated diversity in the Amolops marmoratus species complex in Myanmar and identified a cryptic species; Lu et al. (2014) suggested that the A. mantzorum species group contains five putative species and the nominal species A. mantzorum (David, 1872) may in fact include two cryptic species; Fei et al. (2017) recognized the clade consisting of a high-altitude population of the A. mantzorum complex in the Yalong river basin as a new species; Jiang et al. (2021) revealed multiple cryptic lineages in the Amolops chunganensis complex within A. monticola group; and Zeng et al. (2021) found that the populations previously recorded as A. hongkongensis (Pope & Romer, 1951) or A. daiyunensis (Liu & Hu, 1975) from the coastal hills in eastern Guangdong and southern Fujian represents a cryptic lineage within the A. daiyunensis species group. Overall, efforts since 2000 have described more than half of the known species within Amolops (Wu et al. 2020), which greatly improves our understanding on the taxonomy and species diversity of this genus.

The A. ricketti group is a monophyletic species group containing six recognized species mainly known from southeast China: A. yunkaiensis Lyu, Wang, Liu, Zeng & Wang, 2018, A. albispinus Sung, Wang & Wang, 2016, A. wuyiensis (Liu & Hu, 1975), A. ricketti (Boulenger, 1899), A. sinensis Lyu, Wang & Wang, 2019, and A. yatseni Lyu, Wang & Wang, 2019 (Lyu et al. 2019; Jiang et al. 2021). Amolops ricketti was originally described based on specimens from Mount Wuyi, Fujian, China (Boulenger 1899) and had been recorded widely from southern China (i.e. Guangdong, Zhejiang, Jiangxi, Hubei, Hunan, Anhui, and Sichuan; Fei et al. 2012) and northern Vietnam (Nguyen et al. 2009). However, relatively high morphological variation had been observed among populations (Ngo et al. 2006), and recently several cryptic species have been recognized including A. albispinus, A. sinensis, and A. yatseni (Sung et al. 2016; Lyu et al. 2019), indicating that current records of A. ricketti might be composed of multiple species and further surveys and studies are required to investigate the species diversity of A. ricketti group.

In Yunnan, China, A. ricketti has been recorded from Hekou County for over two decades (Yang 1991), but samples of this population have never been included in previous systematic studies. Given that the records of A. ricketti from the central region of its geographic range (Hunan, Guizhou, Sichuan, and northeastern Guangxi) have been revised to A. sinensis (Lyu et al. 2019; Xiao et al. 2019; Zeng et al. 2021), the records of A. ricketti from west region (Yunnan and adjacent Vietnam) probably also need to be revised. Recently, Poyarkov et al. (2021) supposed that Amolops tonkinensis (Ahl, 1927 “1926”), a junior synonym of A. ricketti described from northern Vietnam, is probably valid, also implying that the taxonomic status of A. ricketti from China–Vietnam border regions needs further examination.

During our recent herpetological surveys in Hekou, Yunnan, China, we have collected several Amolops specimens previously recorded as A. ricketti. Morphological and molecular examinations indicated that these specimens were distinct from A. ricketti and other members of the A. ricketti group and herein we describe them as a new species.

The obtained 16S and COI alignments were 1036 and 667 bp, respectively. The A. ricketti group was a monophyletic species group containing seven well-supported distinct clades, of which six (Clades I‒VI) correspond to the six known species of this group. The clade VII is comprised of populations previously recorded as A. ricketti from Yunnan and Vietnam and a specimen previously classified as A. yatseni from Jingxi, Guangxi, China (YPX6306), and it was the sister to A. yatseni (Fig. 2). The genetic divergences between clade VII and A. yatseni estimated from 16S and COI genes are 1.9% and 5.7%, respectively (Table 2).

Figure 2. 

Bayesian phylogram of the Amolops ricketti species group inferred from the combined data of 16S and COI genes with inclusion of all individuals (A) and inclusion of only individuals for which both the two genes are available (B).

The analysis of species delimitation based on the combined data found 10 partitions (Fig. 3a). The best partition (score = 1.00) grouped the samples into eight species with a distance threshold of c. 2% (Fig. 3b) and one of them corresponds to the clade consisting of the samples from Yunnan and northern Vietnam (Clade VII). All other clades were recognized as distinct species by the ASAP analysis with the exception of clade II, which was grouped into two different species, one containing the samples of A. ricketti from Fujian (including the type locality) and one containing the sample of A. ricketti from Mount Wugong, Jiangxi, China (WUSTW01).

Figure 3. 

ASAP species delimitation within the A. ricketti species group based on the combined data of 16S and COI sequences. The best partition with lowest score is highlighted with red frame.

Morphologically the specimens from Hekou, Yunnan, China were distinguished from all other recognized members of the A. ricketti group by a series of characters. Thus, we consider that the clade VII represents a distinct species. Ahl (1927 “1926”) once described Rhacophorus tonkinensis Ahl, 1927 “1926” based on one specimen from Tonkin (probably Mau Son, Lang Son Province, Vietnam according to Bourret [1942]; Fig. 1), but later Bourret (1942) regarded it to be a junior synonym of A. ricketti. Recently, Poyarkov et al. (2021) supposed that A. tonkinensis should be treated as a distinct species or as a senior synonym of A. yatseni. Body size of the type of A. tonkinensis (sex unknown) is 56 mm (Ahl 1927 “1926”), which is obviously larger than our specimens from Hekou, Yunnan, China in body size (35.5‒37.3 mm in males and 39.2‒45.7 mm in females). In addition, specimens from Hekou differ from A. tonkinensis by tibiotarsal articulation reaching tip of snout and upper eyelid width greater than interorbital space (vs tibiotarsal articulation reaching central of eye and upper eyelid width equal to interorbital space; Ahl 1927 “1926”). Therefore, we consider that the clade VII is not conspecific with the nomen A. tonkinensis and describe it as new.

 Amolops shihaitaoi sp. nov.

https://zoobank.org/025A83B3-B0EE-4632-9284-3BA7175CAA6E

Figs 4, 5, 6, 7

Chresonymy

Amolops ricketti in Yang (1991), Inger et al. (1999), Ngo et al. (2006), Yang and Rao (2008), Nguyen et al. (2009), Stuart et al. (2010), Grosjean et al. (2015); Amolops yatseni in Wu et al. (2020); Amolops tonkinensis in Poyarkov et al. (2021).

Holotype

GXNU YU000353 (Figs 4, 5), adult female, collected on 21 June 2020 by Jian Wang from Hekou, Yunnan, China (22.6287°N, 103.8776°E; 532 m a.s.l.).

Figure 4. 

Views of the holotype of Amolops shihaitaoi sp. nov. (GXNU YU000353) in life.

Figure 5. 

Holotype of Amolops shihaitaoi sp. nov. (GXNU YU000353) in preservative A dorsal view B ventral view.

Paratypes

Six adult females (GXNU YU000351, GXNU YU000352, GXNU YU000354, GXNU YU000355, GXNU YU000478, and GXNU YU000479) and two adult males (GXNU YU000482 and GXNU YU000483) with same collection information as holotype.

Etymology

Specific epithet shihaitaoi is named after Prof. Hai-Tao Shi from Hainan Normal University for his outstanding contribution to the herpetology of China. We suggest the common English name “Hekou torrent frog” and Chinese name “Hé Kǒu Tuān Wā (河口湍蛙)”.

Diagnosis

The new species is assigned to genus Amolops and further to the A. ricketti group morphologically based on the absence of dorsolateral folds, presence of circummarginal groove on disc of the first finger, disc of first finger distinctly smaller than that of second finger, absence of tarsal fold and tarsal glands, and presence of nuptial pads with conical nuptial spines on the first finger in breeding male.

Amolops shihaitaoi sp. nov. can be distinguished from other members of A. ricketti group by having a combination of the following characters: body size moderate (SVL 35.5‒37.3 mm in males and 39.2‒45.7 mm in females); white spines on temporal region, loreal region, snout, and lips present in breeding males but absent in females (Fig. 5); presence of small, dense, translucent or white spines on the dorsal skin of the body, dorsal and dorsolateral skin of limbs; heels overlapping; tibiotarsal articulation reaching tip of snout; longitudinal glandular folds on the skin of shoulders indistinct; presence of supernumerary tubercles below the base of fingers II‒IV, pineal body distinct; presence of vomerine teeth; and absence of vocal sacs.

Description of holotype

Adult female (SVL 43.8 mm; Table 3); head width (HW 15.2 mm) greater than head length (HL 13.6 mm; HW/HL = 1.12); snout short and rounded in profile, projecting beyond margin of lower jaw in ventral view; canthus rostralis distinct; loreal region sloping, concave; nostrils oval, lateral; internarial distance (IND 5.5 mm) greater than interorbital distance (IOD 3.3 mm; IND/IOD = 1.67); upper eyelid width (UEW 4.3 mm) greater than interorbital space (UEW/IOD = 1.30); pineal spot present; pupil oval, horizontal; tympanum small (TD 1.5 mm), rounded, less than half eye diameter (ED 5.9 mm; TD/ED = 0.25); supratympanic fold distinct, start from posterior edge of eye and extending to should; vomerine teeth in two oblique rows between choanae; choanae oval; tongue cordiform, deeply notched posteriorly.

Table 3.

Download as

CSV

XLSX

Measurements (in mm) of Amolops shihaitaoi sp. nov. from the type locality (Holotype is marked with asterisk; M: male; F: female).

Voucher no.	sex	SVL	HL	HW	SL	IND	IOD	UEW	ED	TD	DNE	FHL	TL	TFL	FL
GXNU YU000351	F	39.2	13.3	14.9	5.2	5.5	3.3	3.9	5.2	1.6	2.8	20.4	22.7	30.0	20.3
GXNU YU000352	F	43.2	13.4	15.3	5.2	5.5	3.6	4.1	5.5	1.6	3.0	21.6	24.5	33.4	21.8
GXNU YU000353*	F	43.8	13.6	15.2	5.3	5.5	3.3	4.3	5.9	1.5	2.8	20.5	22.7	30.7	20.9
GXNU YU000354	F	39.4	12.7	14.8	5.1	5.2	3.3	4.3	5.5	1.5	2.7	20.8	23.2	30.9	20.2
GXNU YU000355	F	45.7	14.3	15.5	5.9	5.7	4	4.1	5.3	1.5	2.4	21.6	23.7	33.5	22.4
GXNU YU000478	F	45.1	13.9	16.2	5.9	5.6	3.9	4.2	5.7	1.8	2.5	22.5	25.2	32.5	22.6
GXNU YU000479	F	45.3	13.6	15.7	5.5	5.4	3.2	4.2	5.7	1.9	2.7	22.0	25.2	33.5	22.2
GXNU YU000482	M	37.3	11.7	13.4	4.8	5.3	2.7	3.7	5.0	1.8	2.2	19.3	21.8	29.6	19.7
GXNU YU000483	M	35.5	10.9	13.2	4.7	5.0	3.0	3.1	4.9	1.6	1.9	19.2	21.1	28.5	18.4

Forelimbs moderately robust; relative length of fingers I<II<IV<III; all fingertips expanded into discs with circummarginal grooves, relative width of finger disks I<II<III=IV; webbing between fingers absent; subarticular tubercles prominent and rounded, formula 1, 1, 2, 2; supernumerary tubercle present and prominent below the base of fingers II‒IV; two metacarpal tubercles.

Hindlimbs long and robust, tibiotarsal articulation reaching tip of snout when hindlimb stretched alongside of body; heels slightly overlapping when legs positioned at right angles to body; tarsal glands absent; relative length of toes I<II<III=V<IV; all toe tips expanded into discs with circummarginal grooves; toes fully webbed, webbing formula I1-1II1-1III1-1IV1-1V; lateral fringes of toes I and V developed; subarticular tubercles prominent and rounded, formula 1, 1, 2, 3, 2; inner metatarsal tubercle prominent; outer metatarsal tubercle absent.

Dorsolateral fold absent; dorsal surface rough and granular with denser small translucent or white warts on dorsal body and dorsal limbs; flanks very rough and granular, scattered with large raised white tubercles; rictal gland prominent; large white and small translucent warts present around the vent; skin of throat, chest, and venter slightly wrinkled, both sides of venter obviously granular; ventral surface of limbs smooth.

Coloration in life

Dorsal surface of olive-brown with dark brown patches on dorsal surface of head and trunk and dark brown irregular transverse bars on dorsal surface of limbs; dorsal surface of discs white-mottled with cropper on discs of fingers III and IV and all toe discs; region around cloaca olive-brown with rusty mottling on both sides; sides of head olive-brown with dark brown blotches; rictal gland light yellow; flanks olive-brown, warts on flanks dark or white; throat and chest creamy white scattered with distinct dark blotches and mottled with light yellow; belly creamy white mottled with light yellow; ventral surface of limbs semi-opaque, grey, mottled with light yellow; webbing between toes beige, mottled with black; iris black with brown mottling (Fig. 4).

Coloration in preservative

Dorsal surface dark brown, with irregular light patches; dark brown transverse bars on limbs distinct; ventral surface grayish white, with dark mottling on throat and chest (Fig. 5).

Morphological variation

The new species is sexually dimorphic. Males are smaller than females (Table 1) and possess nuptial pads with spines in the breeding season (Fig. 6). Additionally, spines on dorsal skin in males are less distinct than in females. A male specimen in breeding season (GXNU YU000483) has distinct spines on the temporal region, loreal region, snout, lips, and chin, and has conical spines on the nuptial pad, whereas a male specimen in the early stage of development (GXNU YU000482) lacks distinct spines on the temporal region, loreal region, snout, lips, and chin and its nuptial spines are papillate (Fig. 6). All types have no beige snowflake-like patches on the ventral surface of limbs with the exception of GXNU YU000482. In addition, the three types (GXNU YU000352, GXNU YU000353, GXNU YU000355, and GXNU YU000479) nearly have no light yellow coloration of on the undersides of the limbs. Compared to other types, GXNU YU000482 has less distinct dark patches on the throat and chest (Fig. 7).

Figure 6. 

Two male paratypes of Amolops shihaitaoi sp. nov. A GNXU YU000483 B GXNU YU000482.

Figure 7. 

Ventral view of paratypes of Amolops shihaitaoi sp. nov. in life.

Distribution

In addition to the type locality in Hekou, Yunnan, China, the new species also occurs in Jingxi, Guangxi, China and northern Vietnam (Vĩnh Phúc, Cao Bằng, and Lào Cai) because our molecular analyses revealed that samples from Jingxi, Vĩnh Phúc, Cao Bằng, and Lào Cai that were sequenced by previous studies also belong to the new species. In Yunnan, the new species inhabits rocky streams (Fig. 8). Much of the ecology and behavior of this species remains unknown.

Figure 8. 

Habitat of Amolops shihaitaoi sp. nov. at the type locality.

Comparisons

The absence of dorsolateral folds, presence of circummarginal groove on disc of the first finger, disc of first finger distinctly smaller than that of second finger, absence of tarsal fold and tarsal glands, and presence of nuptial pads with conical nuptial spines on the first finger in breeding males suggest that the new species belongs to the A. ricketti species group, which is supported by the molecular evidence (Fig. 2). Morphological comparisons among the members of the A. ricketti species group are summarized in Table 4. Amolops shihaitaoi sp. nov. is recovered as the sister taxon to A. yatseni, but morphologically it differs from the later by the absence of white spines on temporal region and lower lips in female (vs present; Fig. 9), supernumerary tubercles moderate developed (vs very distinct; Fig. 9), and heels overlapping (vs just meeting).

Table 4.

Download as

CSV

XLSX

Morphological comparison between members of the A. ricketti species group. Characters are: ① vomerine teeth: 0 = absent, 1 = present; ② vocal sacs: 0 = absent, 1 = present; ③ spines on temporal region and lower lips in female: 0 = absent, 1 = present; ④ heels: 0 = overlapping, 1 = just meeting; ⑤ translucent or white spines on dorsal body, dorsal and dorsolateral limbs: 0 = absent, 1 = present; ⑥ spines on temporal region, loreal region, and lips in breeding male: 0 = absent, 1 = present; ⑦ tibiotarsal articulation: 0 = reaching tip of snout, 1 = reaching eye; ⑧ supernumerary tubercle below the base of fingers II: 0 = absent, 1 = present; ⑨ pineal body: 0 = distinct, 1 = indistinct; ⑩ female SVL (mm). “?” = unknown.

Species	①	②	③	④	⑤	⑥	⑦	⑧	⑨	⑩	Source
A. shihaitaoi sp. nov.	1	0	0	0	1	1	0	1	0	39.2‒45.7	This study
A. yatseni	1	0	1	1	1	1	0	1	0	42.1–48.9	a
A. ricketti	1	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	0	53.5‒67.0	a, b
A. sinensis	1	0	0	0	0	1	0	0	0	47.7–52.7	a
A. albispinus	1	0	0	?	0	1	0	0	1	43.1–50.9	a, b
A. wuyiensis	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	45.2–52.7	a, b, c
A. yunkaiensis	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	1	1	35.2–39.0	a, d

Source: a: Lyu et al. (2019); b: Sung et al. (2016); c: Fei et al. (2009); d: Lyu et al. (2018).

Figure 9. 

A, B Amolops shihaitaoi sp. nov. A head of female holotype GXNU YU000353 B hand of male paratype GXNU YU000483 C, D A. yatseni (reproduced from Lyu et al. 2019) C head of female paratype SYS a003981 D hand of male holotype SYS a006807.

The new species has been previously reported as A. ricketti, but it can be distinguished from the later by smaller body size (39.2‒45.7 mm vs 53.5‒67.0 mm in females), presence of dense small translucent or white spines on the dorsal skin of the body, dorsal and dorsolateral skin of limbs (vs absent), presence of spines on skin of temporal region, loreal region, and lips in breeding males (vs absent), and tibiotarsal articulation reaching tip of snout (vs reaching eyes). Amolops shihaitaoi sp. nov. differs from A. sinensis by relatively smaller body size (SVL 39.2‒45.7 mm vs 47.7‒52.7 mm in females), presence of small, dense, translucent or white spines on the dorsal skin of the body, dorsal and dorsolateral skin of limbs (vs absent), presence of supernumerary tubercles below the base of finger II (vs absent), and longitudinal glandular folds on the skin of shoulders indistinct (vs distinct); from A. albispinus by the presence of dense translucent or white spines on the dorsal skin of the body, dorsal and dorsolateral skin of the limbs (vs absent), ventral surface relatively smooth (vs with numerous small tubercles and ridges on the throat and ventral surfaces of trunk and limbs), and pineal body distinct (vs indistinct); and from A. wuyiensis and A. yunkaiensis by the presence of vomerine teeth (vs absent) and absence of vocal sacs (vs present). The new species further obviously differs A. wuyiensis by nuptial spines beige (vs black).

Amolops ricketti was once recorded widely from southern China and Indochina (Fei et al. 2012), but recent studies based on samples mainly from east and middle parts of its distribution range showed that it actually contains multiple cryptic species (Sung et al. 2016; Lyu et al. 2019; Xiao et al. 2019), indicating that a taxonomic investigation for the records from west part of its distribution range is needed to precisely determine the species diversity and distribution of the A. ricketti species group. In this study, we found that the populations from Yunnan and Vietnam previously recorded as A. ricketti represent a distinct species based on morphological and molecular evidence, and the population from Jingxi, Guangxi, which was recently classified as A. yatseni in Wu et al. (2020), also belongs to it. This finding further improves our understanding of the taxonomy and distribution of the A. ricketti species group (Fig. 1).

The taxonomy of A. ricketti species group in northern Vietnam is complicated and needs further study. Recently, A. tonkinensis, a junior synonym of A. ricketti described from Tonkin (probably Lang Son Province of Vietnam according to Bourret [1942]), was considered probably valid or a senior synonym of A. yatseni by Poyarkov et al. (2021). We think that A. shihaitaoi sp. nov. is not conspecific with A. tonkinensis because the new species described here has smaller body size, longer hindlimbs, and upper eyelid width greater than interorbital space as we mentioned above. Additionally, Pham et al. (2020) reported that males of A. ricketti from Hai Ha forest, Quang Ninh Province, Vietnam have vocal sacs, which is questionable and needs further confirmation because A. ricketti sensu stricto, A. sinensis, A. yatseni, and A. shihaitaoi sp. nov. have no vocal sacs. It is possible that the record of A. ricketti from Quang Ninh represents a cryptic species or refers to A. tonkinensis. In addition, the taxonomic status of A. ricketti from Mount Wugong, Jiangxi also needs further investigation because the sample from this locality was not grouped into same species with A. ricketti from the type locality by the analysis of species delimitation. In summary, more cryptic species may exist within the A. ricketti species group, implying that more studies are needed to achieve a complete understanding on the species diversity of this group.

The genus Amolops is the most diverse group of ranid frogs and currently contains 74 species including A. shihaitaoi sp. nov. Of these 74 species, more than a third (30) were described in the last decade (2010‒2021), indicating that the species diversity of Amolops was highly underestimated and the taxonomy of Amolops has attracted much attention of herpetologists during the last decade (e.g. Stuart et al. 2010; Dever et al. 2012; Sun et al. 2013; Jiang et al. 2016; Fei et al. 2017; Yuan et al. 2018; Yu et al. 2019; Che et al. 2020; Gan et al. 2020a, 2020b; Zeng et al. 2021). Most of the newly named Amolops species during the last ten years are from China (especially southwestern China), reflecting high species diversity of Amolops in China and probably the shortage of amphibian surveys in adjacent countries (e.g. Myanmar; Gan et al. 2020b).

Yunnan is the region with highest amphibian species diversity in China (AmphibiaChina 2022), and in recent years a number of new species or newly recorded Amolops were discovered from Yunnan (e.g. Yuan et al. 2018; Yu et al. 2019; Gan et al. 2020a; Wu et al. 2020). Including the new species described here, up to now there are 14 Amolops species known from Yunnan, including A. afghanus (Günther, 1858), A. bellulus Liu, Yang, Ferraris & Matsui, 2000, A. daorum, A. jinjianensis Su, Yang & Li, 1986, A. loloensis (Liu, 1950), A. mantzorum, A. mengdingensis, A. mengyangensis Wu & Tian, 1995, A. shihaitaoi sp. nov., A. splendissimus Orlov & Ho, 2007, A. tuanjieensis Gan, Yu & Wu, 2020, A. tuberodepressus Liu & Yang, 2000, A. viridimaculatus (Jiang, 1983), and A. wenshanensis Yuan, Jin, Li, Stuart & Wu, 2018. Amolops chunganensis (Pope, 1929) was once recorded from Jinghong and Menglian in Yunnan (Yang and Rao 2008), but these two records should be revised to A. mengyangensis and A. tuanjieensis, respectively (Jiang et al. 2021).

Compared to Yunnan, the species diversity of Amolops in Guangxi is much lower and currently only five species are exactly known from there including A. chunganensis (Jiang et al. 2021), A. sinensis (Lyu et al. 2019; this study), A. wenshanensis (Yuan et al. 2018), A. yatseni (Zeng et al. 2021), and the new species described here.

Thanks go to colleagues from Daweishan National Nature Reserve for their assistances during the fieldwork. This work was supported by grants from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (32060114, 31872212), Guangxi Natural Science Foundation Project (2022GXNSFAA035526), Key Laboratory of Ecology of Rare and Endangered Species and Environmental Protection (Guangxi Normal University), Ministry of Education (ERESEP2022Z04), and Guangxi Key Laboratory of Rare and Endangered Animal Ecology, Guangxi Normal University (19-A-01-06).