This species (Fig. 2) is widespread across the island of Mindanao and is the sister species to A. mcgregori from the southern tip of the Zamboanga peninsula (Matsui et al. 2010; Sanguila et al. 2011). With its highly specific torrent-dwelling larval habitat requirements (Inger 1960, 1985), this species is limited to montane habitats (and lowlands immediately adjacent to mountains) with high gradient stream flow. As a result, it is widespread but distributed patchily throughout Mindanao in strips of geographic ranges surrounding major mountain ranges (Inger 1954, 1992, 2005; Duellman and Trueb 1994; Matsui et al. 2010). In suitable habitat this species was observed in large numbers and was often the most commonly observed amphibian in an immediate area. Adults were typically collected in splash zones near rapids or waterfalls although they were also found some distance from water, especially after a period of rainfall. A recent phylogeographic study identified five genetically divergent and geographically structured haplotype groups in central and eastern Mindanao. Sanguila et al. (2011) argued that, at a minimum, these lineages should be recognized as evolutionarily significant units (ESUs) for conservation purposes, and that they may represent distinct species. Two of these ESUs are represented in this study and morphological differences were observed between one form found at Mts. Hilong-hilong and Magdiwata and another morphotype present at Mts. Balatukan and Lumot. Little can be made of this species current conservation status (“Vulnerable:” B1ab(iii); IUCN 2016) because no actual studies of its population status have ever confirmed the “populations trend decreasing” assessment and because its “severely fragmented” distribution appears to be the result of its natural, larval habitat requirements. However, if Sanguila et al. (2011) data can be interpreted as evidence for multiple cryptic species contained within A. muelleri, then each of these five divergent lineages would have much more limited distributions, perhaps qualifying each for some level of threat category. In the absence of firm conclusions either way, and until taxonomic studies are undertaken to confirm or refute this possibility, A. muelleri should be considered “Data Deficient” (DD; IUCN 2010; Diesmos et al. 2014).

Figure 2. 

Ansonia muelleri male (AKU 332971) and female (BKU 334106) from Mt. Lumot, Municipality of Gingoog City, Misamis Oriental Province. Photos: RMB.

Sites and specimens: AN 10: KU 332918. AN 11: KU 332862–901, KU 334101–03; AN 12: KU 332917; AN 14: KU 332902–16; AN 5: USNM 305558–68, USNM 305562–63, 305569–70; AN 9: KU 323441–44; AS 5: KU 319526, KU 319548–55, KU 319710, KU 319527–47, KU 319556, KU 319522–25; D 5: KU 309947–68; MO 2: KU 334802, KU 334105–06, KU 332958–71, KU 332927–57; MO 3: KU 332919–26, KU 334104; MO 5: KU 319711, KU 319713, KU 319714-319715, KU 319718, KU 319723–24, KU 319726, KU 319728–9, KU 319732, KU 319734–35, KU 319740, KU 319747, KU 319749–50, KU 319752, KU 319759–61, KU 319719, KU 319721, KU 319727, KU 319730, KU 319739, KU 319741–43, KU 319746, KU 319748, KU 319751, KU 319753, KU 319754, KU 319756, KU 319716, KU 319725, KU 319755, KU 319757, KU 319712, KU 319744, KU 319717, KU 319720, KU 319733, KU 319736-38, KU 319745, KU 319758, KU 319762, KU 319722, KU 319731; AN 3: CAS 133377–80, CAS 133387–90, CAS 133405–06, CAS 133402–03, CAS 133443–55, CAS 137509–15, CAS 133489–93; AN 4: CAS 133216–29, CAS 133153–61, CAS 133182–98, CAS 133249, CAS 133344, CAS 133283–5; AN 5: CAS 248315–9; AN 6: CAS 185731, CAS 133520, CAS 133528–29, CAS 133545–46, CAS 133535–39.

As currently understood, this species (Fig. 3) inhabits an improbably disjunct distribution that includes Mindanao and Basilan Islands (type locality: Zamboanga), and parts of the Malay Peninsula, Sumatra, Mentawi Islands and Natuna Islands (Inger 1954, 1999). Considered “Least Concern” (LC) by IUCN (2016), this uncommon and patchily distributed small species can be found calling (with soft “peeping” vocalization) on the surfaces of shrubs and understory trees in the vicinity of running water. It appears to tolerate moderate levels of forest disturbance and has been found on ornamental plants around buildings on forest edges (RMB personal observations). We suspect that this species eventually will be recognized as a Philippines endemic, and that populations outside of the country will be referred to other species. At that time, reconsideration of its conservation status will be required.

Figure 3. 

Pelophryne brevipes male (KU 334658) from 1200 masl, Shrine Site, Municipality of Gingoog, Mt. Lumot, Misamis Oriental Province. Photo: RMB.

Sites and specimens: AS 5: KU 319434–39.

We frequently observe this common introduced species in the vicinity of human habitations and in agricultural areas on Mindanao. It may have originally been introduced to the Philippines during the industrial revolution and the major sugar cane agricultural production boom on the central Philippine island of Negros (Alcala 1957; Brown and Alcala 1970), and has now become widespread throughout the country (Alcala and Brown 1998; Diesmos et al. 2006, 2015). We observed this species around human populations at most sites, but did not encounter it in forested areas. We collected a single specimen at low elevation on Mt. Lumot.

Sites and specimens: MO 6: KU 333803.

Platymantis cf. corrugatus (Fig. 4) is a commonly encountered widespread species on the Mindanao PAIC. Populations on these islands are morphologically and acoustically distinguishable from Luzon and Visayan PAIC lineages and molecular studies are underway to determine if these slight differences could constitute the basis for taxonomic recognition. Although the call on all three PAICs is similar, the lineage on the Mindanao PAIC (“sp. 34;” Brown et al. 2015) have a different preferred calling habit (calling from exposed areas, versus under leaf litter on Luzon) and daily pattern of activity (calling all evening versus strictly crepuscular; RMB personal observations.). Platymantis corrugatus is classified by the IUCN as “Least Concern” (LC; IUCN 2016).

Figure 4. 

Platymantis cf. corrugatus male (KU 304501) and female (KU 304502) photographed together at Municipality of Mambajao, Mt. Mambajao, Camiguin Sur Island. Photo: CDS.

Sites and specimens: AN 1: CAS 133690; AN 11: KU 333301–09; AN 3: CAS 133572, CAS 133622, CAS 133678, CAS 133679–80, CAS 133779, CAS 185732–33; AN 5: USNM 305583–88, KU 319557–73; AS 6: KU 314062–64; C 1: CAS-SUA 24060, CAS-SUA 24106, CAS-SUA 24110; C 10: KU 300351, KU 300355; C 13: KU 309728–67, KU 310353–54; C 14: KU 309768–70; C 2: CAS-SUA 24058, CAS-SUA 2406–12, CAS-SUA 24092, CAS-SUA 24107–08; C 3: CAS-SUA 24063; C 6: CAS-SUA 23024–30, CAS-SUA 23044; C 7: CAS 139038–39, CAS-SUA 23031–42, USNM 305727–28; C 8: CAS-SUA 23043; D 5: KU 310004–06.

As currently understood, this common, widespread species (Fig. 5) is now known from seven Philippine islands throughout the Mindanao PAIC and is known from at least six of Mindanao’s major mountain ranges (AmphibiaWeb 2013); Although P. guentheri has been considered “Vulnerable” (VU: B1ab(iii); IUCN 2016) on the basis if an “extent of occurrence less than 20,000 square km’” and distribution “extremely fragmented distribution” with populations trends inferred to be declining on the basis of “continuing decline in the extent and quality of its habitat” (IUCN 2016), continued treatment of this species as under threat of extinction is no longer tractable. Our now extensive surveys throughout Bohol, Samar, Leyte, Dinagat and Mindanao indicate that this very widespread species persists in second growth, degraded, and fragmented habitat patches and is be highly abundant and commonly encountered (and easily identified on the basis of its frequency sweep advertisement call), given sufficient precipitation and any form of vegetation present. We therefore downgrade this species to “Near Threatened” (NT; IUCN 2010; Diesmos et al. 2014) and emphasize that we do not anticipate circumstances that could result in re-elevating of this species to a higher threat category in the foreseeable future.

Figure 5. 

Platymantis guentheri male (AKU 309208) from Eye Falls, Mt. Hilong-hilong, Municipality of Remedios T. Romualdez, Agusan del Norte Province. Photo: RMB; (BKU 333494) from Mt. Mambajao, Municipality of Mambajao, Camiguin Sur Island. Photo: CDS.

Sites and specimens: AN 11: KU 333492–526; AN 12: KU 333528–46; AN 5: USNM 305589–93, KU 319609–26; D 4: KU 306320–5, KU 310009; D 5: KU 310007–08, MO 2: KU 333547, MO 5: KU 321843–44, MO 6: KU 333548–50; AN 1: CAS 146460, AN 3: CAS 133411, CAS 133470, CAS 133570–71, CAS 133573, CAS 133644–45, CAS 133651–3, CAS 133780–81, CAS 146469–70, CAS 186122, CAS 186124–26, CAS 196378–79, CAS 200177; AN 4: CAS 133148–49, CAS 133202, CAS 133213, CAS 133257, CAS 133287–88, CAS 133307, CAS 133313, CAS 133332–33, CAS 133357–58; AN 6: CAS 133518–19, CAS 133531, CAS 133547–48, CAS 146468, CAS 186123.

We collected four specimens of what appears to be a morphologically distinctive arboreal Platymantis (Fig. 6) at our mid- (470 m) and higher (1130 m) elevation sites on Mt. Hilong-hilong. Molecular studies are underway to determine whether these distinctive specimens are a unique species.

Figure 6. 

Platymantis cf. guentheri sp. male 1 (KU 333536) from May-Impit, Mt. Hilong-hilong, Municipality of Remedios T. Romualdez, Agusan del Norte Province. Photo: RMB.

Sites and specimens: AN 12: KU 333827; AN 14: KU 333824–26.

We collected a single specimen of a morphologically distinctive arboreal Platymantis and high elevation on Mt. Lumot. Molecular studies are under way to determine the genetic affinities of the single specimen.

Site and specimens: MO 2: KU 334329.

Considered “Vulnerable” (VU; B1ab (iii); IUCN 2016) for the same reasons as P. guentheri (above), Platymantis rabori (Fig. 7) is relatively widespread on Bohol, Leyte, Samar, and Mindanao (AmphibiaWeb 2013), but is much less commonly encountered and locally considerably less abundant. This species is easily identified by its distinctive morphology (relatively large body size, widely expanded terminal disks of the fingers) and slowly repeated pulsed call, similar to other species of the P. guentheri complex (Brown et al. 1997) and it usually calls high in the forest canopy, which may explain why it is seldom collected and rare in collections. This species does appear dependent on forest canopy, suggesting that the original assessment of this species as VU is still appropriate.

Figure 7. 

Platymantis rabori male (AKU 334334) and female (BKU 334335) from 900 masl, Mt. Lumot, Gingoog, Misamis Oriental Province. Photos: RMB.

Sites and specimens: AN 12: KU 333527, KU 334331–32; AN 13: KU 334333; MO 6: KU 334334–35, AN 5: CAS 197880.

Several specimens of a morphologically distinctive terrestrial (leaf litter) species of Platymantis were collected on Mt. Hilong-hilong (Fig. 8). Although we have never heard this species vocalize (and have not yet identified its phylogenetic affinities), it is clearly distinct (intermediate body size and unique coloration) from other species included at this site.

Figure 8. 

Platymantis sp. “Hilong ground” male (KU 334339) from Eye Falls, Mt. Hilong-hilong, Municipality of Remedios T. Romualdez, Agusan del Norte Province. Photo: RMB.

Sites and specimens: AN 11: KU 334336–38; AN 14: KU 334339.

This suspected new species of Platymantis (Fig. 9) has now been recorded at numerous sites on Mindanao, Bohol, Samar and Leyte islands and is readily identified by its small body size and unique advertisement call, consisting of a long chain of clicking pulses. Preliminary phylogenetic analyses of DNA sequence data suggest that these populations constitute a distinct lineage that is divergent from other Mindanao PAIC species.

Figure 9. 

Platymantis sp. “Clicker” male (KU 334508) a species recorded but uncollected at 300 masl, Eye Falls, Mt. Hilong-hilong, Municipality of Remedios T. Romualdez, Agusan del Norte Province, Mindanao Island. This photo (by RMB) was taken at Pasonanca Natural Park, Zamboanga City.

Sites and specimens: AS 5: KU 319508–12, KU 319403–17.

We collected this morphologically and acoustically distinctive undescribed species of Platymantis (Fig. 10) calling from steep hillsides and ravines on Mts. Hilong-hilong, Balatukan, Lumot, and Magdiwata. This new species calls only from the steep slopes and calls with a loud, paired, two-note calls.

Figure 10. 

Platymantis sp. “Cliff-loud” male (specimen not collected) from Mt. Balatukan, Municipality of Gingoog, Misamis Oriental Province. Photo: ACD.

Sites and specimens: AN 12: KU 334340–52, KU 334357–62; AN 14: KU 334353–56; AS 5: KU 319470–99, KU 319513–17, KU 319709, KU 319972; MO 6: KU 334363–83.

Two specimens of an acoustically unique Platymantis species (Fig. 11) were collected by ACD, MBS and party on Mt. Balatukan. The advertisement call of this population is so distinct that we cannot ally it with any known Platymantis.

Figure 11. 

Platymantis sp. “Dual” male (specimen deposited in PNM) from Mt. Balatukan, Municipality of Gingoog, Misamis Oriental Province. Photo: ACD.

Sites and specimens: MO 5: KU 319431–32.

This endemic species, formerly considered conspecific with F. cancrivora but now afforded the status of an endemic Philippine species, due to its genetic distinctiveness (Kurniawan et al. 2010, 2011), is common in coastal areas of NE Mindanao, brackish water swamps and mangroves, and river mouth estuarine areas. CAS specimens were collected in coastal areas, along riverbanks, four decades ago; an assessment of this species status in these heavily populated areas would be advisable. This species’ conservation status is “Data Deficient” (DD; IUCN 2016). As lowland and coastal habitats throughout the country continue to be invaded by the introduced species Hoplobatrachus rugulosus and Kaloula pulchra (Diesmos et al. 2006, 2014, 2015), these voracious generalist species replace entire populations of native frogs (RMB, ACD personal observation), either via competition for resources or direct predation on native taxa. We suspect this widespread Philippine endemic may soon become threatened with extinction; accordingly we recommend field-based surveys targeting conservation status assessment.

Sites and specimens: AN 8: CAS-SUA 16486–87; C 4: USNM 43210; SN 1: CAS-SUA 16484–85; AN 1: CAS 133726–29, CAS 146463. C 6: CAS-SUA 23092–94.

The first endemic Philippine species known to science, F. vittigera (Fig. 12) inhabits low elevation aquatic habitats and is often found in streams, drainage ditches and flooded rice fields. It is easily identified at a distance by its loud “honking” advertisement call and aggregation in large choruses. This species conservation status is currently “Least Concern” (LC; IUCN 2016) but we revise it to “Data Deficient” (DD; IUCN 2010 to reflect the paucity of available data on its actual confirmed (versus presumed; IUCN 2016) distribution and the degree to which it may be threatened by invasive species. Like F. moodiei, this is another species that is quickly replaced when Hoplobatrachus rugulosus and Kaloula pulchra invade its low elevation riparian habitat (RMB, ACD personal observation; Diesmos et al. 2006, 2014, 2015).

Figure 12. 

Fejervarya vittigera has been observed in coastal and inland low elevation areas throughout northeast Mindanao. Photo (RMB; deposited at KU; specimen not yet cataloged) from the Municipality of Burauen, Leyte Island.

Sites and specimens: AN 1: CAS 185728–30; AN 1: CAS 133726–29, CAS 146463; AN 8: CAS-SUA 16486–87; AS 2: USNM 229333–54; AS 4: KU 314051–53; C 4: USNM 43210; C 6: CAS-SUA 23092–94; C 12: KU 302048–50; D 1: USNM 229311–13; D 4: KU 305655–57; SN 1: CAS-SUA 16484–85.

Recent collections of this species (Fig. 13) at high elevations on Mts. Balatukan and Lumot and on Dinagat Island make it clear that, as presently understood, this species is considerably more widespread than previously thought. Previously recorded in the Diwata range (Brown and Alcala 1977) and Mt. Kitanglad (Bukidnon Province; based on a single, tentatively identified specimen in FMNH; ACD personal observation), this species is most likely widely distributed on montane formations throughout much of northern and central Mindanao. This species’ conservation status has been arbitrarily listed since 2004 as “Vulnerable” (IUCN 2016) based solely on its previously assessed range of less than 20,000 square kilometers and possessing a “severely fragmented” distribution with “continuing decline in the extent and quality of its forest habitat,” (IUCN 2016) none of which has actually been determined with accompanying field based data. Now that is it known to inhabit a much wider geographic range (data presented here), we adopt the suggested revision of Diesmos et al. (2014) who downgraded this species status to “Near Threatened” (NT: IUCN 2010). Given that there have, in fact, been no actual field studies of habitat fragmentation in its actual range and that we know nothing of the extent or quality of its required habitat, we fail to see how this species’ status could be elevated to a higher level, unless drastic land use changes at high elevations were to occur. Many of the known areas of occurrence are now protected areas (Mts. Hilong-hilong, Kitanglad) or proposed protected areas (e.g., Mt. Lumot), so this species may well be reasonably well protected for the foreseeable future.

Figure 13. 

Limnonectes diautus male (KU 320112) from 1900 masl, Mt. Balatukan, Municipality of Gingoog, Misamis Oriental Province. Photo: ACD.

Sites and specimens: AN 12: KU 33339–43; AN 13: KU 333369–73; AN 14: KU 333375. KU 333381–89; AN 3: CAS 133430–32, CAS 133434, CAS 133500, CAS 139389–93; D 5: KU 309992–310000.

The Leyte Swamp Frog, L. leytensis (Fig. 14), is widely distributed on the Mindanao, Visayan, and Romblon PAICs and is frequently observed in swamps or marshes, but also along small streams or other bodies of water. We collected specimens on grassy banks of streams on Dinagat Island, and in marshy areas of Bunawan. Its conservation status is “Least Concern” (LC; IUCN 2016).

Figure 14. 

Limnonectes leytensis has been collected in Bunawan, Agusan del Sur Province and on Dinagat Island. Photo: RMB (from Bohol; KU 326352).

Sites and specimens: AN 10: KU 333397–98, KU 333807; AS 2: USNM 229332; AS 4: KU 314059–61; D 2: KU 306071, KU 306073; D 4: KU 306064, KU 306066–67, KU 306074, KU 306078–80; MO 5: KU 319892–98; MO 6: KU 333809–14; AN 1: CAS 133738–9; AN 3: CAS 133369, CAS 133383, CAS 133681–82, CAS 145939; C 1: CAS-SUA 24087–88; C 2: CAS-SUA 24090, CAS-SUA 24109; C 3: CAS-SUA 24091; C 6: CAS-SUA 22857–59, CAS-SUA 22863–68, CAS-SUA 23084–91; SN 1: CAS 60580–82.

Stejneger (1910) described Limnonectes magnus from specimens collected at high elevation on Mt. Apo. Over the century, this name was widely applied to all large bodied fanged frogs of the Mindanao PAIC (Samar, Leyte, Bohol; Brown and Alcala 1970; Alcala and Brown 1998). Evans et al. (2003) demonstrated the genetic distinctiveness of the high elevation Mt. Apo species, which is considerably divergent from the widespread low elevation species. Thus, the taxonomic status of the widespread, low elevation species remains unresolved with respect to real L. magnus at its type locality. Limnonectes magnus has been treated as “Near Threatened” because the species is hunted for its meat. However, the degree to which this species actually is “over-harvested” has never been properly ascertained (contrary to IUCN 2016) and there have been no studies whatsoever of its status on Mt. Apo. It remains possible that the widespread low elevation form (Fig. 15) should be downgraded to “Least Concern,” whereas the high elevation Mt. Apo populations may actually be range-restricted and worthy of higher conservation status. Until taxonomic studies have properly been undertaken, surveys for genetic variation are conducted throughout its range, and populations at high elevations have been studied, we argue that this species should be treated as “Data Deficient” (DD; IUCN 2016) and that field-base conservation efforts be focused on the Mt. Apo population.

Figure 15. 

Limnonectes cf. magnus female (KU 333351) from Eye Falls, Mt. Hilong-hilong, Municipality of Remedios T. Romualdez, Agusan del Norte Province. Photo: RMB.

Sites and specimens: AN 10: KU 333396, KU 333399–415, KU 333808. AN 11: KU 333343–68, KU 334798; AN 12: KU 333390–91, KU 333394–95, KU 334107; AN 14: KU 333374, KU 333376–80, KU 333382, AN 3: CAS 133384–86, CAS 133429, CAS 133433, CAS 133554, CAS 133673–74, CAS 133792, CAS 139396, CAS 186128; AN 4: CAS 133203–06; CAS 133232–3; AN 5: USNM 305598–99; AS 2: USNM 229355–58; AS 5: KU 319383–99; C 12: KU 302139–40; C 13: KU 309685–706; C 14: KU 309707–27; C 6: USNM 305729; C 7: USNM 305730–32; D 2: KU 306003–84; D 4: KU 306062–81; D 5: KU 309974–91; MO 2: KU333428–77, KU 333478, KU 334796–97, KU 334799; MO 4: KU 333417–27; MO 5: KU 320078–116; MO 6: KU 333479–91; SS 2: CAS-SUA 17462.

Commonly encountered and locally abundant in central, southern, and western Mindanao, this species (Fig. 16) is conspicuously absent at most NE Mindanao localities and has not been recorded on Bohol, Leyte, Dinagat, Siargao, or Samar. Considered “Vulnerable” (VU; IUCN 2016: B1ab (iii) because of is supposedly small (< 20,000 square kilometers), its “severely fragmented distribution” and “continued decline in quality and extent of Mindanao’s forests, this species is now known from Bunawan in NE Mindano (the origin of our specimens), throughout much of south-central Mindanao, and all the way west to Zamboanga and Basilan. Given that no studies of its distribution have ever actually been conducted, it appears widespread, commonly encountered, and locally abundant wherever present, we consider a revision of its conservation status warranted. We take issue with the IUCN (2016) characterization of is range as “severely fragmented” and we follow Diesmos et al. (2014) in their downgrading of this species to “Near Threatened” (NT) using IUCN status assessment criteria (IUCN 2010). Our acceptance of this proposal (a downgrade from VU to NT, and not Least Concern) is based on the observation that the species appears somewhat dependent upon vegetation cover (but second growth and nursery forests appear sufficient to sustain large populations; RMB, ACD, MBS personal observation).

Figure 16. 

Limnonectes parvus has been collected in Municipality of Bunawan, Agusan del Sur Province. (from Davao City Province; KU 326069). Photo: RMB.

Sites and specimens: AS 5: KU 319518–21.

Yellow-bellied Puddle Frogs are widespread, aquatic, non-endemic species found in a wide variety of freshwater habitats from streams, rivers, swamps, and flooded rice fields at low elevation, to cascading mountain streams in montane environments. This species’ conservation status is “Least Concern” (LC; IUCN 2016).

Sites and specimens: AN 10: KU 333097–102; AN 5: USNM 305581–82, USNM 305769–70; C 6: CAS-SUA 22854; D 5: KU 310001–03; MO 2: KU 333109–37; MO 3: KU 333103–08; MO 5: KU 319790–98; MO 6: KU 333138–47; AN 3: CAS 133637–42, CAS 133675–77, CAS 137519.

Widespread throughout Mindanao and Basilan, but not Dinagat, Siargao, Leyte, Samar or Bohol (Brown et al. 2009), this species (Fig. 17) occurs at naturally low abundances in a wide variety of habitats provided that some vegetation persists. We have encountered this species in agricultural areas adjacent to second growth, tree nurseries, along riparian habitats in lowland forest, and up to 1,500 m on Mts. Magdiwata, Hilong-hilong, Balatukan, and Lumot. Previously unassessed, we categorize this species as “Least Concern” (LC) using IUCN conservation status assessment criteria (IUCN 2010).

Figure 17. 

Leptobrachium lumadorum male (KU 334801) from 1200 masl, Shrine Site, Mt. Lumot, Municipality of Gingoog, Misamis Oriental Province. Photo: RMB.

Sites and specimens: AN 11: KU 333673–75; AN 12: KU 333676; AS 5: KU 319449–50; MO 2: KU 333677–79, KU 334801; MO 5: KU 319773–76; MO 6: KU 333680–85.

This species conservation status has been listed as “Vulnerable” (VU; IUCN 2016). Since 2004, this classification is no longer tenable given new information on its extremely widespread distribution (throughout all islands of the Mindanao PAIC), its wide ecological tolerance of disturbance, and the fact that it is commonly encountered and locally abundant. For the same reasons we have suggested downgrading Platymantis güntheri, Limnonectes parvus and L. diuatus, we similarly propose a downgrade of Megophrys stejnegeri (Fig. 18) to “Near Threatened” (NT; IUCN 2010) and emphasize that we can foresee no circumstances that conceivably would result in a higher level of threat category being assigned to this species in the near future.

Figure 18. 

Megophrys stejnegeri male (KU 333289) from Mt. Lumot, Municipality of Gingoog, Misamis Oriental Province. Photo: RMB.

Sites and specimens: AN 10: KU 333286; AN 11: KU 333259–72; AN 12: KU 333274–76; AN 13: KU 333277–78, AN 14: KU 333279–85; AN 3: CAS 133266, CAS 133391–92, CAS 133409–10, CAS 133465–68, CAS 133474–76, CAS 133486–88, CAS 133636, CAS 133657, CAS 133782, CAS 200178; AN 4: CAS 133127–32, CAS 133181, CAS 133250, CAS 133302–04, CAS 133310, CAS 133324, CAS 133337, CAS 133345–52; AN 5: USNM 305571–80; AN 6: CAS 133516–17, CAS 133527, CAS 133549–51; AS 2: USNM 229330–1; AS 5: KU 319592–608; D 5: KU 310029–31; MO 2: KU 333290–98, KU 334793, KU 334800; MO 3: KU 333287–9, KU 334792, MO 5: KU 319763–72, KU 321851; MO 6: KU 333299–300, KU 334794.

Known only from Mindanao, Jolo, and Palawan in the Philippines, but also from Peninsular Malaysia, Thailand and central Borneo, this species (Fig. 19) inhabits a wide geographic range, but is characterized by a patchy and unpredictable distribution. We commonly find this species in moderately sized (10–25 individuals), tightly clustered choruses surrounding stream-side pools (preferred breeding habitat) in rock impressions. The advertisement call of this species is a series of high frequency, quiet “peeps” and it is currently classified as “Least Concern” (LC; IUCN 2016); that status should be revisited following molecular studies aimed at determining the number of evolutionary lineages in this widespread, but poorly understood species.

Figure 19. 

Chaperina fusca female (AKU 321410) from Barangay Tulosa, Pasonanca Natural Park, Zamboanga City Province, Mindanao Island. Photo: RMB; (BKU 319441.) male from 1900 masl, Mt. Balatukan, Municipality of Gingoog, Misamis Oriental Province. Photo: ACD.

Sites and specimens: AS 5: KU 319440–48, AN 3: CAS 133542, CAS 133623.

Until recently, Kalophrynus pleurostigma Tschudi, 1838 (Fig. 20) was considered a widespread species from the Philippines, Indonesia, Singapore, Malaysia, Thailand and Myanmar (AmphibiaWeb 2013). Zug (2015) clarified the status of the Philippine population and resurrected K. sinensis—the oldest available name, Calophrynus pleurostigma var. Sinensis Peters (1867)—for the Philippine lineage. In doing so, he considered all Philippine populations to be conspecific, and thus, considered Boettger’s 1897 Calophrynus acutirostris (type loc.: Samar Island) and Stejneger’s (1908) Kalophrynus stellatus (Basilan Island) to be junior synonyms of K. sinensis. If future genetic studies determine that significant geographic structure exists to warrant the recognition of allopatric islands populations, additional names may need to be resurrected from the synonymy of K. sinensis (Zug 2015). Kalophrynus sinensis frequently is encountered in the rainy season, calling while floating in temporary pools or water filled cavities in a variety of habitats of varying levels of disturbance. It is classified as “Least Concern” (LC; IUCN 2016). Our specimens were found floating in stream side pools, water-filled depressions on rocks, and even in water collected in half coconut shells in agricultural areas.

Figure 20. 

Kalophrynus sinensis male (KU 333148) from Mt. Hilong-hilong Municipality of Remedios T. Romualdez, Agusan del Norte Province. Photo: RMB.

Sites and specimens: AN 10: KU 333152–53; AN 11: KU 333148, AN 12: KU 333149–51; AS 5: KU 319467–69, KU 314054–55; C 10: KU 301847–48, KU 327822–30; C 13: KU 309647–53, KU 310352; C 14: KU 309654–57; C 3: CAS-SUA 24093; C 7: CAS-SUA 22855, USNM 305724–26. D 4: KU 305872; D 5: KU 309969–73; AN 3: CAS 133567–69, CAS 133600–03, CAS 133633, CAS 133771–76, CAS 137516–18; C 1: CAS-SUA 24064–68, CAS-SUA 24094–96, CAS-SUA 24114–18; C 2: CAS-SUA 24069; C 3: CAS-SUA 24070; C 7: CAS 139035–36, CAS 139172.

The curious, patchy, and unpredictable distribution of the Mindanao PAIC representative of the Kaloula conjuncta group (Inger 1954; Alcala and Brown 1998) leads us to think that this “subspecies” (Fig. 21) has a distinctly different natural history than the other taxa in this group (e.g., K. c. conjuncta from Luzon and K. c. negrosensis from the western Visayan islands of Panay, and Negros). In a recent phylogenetic analysis, Blackburn et al. (2013) demonstrated the monophyletic and genetic distinctiveness of each of the subspecies of Kaloula conjuncta, suggesting that each may warrant specific status. If this action is followed by taxonomists, the conservation status of K. c. meridionalis will need to be independently assessed. Kaloula conjuncta currently is considered “Least Concern” (LC; IUCN 2016) and its subspecies have not been assessed individually. Frogs of the Kaloula conjuncta Complex emerges at the start of the rainy season, forming large breeding aggregations. At other times of the year they virtually undetectable (RMB personal observation), which will be a challenge for future conservation status assessments; we consider this taxon to be a distinct evolutionary lineage, worthy of species rank; as such we classify it as Data Deficient (DD; IUCN 2010).

Figure 21. 

Kaloula conjuncta meridionalis females (KU 319452–53) were collected from Mt. Magdiwata, Barangay Bayugan II, Municipality of San Francisco, Agusan del Sur Province. Photo: RMB (TNHC 59636; from Municipality of Toril, Davao City Province).

Sites and specimens: AS 2: USNM 229325–29; AS 5: KU 319451–53; C 13: KU 319364; C 14: KU 309658; SN 1: CAS 89800, CAS-SUA 16166–69.

Distributed throughout the Philippines and formerly quite commonly encountered in dense aggregations in rice fields and temporary bodies of water in the rainy season, Kaloula picta (Fig. 22) has been considered “Least Concern” (LC; IUCN 2016). We consider Kaloula picta to be “Data Deficient” (DD; IUCN 2010), owing to lack of recent field observations confirming the species’ actual (versus presumed; IUCN 2016) distribution and the extent to which it may be threatened by invasive species. Unevaluated threats to this species may include competition and/or direct predation from recently introduced invasive species K. pulchra and H. rugulosus (Diesmos et al. 2006, 2015). Blackburn et al. (2013) demonstrated the genetic uniformity of this species throughout the Philippines, which would tend to refute Inger’s (1954) suggestion that regional morphological differentiation within K. picta might eventually warrant taxonomic partitioning.

Figure 22. 

Kaloula picta were observed (specimens not collected) at the Municipality of Gingoog City, Misamis Oriental Province. (TNHC 56371; from Municipality of Toril, Davao City Province). Photo: RMB.

Sites and specimens: AS 4: KU 314056–57; C 12: KU 301865–76; C 14: KU 309659–61, KU 310356; D 1: USNM 229309–10.

An undescribed species of forest cavity-dwelling (tree hole) Kaloula has been documented on Leyte, Samar islands (Blackburn et al. 2013), and northeast Mindanao (Fig. 23). Distictive “honking” vocalizations were heard during our 2012 survey of Mt. Hilong-hilong (RMB, unpublished data) but the source of these apparently species-specific calls was never documented because of the sheer, canyon-like terrain at Eye Falls. Nevertheless, we are certain of this new species’ identity, having traced its distinctive advertisement call to individual calling males on numerous occasions on Samar and Leyte, and so inclusion of this undescribed species in the this report is clearly advisable at this time.

Figure 23. 

Kaloula sp. female (KU 319451) from 1900 masl, Mt. Balatukan, Municipality of Gingoog City, Misamis Oriental Province. Photo: ACD.

Sites and specimens: none.

Described from Camiguin Sur Island (Brown and Alcala 1967), O. nana reportedly differs from O. anulata (from Mt. Apo) on the basis of the absence of subarticular tubercles on the hand. Now that specimens of Oreophryne have been collected from numerous high and low elevation sites throughout Mindanao, a comprehensive appraisal of the genetic and morphological variation in this group is overdue. Our impression is that there are several sites where the degree of distinctiveness of the subarticular tubercles varies and that this character may require additional study. For now, we refer all our Northeast Mindanao Oreophryne to “O. cf. nana” with the caveat that we are not at all certain of this identification. This species (Fig. 24) is listed as “Data Deficient” (DD; IUCN 2016) due to taxonomic and species distribution uncertainty and as a taxonomic reappraisal becomes available, the status for the Camiguin Sur Island and northeast Mindanao populations will need to be revisited. Specimens from our Mt. Lumot expedition were positive for chytrid fungus (Brown et al. 2012b; Diesmos et al. 2012, 2015), which leaves us with concerns for the long-term status of these populations.

Figure 24. 

Oreophryne cf. nana male (AKU 334100) from 1700 masl, Mt. Lumot, Municipality of Gingoog City, Misamis Oriental Province. (Photo: KAC) and from (BKU 333330), male from Barangay Civoleg, Haribon Site, 1700 m, Mt. Lumot, Municipality of Gingoog City, Misamis Oriental Province.Photo: RMB

Sites and specimens: AS 6: KU 314058; C 13: KU 309662–84; C 3: CAS-SUA 24089; C 7: CAS 137552–54; C 8: CAS-SUA 22055–62; MO 2: KU 333341–42, KU 334100; MO 3: KU 333178, KU 334099; MO 4: KU 333310–40.

This species (Fig. 25) is widespread, commonly encountered at high abundances, and distributed throughout the Mindanao PAIC islands (Brown and Guttman 2002; Brown and Siler 2013). Classified as “Least Concern” (LC; IUCN 2016) the species can be found in a variety of disturbed habitats and is distributed across much of the elevational relief of Mindanao. Males form choruses around pools in streams and rivers and call when water levels are relatively low; females have been observed in these same riparian habitats, but also relatively far away from water (100 m or more), sometimes perching in low branches of understory trees, and occasionally aggregating in shallow caves formed by overhanging stream banks (RMB personal observation). The discovery of a new, morphologically similar, and exceedingly rare stream frog species that had previously been confused with Hylarana grandocula (Brown and Siler 2013; Brown 2015) leads us to speculate that mountains of northeast Mindanao may also harbor undocumented populations of this second Mindanao Hylarana taxon. Oliver et al. (2015) recently published a phylogeny for many members of the African, Papuan, and southeast Asian members of the genus Hylarana and recognized “Pulchrana” as the available name corresponding to the Hylarana signata complex (sensuBrown and Guttman 2002; Brown and Siler 2013). Although this action is arbitrary and unnecessary and no justification for a maximally atomized classification was provided (Wiens et al. 2009; Poe 2013; Brown et al. 2015) we adopt the most recently published name.

Figure 25. 

Pulchrana grandocula female (KU333633) from Mt. Lumot, Municipality of Gingoog City, Misamis Oriental Province. Photo: RMB.

Sites and specimens: AN 10: KU 333592–602; AN 11: KU 333551–91; AN 5: USNM 305600–01; AS 2: USNM 229359–60; AS 5: KU 319627–40; C 12: KU 302374–79; C 14: KU 309771–819, KU 310355; C 6: USNM 305733–36; C 7: USNM 305737–38; D 2: KU 306445–72; D 2: KU 306480–90; D 4: KU 306439–44, KU 306473–79; D 5: KU 310015–28, KU 310370; MO 2: KU 333612–49; MO 4: KU 333603–11; MO 5: KU 319783–89; MO 6: KU 333650–71; AN 1: CAS 133722, CAS 186127; AN 3: CAS 133382, CAS 133503–04, CAS 133553, CAS 133664–65, CAS 137535–39, CAS 139397–98, CAS 145938; C 1: CAS-SUA 24071–77, CAS-SUA 24080–86, CAS-SUA 24101–53; C 6: CAS 139173–74, CAS-SUA 23064–83; C 7: CAS 139041–43, CAS 139175; SS 2: CAS-SUA 17499.

Previously considered a subspecies of “Rana everetti” (Inger 1954), the treatment of the Samar-Leyte-northeast Mindanao population of slender stream frog as a full species, distinct from the southwest Mindanao population (topotypic Sanguirana everetti) is an arrangement that was first postulated on the basis of morphometric data (Brown et al. 2000b, 2002; Fuiten et al. 2011), and has now been confirmed with genetic data (Brown et al. 2016). When reproductively active (July–August on Mt. Lumot) this species (Fig. 26) can be exceedingly common and locally abundant in riparian habitats, and usually perches in streamside vegetation, on steep banks, or large boulders, several meters from water; we have observed individuals as high as 4–5 m in riverbank trees. Lacking vocal sacs, Sanguirana albotuberculata males call with a slow, dull, pulsed rattle vocalization (the apparent advertisement call). Females also vocalize with a series of rapid “squeaks” and “whistles” delivered in a series of descending frequency notes (RMB personal observation) as has been reported two related species, S. luzonensis (Brown et al. 2000) and the lineage from the West Visayan islands’ (Brown et al. in review). Previously considered “Data Deficient” (DD; IUCN 2016), this species has now been recorded at a sufficient number of localities that we can evaluate it against IUCN (2010) conservation status criteria. Sanguirana albotuberculata does not qualify for elevated threat status; we consider it “Least Concern” (LC; Diesmos and Brown 2011; Diesmos et al. 2014).

Figure 26. 

Sanguirana albotuberculata male (AKU 333000) and female (BKU 333001) from Mt. Hilong-hilong, Municipality of Remedios T. Romualdez, Agusan del Norte Province. Photos: RMB.

Sites and specimens: AN 11: KU 332972–3007; MO 2: KU 333008–30, KU 333034–41, KU 333059–67; MO 4: KU 333043–58; MO 5: KU 319777–82; MO 6: KU 333031–33, KU 333042; AN 3: CAS 133422–23, CAS 133469, CAS 133501, CAS 137533–34, CAS 139394–95; AN 5: USNM 305594–97.

Common throughout the Mindanao faunal region, Staurois natator (Fig. 27) is a frequently observed component of most amphibian communities of the southern Philippines (Alcala and Brown 1998). Arifin et al. (2011) demonstrated the distinction between Palawan faunal region populations (S. nubilis) versus those of the Mindanao PAIC (S. natator); remaining taxonomic issues include the status of Basilan populations and the unique color pattern exhibited by populations of Samar and Leyte islands (RMB personal observation). This species is characterized as “Least Concern” (LC; IUCN 2016).

Figure 27. 

Staurois natator male (AKU 327816) from Municipality of Mambajao, Mt. Mambajao, Camiguin Sur Island (Photo: CDS) and female (BKU 319809) from 1900 masl, Mt. Balatukan, Municipality of Gingoog, Misamis Oriental Province. Photo: ACD.

Sites and specimens: AN 1: CAS 133683; AN 13: KU 333775–801; AN 3: CAS 133214, CAS 133264–68, CAS 133435–42, CAS 133464, CAS 133494, CAS 133555, CAS 133605–08, CAS 133658–61, CAS 133672, CAS 137525–32; AN 4: CAS 133146–47, CAS 133168–77, CAS 133230, CAS 133244–48, CAS 133282, CAS 133323, CAS 133342; AN 5: USNM 305602–11, KU 319500–07; D 2: KU 306562–91; D 5: KU 310034–66; MO 2: KU 333710–74; MO 4: KU 333686–94; MO 5: KU 319799–843; MO 6: KU 333695–709; SS 2: CAS-SUA 17497–98.

This somewhat rarely encountered species (Fig. 28) is known from Basilan, Leyte, Samar, Mindanao, and Bohol. Taylor speculated that its apparent “rarity” might be due to the species’ arboreal microhabitat preferences; he reported finding individuals underneath leaf litter inside a tree cavity (Taylor 1920a). We suspect that this species, which does not form choruses, is rare in collections because of the difficulty of localizing and tracking its soft, tonal advertisement call, and so we do not recommend elevating conservation status (sensuIUCN 2016) of this species on the basis of the frequency with which it has been collected historically in faunal surveys. We typically locate individuals on shrubs and saplings after triangulating (with multiple field collectors) on the source of its recognizable, but soft whistling call. Theloderma spinosum calls with a quiet, high frequency, pure tone chirp or a rapid series of quiet, high frequency, ascending chirps. Based on our observations this species seems to rely on primary and mature secondary forest and has been collected along elevational ranges of 300–1,100 m (Brown and Alcala 1994; Alcala and Brown 1998). On the basis of a molecular phylogenetic analysis Poyarkov et al. (2015), recommended that Nyctixalus be considered a subgenus of Theloderma. This species was previously classified as “Vulnerable” (VU; IUCN 2016). It has recently been reassessed (Diesmos et al. 2014) on the basis of new data and qualifies only for “Near Threatened” (NT; IUCN 2010; Diesmos et al. 2014, 2015).

Figure 28. 

Theloderma spinosum female (KU 333805) from May-Impit, Mt. Hilong-hilong, Municipality of Remedios T. Romualdez, Agusan del Norte Province. Photo: RMB.

Sites and specimens: AN 12: KU 333804–05; AS 5: KU 319400–02; MO 6: KU 333806; AN 3: CAS 133561, CAS 133629–32, CAS 139319.

This small shrub frog (Fig. 29) is one of the most conspicuous, locally abundant, and commonly recorded montane forest frogs—provided that field workers recognize its distinctive advertisement call (a rattle, with decremental pulse rate), conduct surveys on nights following heavy rains, and search its preferred microhabitat (small leaf perches, including undersides of leaves, 0.3–1.0 m above forest floor). It is known from Jolo and Basilan islands of the Sulu Archipelago, and throughout the entirety of Mindanao Island from the extreme southwestern Zamboanga City area (RMB, ACD, CDS, and MBS personal observations) to the mountains of the northeast (Brown and Alcala 1994). As noted by Diesmos et al. (2014), the species IUCN conservation status (“Vulnerable:” B1ab(iii); IUCN 2016) is incorrect because no actual population research has ever confirmed the “populations trend decreasing due to continuing decline in the extent and quality of its forest habitat” justification (IUCN 2016). We found this species to be quite common, in dense aggregations, even in highly disturbed matrices of regenerating second growth and shifting agriculture on the lower slopes of Mts. Balatukan, Magdiwata, Hilong-hilong, and Lumot. Characterizing this species’ range as “severely fragmented” also appears to be erroneous because it is generally a mid- high-montage species (and, thus, has a naturally discontinuous distribution on isolated mountains). Philautus acutirostris was screened extensively for fungal; pathogens in 2010–2012 and we detected no signs of infection by chytrid fungus.

Figure 29. 

Philautus acutirostris female (KU 334110) from May-Impit, Mt. Hilong-hilong, Municipality of Remedios T. Romualdez, Agusan del Norte Province. Photo: RMB.

Sites and specimens: AN 3: CAS 133262, CAS 133394, CAS 133576, CAS 133649, CAS 133650; AN 4: CAS 133140, CAS 133164–67, CAS 133207, CAS 133211–12, CAS 133259, CAS 133289–90, CAS 133298–300, CAS 133308–09, CAS 133311–12, CAS 133334–36; AN 5: NMNH 497019–21; AN 12: KU 334108–55, KU 334157; AN 13: KU 334156.

This high elevation Mindanao endemic shrub frog (Fig. 30) calls from a variety of perches in primary forests above 700 or 800 meters. It has been recorded from forests of eastern Mindanao (Brown and Alcala 1994; Plaza and Sanguila 2015) to the more central high elevation forests of Mt. Lumot to Mt. Malingdang of western Mindanao (Nuñeza et al. 2010). This is a species (in contrast to P. acutirostris and P. worcesteri), which actually does appear to be limited to relatively smaller areas of occurrence towards the higher elevation reaches of montane habitats. Although we emphasize that a naturally discontinuous geographical distribution does not constitute a “severely fragmented” range (IUCN 2016), that this species occurs in multiple protected areas, and that additional montane localities are certain to be added to the species geographical range once the mountains of Mindanao are properly surveyed, we follow Diesmos et al. (2014) and hold downgrading of Philautus poecilius’s conservation status in abeyance because available data do suggest that this species is a high elevation specialist, with a distribution limited to original forest. At one high elevation site (Mt. Lumot) where we found this species, we detected high prevalence and levels of chytrid infection in other species of treefrogs; Philautus poecilius, however, was negative for chytrid.

Figure 30. 

Philautus poecilus male from Mt. Lumot, Municipality of Gingoog, Misamis Oriental Province. Photo: KAC.

Sites and specimens: AN 6: CAS 133524–26, CAS 133530, CAS 133532, CAS 133543–44; MO 3: KU 334208–23.

Described originally from Dapitan Peak (10 km from Masawan, Misamis Occidental Province), this species (Fig. 31) is also known from another site in the same province (Mt. Malingdang; Nuñeza et al. 2010), from Mt. Kitanglad (IUCN, 2016) and now from our work on Mt. Lumot (Misamis Oriental Province), constituting a substantial extension of its range, to the east. When Diesmos et al. (2014) downgraded from “Endangered” (EN; IUCN 2016) to “Vulnerable” (VU; IUCN 2016), they found that the species no longer qualified for the higher threat category principally on the basis of its much wider area of occurrence, and also the fact that it appears to tolerate at least some levels of disturbance to its preferred upper montane forest habitat.

Figure 31. 

Philautus surrufus female from May-Impit, Mt. Hilong-hilong, Municipality of Remedios T. Romualdez, Agusan del Norte Province. Photo: RMB.

Sites and specimens: MO 2: KU 334159–65; MO 3: 334158; MO 5: KU 321835–42.

The presence of Philautus surdus (Fig. 32) on Mindanao is attributed exclusively to specimens from several sites in Agusan Del Norte province. Elsewhere in the Philippines, this species has been recorded from Bohol, Polillo, Catanduanes, and throughout Luzon (Brown and Alcala 1994). Considered “Least Concern” (LC; IUCN 2016) because of its wide distribution across multiple islands and including many protected areas. However, we emphasize that Philippine Philautus are notoriously difficult to identify (because of their similar size, variable appearance, and because most species exhibit color pattern polymorphism and have similar “crunch” mating calls), and we would not be surprised if future molecular data revealed the presence of multiple species masquerading within this oddly widely distributed species.

Figure 32. 

Philautus surdus male from May-Impit, Mt. Hilong-hilong, Municipality of Remedios T. Romualdez, Agusan del Norte Province. Photo: RMB.

Sites and specimens: AN 3: CAS 133263, CAS 133646–47, CAS 133698–99, CAS 133809–10, CAS 133791, CAS 133793; AN 4: CAS 133163, CAS 133199–01, CAS 133343, CAS 133565, CAS 182565, CAS 182568, CAS 183202–04; AN 5: NMNH 305622–25; AN 12: KU 333815–20, KU 333822–23.

Brown et al. (1998) resurrected Philautus worcesteri from the synonomy of Platymantis guentheri (where it was placed by Inger [1954]). Once recognized as the distinctive large-bodied Philautus of Mindanao, it was recorded at numerous montane sites throughout the island (Brown and Alcala 1994) and since has been documented at a variety of sites in the island’s northeast and southwest. This species (Fig. 33) no longer qualifies for a listing of “Vulnerable” (VU; IUCN 2016) because (1) it is no known from a much greater area of occurrence than when it was originally assessed (IUCN 2004), (2) it is known from many lower elevation areas (originally considered restricted to 800–2,000 m), and (3) because it has recently been recorded at several highly disturbed agro-forest, lower-elevation sites (Zamboanga City area, lower slopes of Mts. Lumot and Hilong-hilong). We therefore classify it as “Near Threatened” (NT; IUCN, 2010) and we urge field workers to focus on its distinctive advertisement call (a loud, “crunch,” sounding to the human ear like “Yaak!,” repeated two or three times) when conducting future surveys. We suspect that this species has, in some past studies, not been detected because it perches higher and calls less frequently under drier atmospheric conditions. We screened this species for chytrid fungus at multiple sites between 2010 and 2012 and no infection was detected.

Figure 33. 

Philautus worcesteri male (KU 334207) from 1200 masl, Shrine Site, Municipality of Gingoog, Mt. Lumot, Misamis Oriental Province. Photo: RMB.

Sites and specimens: AN 4: CAS 133237, CAS 133252, CAS 133305-06, CAS 183415; AN 5: 497022; AN 6: CAS 1333521–23, CAS 133533–34; AN 12: KU 334175; D 5: KU 310010–310014; MO 2: KU 334182–334207, 334224; MO 3: KU 334158; KU 334177–334181; MO 5: KU 321845, KU 321847.

Common and distributed throughout the archipelago, Polypedates leucomystax (Fig. 34) is a species that persists well in disturbed habitats, is ubiquitous in agricultural areas, and is considered “Least Concern” (LC; IUCN 2010, 2016). Philippine populations are composed of two divergent and unrelated mitochondrial gene lineages (Brown et al. 2010b), one of which is limited to the Mindanao faunal region, Borneo, and the Malay Peninsula. The taxonomic status of these two lineages remains unresolved (Brown et al. 2010b).

Sites and specimens: AN 1: CAS 133712–25; AN 10: KU 333068–72; AN 3: CAS 133562, CAS 133626–28, CAS 133643, CAS 133667–71, CAS 137520–24; AS 2: USNM 229361–67; AS 4: KU 314079–86; AS 6: KU 314078; C 1: CAS-SUA 24055, CAS-SUA 24111–13; C 12: KU 302450; C 14: KU 309820–21; C 6: CAS-SUA 23060–63; C 7: CAS-SUA 23045; C 8: CAS-SUA 23046–59; D 1: USNM 229314–18; MO 5: KU 319888–91; MO 6: KU 333073–96.

Figure 34. 

The frog Polypedates leucomystax is represented in the Philippines by at least two highly divergent mitochondrial gene lineages (Brown et al. 2010); one, shown here, is widely distributed from northern Luzon to northern Mindanao. Photo: K. Hesed (from Isabela Province, Luzon; KU 307625).

Previously classified as a species of Rhacophorus, K. appendiculatus (Fig. 35) is distributed across much of the archipelago’s eastern island arc (Mindanao, Dinagat, Samar, Leyte, and northern Luzon), but is conspicuously absent on the intervening Bicol Peninsula (Brown and Alcala 1994). In a recent phylogeographic analysis of samples from throughout this range, Gonzales et al. (2014) suggested a novel island colonization scenario and provided some evidence to suggest that K. appendiculatus in the Philippines may be composed of several independent evolutionary lineage, which eventually may be recognized as separate species. Based on this information and the unresolved taxonomic status of the three major Philippine lineages, Diesmos et al. (2014) recommend classification of Philippine populations of K. appendiculatus as “Data Deficient” (DD; IUCN 2016). The resolution of the status of these populations is an urgent conservation priority for the immediate future. This is a swamp, ephemeral pool, and stagnant water specialist species, which most likely lays its eggs in mud; the tadpoles are unknown.

Figure 35. 

Kurixalus appendiculatus has been recorded in Agusan del Sur, Camiguin, and Misamis Oriental provinces (Fig. 1). Photo: RMB (from the Municipality of Balangiga, Samar; specimen deposited at KU).

Sites and specimens: AS 5: KU 319454–66; AS 6: KU 314087; C 13: KU 309835–59; MO 6: KU 333802.

This common tree frog (Fig. 36) inhabits overhanging understory vegetation surrounding rapidly cascading streams in lower- to mid-montane forests. Its distinctive advertisement call is a single brief, high frequency, shrill chirp—and can be heard over the sound of waterfalls (its favored microhabitat). Previously considered uncommon, this species is now appreciated for its very specific microhabitat preference, wherein it can be predictably encountered by experienced field workers. Originally classified in 2004 as “Vulnerable” (VU; IUCN 2016), this species now qualifies only for “Near Threatened” (NT; IUCN 2010; Diesmos et al. 2014) as a result of the numerous new localities at which it has been recorded (Gonzales et al. 2014), and the predictability with which it can be found, now that its habitat is known and can be purposefully surveyed (Diesmos et al. 2014, 2015).

Figure 36. 

Rhacophorus bimaculatus male (KU 333195) from Mt. Lumot, Municipality of Gingoog City, Misamis Oriental Province. Photo: RMB.

Sites and specimens: AN 11: KU 333154–67; AN 12: KU 333171; AN 13: KU 333168–70; AS 5: KU 319574–91; D 5: KU 310032–33; MO 2: KU 333180–249; MO 3: KU 333172–77, KU 333179; MO 5: KU 319846–87; MO 6: KU 333250–58; AN 3: CAS 133395, CAS 133427, CAS 133558–60, CAS 133621, CAS 133655–6, CAS 133666, CAS 133787–88, CAS 139399, CAS 180678–79; AN 4: CAS 133178–80, CAS 133251, CAS 133295–97; AN 5: CAS 182564.

This swamp- and ephemeral pond-breeding species (Fig. 37), as presently conceived, is distributed throughout the archipelago (Brown and Alcala 1994; Alcala and Brown 1998; Gaulke 2011). Outside of the country, populations referred to the same species have been reported from Peninsular Thailand, Borneo, and Sumatra (Manthey and Grossman 1997). Patchily distributed, this species is most often encountered perched in vegetation above stagnant pools such as feral pig wallows, and nearly any water-filled in original or even highly disturbed forest (RMB personal observation). Because of its wide distribution, this species is considered “Least Concern” (LC; IUCN 2016).

Figure 37. 

Rhacophorus pardalis has been recorded from Agusan del Sur Province and Camiguin Sur Island. Photo: RMB (from the Municipality of Burauen, Leyte Island; specimen deposited at KU).

Sites and specimens: AS 5: KU 319647–50; C 1: CAS-SUA 24097–100; C 13: KU 309824; C 14: KU 309822–23, KU 309825–34.

A single specimen putatively identified as I. mindanaoensis (Fig. 38) has been collected at Barangay Bayugan II, Municipality of San Francisco, Mt. Magdiwata. Collected in dry soil beneath a log several hundred meters from a small stream, this specimen appears to be a juvenile male. The taxonomy and extent of occurrence of I. mindanaoensis is somewhat uncertain. Other specimens have been reported from Bukidnon (central Mindanao), Mt. Malindang (western Mindanao; most likely misidentified exemplars of I. glandulosus, a close relative known from Basilan Island and the southern Zamboanga Peninsula), Davao City Province (eastern Mindanao) and South Cotabato Province (southern Mindanao; Taylor 1920a, 1960, 1965; Inger 1954, Diesmos et al. 2011, 2014, 2015). A much-needed effort to reexamine and reconsider the range of variation exhibited in traditional morphologically diagnostic characters (Taylor 1960, 1965) would now be possible, given the accumulation of specimens from throughout the island. Given the current uncertainty, however, concerning its distribution taxonomic status, this species is considered by the IUCN to be “Data Deficient” (DD; IUCN 2016).

Figure 38. 

Ichthyophis mindanaoensis has been collected in Mt. Magdiwata, Municipality of San Francisco, Agusan del Sur Province. Photo: RMB (from Davao City Province, specimen deposited in Cincinnati Museum of Natural History).

Sites and specimens: AS 5: KU 319433.

This species (Fig. 39) was found asleep at night in shrubs and saplings 2–4 meters above the ground in secondary forest and along forest edges in agricultural areas. Individuals were especially common at site MO 6 at the edge of primary forest abutting a river. This species has a widespread distribution that includes Northeast Mindanao, Camiguin Sur, Dinagat and Siargao islands. At present, with the taxonomy of this group confused and unassessed using molecular data (Hallermann 2005), the conservation status of “B. cristatella” remains unassessed (IUCN 2016). If this taxon is as widespread as currently conceived (Hallermann 2005), its extremely broad distribution throughout the Philippines and surrounding Sundaic landmasses, plus its constant presence in a wide variety of forested and unforested habitats, would qualify it for “Least Concern” (LC) using IUCN conservation status assessment criteria (IUCN 2010). We recommend treating this species as “Data Deficient” (DD; IUCN 2016) until a formal taxonomic review using both morphological and genetic data, can be performed. We suspect Philippine populations are not conspecific with the lineage at the type locality (Java Island, Indonesia); although Taylor named Bronchocela marmorata from northern Luzon, that name most likely would not apply to the distinctive population on the Mindanao PAIC (see also: Grismer et al. 2015, 2016).

Figure 39. 

Bronchocela sp. male (KU 334441) from Eye Falls, Mt. Hilong-hilong, Municipality of Remedios T. Romualdez, Agusan del Norte Province. Photo: RMB.

Sites and specimens: AN 12: KU 334001; AN 5: USNM 497026; C 13: KU 309860–62; D 5: KU 310374; MO 2: KU 334002; MO 6: 334003–09; AN 1: CAS 133734; AN 3: CAS 133565; C 1: CAS-SUR 28348; C 2: CAS-SUR 28335; C 6: CAS-SUR 26132, CAS-SUR 26138.

This species occurs throughout the Mindanao and Sulu faunal regions (McGuire and Alcala 2000). We encountered D. bimaculatus (Fig. 40) in both primary and secondary forests as well as at the edges of coconut plantations immediately adjacent to forest; our observations are consistent with those of McGuire and Alcala (2000). The maximum elevational extent of this species appears to extend up to 990 m in elevation on Mt. Hilong-hilong. We observed individuals of this species low on trunks along the edges of primary forest, during the day; however one individual was found asleep on a branch at night. This species is classified by the IUCN as “Least Concern” (LC; IUCN 2016).

Figure 40. 

Draco bimaculatus is widely distributed throughout low elevation and coastal areas of northeast Mindanao. Photo: RMB (female from the Municipality of Bilar, Bohol Province, Bohol Island (specimen deposited in PNM).

Sites and specimens: AN 10: KU 333951, KU 333980; AN 12: KU 333978–79; AS 2: USNM 229368–70; AS 5: KU 319645–46; AS 6: KU 314088–89; D 2: KU 305587; D 4: KU 310085–89; D 5: KU 310069–84; MO 6: KU 333952–77; AN 1: CAS 133685–6; AN 3: CAS 154695.

This species was quite common in coconut plantations and, like Draco bimaculatus, was found far from forest in a few instances. This species is classified by the IUCN as “Least Concern” (LC; IUCN 2016) and its population size may be increasing due to the expansion of Mindanao’s ubiquitous coastal coconut plantations.

Sites and specimens: AN 15: KU 333989–97; AS 5: KU 319642–4; C 11: KU 309942–43; C 13: KU 309939–41; C 15: KU 309937–38, KU 309944–45; D 2: KU 305589–93; D 5: KU 310180; MO 5: KU 319949; MO 6: KU 333981–88; C 1: CAS-SUR 28200, CAS-SUR 28339; C 2: CAS-SUR 28349.

This species (Fig. 41) is rarely encountered in the wild and the extent of its occurrence is poorly known; it has been documented from Mindanao, Leyte, Samar, Dinagat and Siargao isands (Taylor 1922a; Ross and Lazell 1990; Smith 1993a; McGuire and Alcala 2000; Realubit et al. 2015). Specimens have only been observed in primary and mature secondary growth forest habitats, active during the day on trunks, usually quite high above the ground (5–10 m above the ground; RMB personal observation). A true forest obligate, this phylogenetically distinct (McGuire and Kiew 2001) species qualifies for formal recognition as a “Vulnerable” (VU; IUCN 2010, 2016) conservation status taxon. It is noteworthy that biologists have always considered this species to be rare (for review, see McGuire and Alcala 2000) and almost a century ago, following several years of near-continuous fieldwork in heavily forested central Mindanao, Taylor (1922a) had only collected a few specimens.

Figure 41. 

Draco mindanensis, a seldom-recorded forest species from Agusan del Norte and Agusan del Sur Provinces. A Close-up of head, male specimen B Male patagial coloration. Photos: RMB (from the Municipality of Balangiga, Samar Island; specimen deposited at KU).

Sites and specimens: AS 5: KU 319641; AN 1: CAS 133684; AN 3: CAS 133566.

Known from Mindanao, Dinagat, Samar, Leyte and Bohol islands (McGuire and Alcala 2000), this species (Fig. 42) has been characterized as a primary and secondary forest inhabitant, that can also occasionally be observed in coconut palm plantations immediately adjacent to forest (McGuire and Alcala 2000). Like all Draco, it feeds exclusively on ants and termites. It is categorized as “Least Concern” (LC; IUCN 2016) for conservation planning purposes.

Figure 42. 

Draco ornatus has been recorded only from Dinagat Island and Agusan del Norte Province. Photos: RMB (A dorsal; B ventral, from the Municipality of Burauen, Leyte Island; specimens deposited at KU).

Sites and specimens: D 5: KU 310067–68; AN 4: CAS 133151–52, CAS 133254.

Gonocephalus interruptus is the only species of Gonocephalus in the Philippines with a type specimen bearing specific locality data indicating that it was collected on Mindanao Island (although where on Mindanao is unclear). Precise type locality data are unavailable for G. semperi and G. sophiae, species originally reported only to have been originally collected from “The Philippines.” Although recent taxonomists and biogeographers have referred to specimens from Mindoro, Mindanao, and Bohol to G. semperi and others from Luzon, Mindanao and the western Visayas (Negros, Panay, Masbate) to G. sophiae, both species’ original descriptions were not accompanied by specific locality data. Thus, detailed comparisons of the name-bearing type specimens to fresh material from known localities will be necessary to definitively determine the proper application of these names to Philippine populations. Based on the crest morphology of our specimens and comparison to original illustrations (Boulenger 1885; Taylor 1922a, 1923) and their known provenance (Mindanao), we treat this taxon as most likely representative of G. interruptus (Fig. 43). We concede that additional phylogeny-based taxonomic review will be required to confirm this designation and properly assign this name to the phenotypically most similar population, following examination of the name-bearing type (Boulenger 1885). We encountered this species at night, sleeping on the trunks of small trees and saplings in both moderately disturbed mature primary and secondary forest. Gonocephalus interruptus is treated by the IUCN as a “Data Deficient” (DD; IUCN 2016) taxon.

Figure 43. 

Gonocephalus cf. interruptus male (KU 334325) from Mt. Lumot, Municipality of Gingoog, Misamis Oriental Province. Photo: RMB.

Sites and specimens: AN 11: KU 334319–20; AN 12: KU 334321–23; AS 5: KU 319903–19. C 7: CAS 139034, CAS 185492, CAS-SUR 26137. C 9: KU 309869, KU 309873; C 13: KU 309863; C 14: KU 309864–72. MO 2: KU 334324; MO 6: KU 334325–28.