2- Ranitomeya amazonica , Schulte, 1999 :
Ranitomeya amazonica is a poison dart frog in the genus Ranitomeya. It was first described by Rainer Schulte in 1999 as Dendrobates amazonicus when he separated it from Dendrobates ventrimaculatus, primarily on the basis of call characteristics. The validity of the specieshas been debated, but further studies, also including genetic data, support its validity.
Conservation status :
Data Deficient (IUCN 3.1)
Scientific classification :
Binomial name :
Dendrobates amazonicus Schulte, 1999
Known distribution consists of widely separated populations, one in northwestern Amazonian Peru (Loreto Region, including the type locality) and extreme southeastern Colombia (Amazonas Department), and expected in the adjacent Brazil, Venezuela; extreme southern Guyana; eastern French Guiana; the mouth of the Amazon in Brazil. Whether the large gaps are real or result from insufficient sampling is unknown.
Conservation status :
It is listed as "Data Deficient" on the IUCN Red List based on the assessment from 2004. The number of them in the wild is unknown. More recently, Brown, Twomey, and colleagues suggested that it should be classified as "Least Concern". The frog occurs in the Alpahuayo Mishana National Reserve in Peru.
Ranitomeya amazonica is 16–19 mm long with smooth, black skin. The torso is laterally striped orange or red while the legs and arms feature a mesh of blue, grey or green on black. There is no explicit sexual dimorphism in this frog but females tend to be slightly bigger than males.
Its habitat is in the Amazon jungle. It most frequently uses bromeliads for breeding.
For the external links , refrences click here to read the full wikipedia article
Ranitomeya Amazonica calling
Care Articles :
1- Ranitomeya amazonica :
courtesy to : www.dendrobase.de/index.php
The epithetamazonica is Latinized and derives from "Amazonas". It refers to the adoption of S CHULTE (1999) that the species could be distributed along the entire Amazon River from Peru to Guyana (see scheme and distribution).
Dendrobates guianensis (Z IMMERMANN and Z IMMERMANN , 1994)
Dendrobates amazonicus (S CHULTE , 1999)
Amphibia-> Anura-> Dendrobatoidea-> Dendrobatidae-> Dendrobatinae-> Ranitomeya -> Ranitomeya amazonica (S CHULTE , 1999)
Note to the scheme:
The validity of the species Ranitomeya amazonica is still the subject of scientific discussion. If this taxon Validity remains, must show further investigations. S CHULTE separated the species 1999 from R. ventrimaculata [ Dendrobates ventrimaculatus ] as " Dendrobates amazonicus " because the species R. ventrimaculata is not sufficiently defined and probably contains several species as a "collection" (see also C ALDWELL & M YERS , 1990 and L ÖTTERS & V ENCES , 2000). Unfortunately, the separation was only based on morphological considerations (coloring and drawing patterns). Comparative call analyzes or genetic data were S CHULTEnot before or were not sufficiently occupied. He defined the species mainly through the "typical" Y-drawing of the Dorsolateralstreifen, Populations of such animals are known from Peru, Ecuador, Colombia, Guyana and French Guiana. From this widespread distribution along the Amazon River, he derived the epithet " amazonica " from. However, a continuous distribution of the species throughout the Amazon has not been confirmed. Above all, populations in Brazil and Colombia are more likely to belong to other species (B ROWN ET AL ., 2006). In this area, small dendrobatids of the ventrimaculatus group could not be detected on a regional basis, thus leading to distribution gaps (C ALDWELL & M YERS , 1990). Recent studies also show, among many populations, that S CHULTE the taxon R. amazonicaoffsets, differences in the physical parameters of the display (O STROWSKI & M AHN , personal measurements) and the genotypes (V ENCES ET AL., 2003; B ROWN ET AL . 2006 and G RANT ET AL ., 2006). Other populations considered as distinct species, in turn, show similarities in some characteristics to populations designated as R. amazonica . For example, the species R. amazonica can be crossed with R. variabilis and also shows very similar (although not identical) ringing characteristics. L ÖTTERS & V ENCES (2000) discusses the unsecured status of the species towards R. variabilis and R. ignea . The species R. ignea (for validity of this species see species descriptionR. ignea ) actually shows a very similar drawing pattern as R. amazonica (B ROWN ET AL 2007), but differs by a smaller one KRL , another call and a genetic affiliation to the reticulatus clade (B ROWN ET AL ., 2006) by R. amazonica . Compared to the species R. variabilis , the species can also be clearly distinguished by a completely different pattern , a slightly different reputation (O STROWSKI & M AHN , own measurements) and also by genetic differences (B ROWN ET AL . The status of the taxon R. ventrimaculata , however, remains poorly secured. Since the species R. ventrimaculata presumably contains several different species, its status itself must first be redefined (see L ÖTTERS & VENCES , 2000). At present it is therefore not certain that the taxon R. amazonica is not identical to R. ventrimaculata . At least in herethology (Revierverhalten, Brutbiologie) differ so far all known populations with Y-drawing from Peru, Ecuador and the Guyanas according to recent findings not appreciably. Only a further, more detailed examination of all genes designated as R. ventrimaculata / amazonica with regard to genetics, reputation and behavior can clarify the prevailing confusion. Until the species question of the ventrimaculatus complex has been clarified, populations should be referred to as R. amazonica under the name R. ventrimaculata sl summarized as a collection type (in the sense of C ALDWELL & M YERS , 1990) and only the red-orange populations around Iquitos (type discovery site) are referred to as R. amazonica .
threat status :
DD (= Data Deficient) according to IUCN (2004). Since the taxonomic status of the species is still questionable and exact information on distribution and ecology is missing, the risk status of the species has not been further defined due to a lack of data. Notifiable according to BArtSchVO.
As with the former Art Dendrobates azureus , the species could also turn out to be synonymous with another species ( R. ventrimaculata ). This has consequences for the protection of species, as this particular local population may be endangered due to its small-scale distribution, but the species is not classified as threatened. Thus, the "Azureus" population of D. tinctorius according to IUCN (still as D. azureuslisted) classified as threatened due to the small distribution area (VU = vulnerable). The species D. tinctorius , to which D. azureus is considered a synonym based on the latest research results, is classified as less threatened due to its widespread use (LC = least concern).
According to CITES (2005), the species under this name has not been legally executed and traded.
Annex II of the WA. Annex B of the EU ArtSchVO (EC).
Little Dendrobatide with one KRLfrom 16-19mm (S CHULTE , 1999).
Skin smooth. Basic color black.Supralabial-lateral and Dorsalstreifen in orange to red. Dorsolateralstreifen mostly merged into a Y at the neck, rarely completely separated. Mostly with black nose patch. Belly, flanks and limbs with a bubble network (black primary color punctiform visible) in blue, green or gray. Point size on the stomach usually larger. Network on the flank mostly clearly separated by black band from the lateral strip. Throat contrasted in color of the stripe pattern, with black spots and often separated from them by the differently colored abdominal drawing pattern. Bright signal spots on the humeral neck muzzle shorter than eye diameter. Nostrils close to the edge of the nose. No teeth available.Inter Orbit Aldi dance corresponds approximately to the eye diameter. tympanum in the form of a vertical oval, and about half the size of the eye diameter. First finger shorter than finger two.finger formula: 1 <2 <4 <3. Finger disks significantly widened. On finger 3 about 2.6 times as wide as the finger. Outer Metacarpal tubercle big, round and light colored. Inner metacarpal tubercle small and oval (diameter about ½ size of the exterior). Only one highly visible (elevated) subarticular tubercle per finger. toes formula: 1 <2 <3 ≤ 5 <4. Toe 1 without enlarged toe disc and very short (reduced), the other toes with slightly widened toe discs (about 1.6 times as wide as toe). Tarsal tubercle usually absent or very poorly developed. Bright small oval inner metacarpal tubercle. Large outer metacarpal tubercle (about 2 times the size of Innerer's) and also oval. Subarticular tubercle only at toes 1 and 2. No clear sexual dimorphism. Females usually a little bigger and fuller. Male with subgular he sonic balloon (after S CHULTE , 1999)
Since the species status has not yet been finally clarified, only the red-orange populations around Iquitos should be designated as R. amazonica .
5 - 6 years
Males usually start to call at 6 months. Females take longer to reach sexual maturity. The first fertilized clutches are discontinued at about 8-10 months.
There are no studies on the populations around Iquitos. For R. ventrimaculata populations of Mishana (Rio Nanay, Peru) were considered poison classes mainly Pumilio-and histrionicotoxins proven (in S CHULTE , 1999 after D ALY ET AL .)
Clutch and larvae:
Features of scrim:
R. amazonica produces clutches of mostly 4-6 black eggs with a diameter of about 1 mm. The clutches are always deposited below the water surface in small Phytotelamta.
Larvae identical to R. ventrimaculata sl (Y-drawing).
Depending on the temperature, the larvae hatch from the eggs after 12-16 days. The larvae develop with good feeding, at about 22 ° C within 70 - 140 days to the finished frog (I SENSEE , pers. Come)
The larvae of R. amazonica sl areomnivorous and eat all types of foods that can be overwhelmed. In the field, the larvae as well as those of the closely related species R. ventrimaculatus (S UMMERS & A MOS , 1999) are highly cannibalistic and eat in poor nutrition in the phytotelmata mainly remote clutches and smaller larvae of their own species (optional Oophagie) they are not specialized and also take insect larvae and detritus as food. With a finely ground mixture of ornamental fish flake food, spirulina algae and freeze-dried arthropods such as crayfishes, red mosquito larvae and Artemia, the larvae can be reared under artificial conditions very well. (O STROVSKI , own observation)
All behaviors of R. amazonica are completely identical to those of R. ventrimaculata described behavior of populations (with Y-markings) from Peru, Ecuador and Guayana.
Type find location of the first description
"Bosque UNAP, Iquitos (Prov. Loreto, Peru), about 130 m asl" (S CHULTE , 1999)
Region of Iquitos, Peru
Distribution area Ranitomeya amazonica
The biotope visited by the author was a secondary forest along the road from Iquitos to Nauta. The forest stretched along the banks of the Amazon River. The sites were always outside the flood plain on hills at about 120 m altitude (Terra Firme forest)). The crown layer was about 15 - 20 m in height. Although it was not primary forest, it was quite dense. On the ground there was a 20 - 30 cm thick layer of leaves in most places and only in a few places with increased incidence of light could soil be found in the form of perennials, herbs or ground bromeliads. The animals were sympatric with A. femoralis and Ranitomeya reticulata, In places of increased incidence of light (clearing, roadsides or trees), the trunks of the adjacent trees were more abundant with bromeliads of the genus Guzmania ssp. overgrown. These served the R. amazonica as breeding plants. In the area of these "Bromeliads" the population density of the animals was significantly increased. The animals inhabited the root bases of the trees and the upper herb layer. We rarely found animals in the foliage. Mostly they lived in 1.5 - 5 m height. We were also able to hear calls from heights of 10 meters and more (O STROWSKI , personal observation)
Biotope of Ranitomeya amazonica
Biotope of Ranitomeya amazonica
Biotope of Ranitomeya amazonica
Biotope of Ranitomeya amazonica
The biotopes are all located in humid lowland rainforests with daytime climates. Year-round temperatures are fairly constant. The fluctuations in the average annual temperature of 1 - 2 ° C lower than the fluctuations between daytime and nighttime temperatures. But these are usually in the lowland rainforest of the Amazon region only at 3 - 4 ° C. At the forest floor can hardly detect a temperature difference and already close below the leaf layer can measure temperatures that correspond approximately to those of the annual average (W ALTER & B RECKLE, 1999). The temperatures at the forest floor should therefore correspond approximately to the annual mean of Iquitos with 26 ° C. In November we were able to measure temperatures of 24 ° C in the morning and 26 ° C in the biotope in the late afternoon. In higher areas of the treetops daily fluctuations of 10 ° C and more can occur. In particular, larvae in phytotelmata of higher epiphytes can therefore be exposed to significantly greater temperature fluctuations (up to 10 ° C difference) during the course of the day. Since the adults mostly inhabit the lower tribal bases, they are rarely exposed to temperatures well below or above 26 ° C. The climate of the Amazon basin is also relatively constant in terms of rainfall and humid all year round. In the months of June to October, the rainfall, although somewhat lower, but there is no pronounced dry period.
Attitude in the terrarium :
Terrarium / Facility:
Rain forest terrarium from 40 x 40 x 40 cm
automatic irrigation and fog plant recommended
24-26 ° C, drop by 3-4 ° C at night
Annual variation: minimal (1-2 ° C)
70-80%, at noon to 70%, morning and evening 100% (fog)
Usual little food animals like
Small fruit fly
or crickets, recently hatched
(Micro beetle), and finely sifted
, For juveniles, springtails are indispensable in the first two weeks. Only frogs that are metamorphosed from very large larvae can sometimes cope with the small fruit fly. For
Feeding animals such as crickets and fruit flies should be dusted regularly 1-2 times a week with a good vitamin preparation (eg Amivit A after the original B IRKHAHN-Rezeptur). Feed animals for young animals should be pollinated daily for the first 4 weeks. Store opened vitamin supplements in the fridge. Fruit flies can be well fed before feeding with liquid vitamin preparations (eg Sanostol, Multibionta) and so be nutritionally and nutritionally valuable. Pollinated food animals should be offered in the terrarium on exchangeable trays. Residual vitamin powder residues can not form a bacterial focus on the terrarium floor. Fruit pieces designed in small bowls in the terrarium (eg banana slices) are good places for fruit flies and are soon accepted by the frogs as feeding places. For a sufficient vitamin supply of the feed animals by these lures the dwell time of the feed animals should be too small, so that should be additionally vitaminized. Offered food trays should be cleaned every 2-3 days for hygienic reasons. Springtails can be well focused on laid out Xaxim pieces by using them with small! Quantities of dry yeast sprinkled. Here, too, the frogs quickly learn the meaning of the feeding place.
Best results with 1,1 but group keeping from 60 x 40 x 40 cm possible. Groups of 2.3 or more usually work well if the males can form their own areas (good planting and structuring). Females show no aggressiveness among themselves and common spawning with two or more females are not uncommon.
Tips for breeding:
The animals spawn in nature in water-filled phytotelmata off. In the terrarium, vertically mounted, water-filled photo boxes (Photo can type III) used. The clutches are deposited below the water surface. Often two or more females spawn with one male (O STROWSKI , own observation). For a controlled development it is advisable to grow the eggs in small Petri dishes outside the terrarium at about 22 ° -26 ° C (better development rate). The best results are obtained with an early withdrawal. The development time to the hatching of the larva is about 12-16 days. The larvae are omnivorous and can be reared with common dry foods. Since they are highly cannibalistic, individual rearing must be carried out in small containers (at least 50 ml). The water temperature should not drop below 18 ° C for a long time and should not exceed 27 ° C, otherwise it may cause developmental problems. With regular feeding (at least every 2 days) and a 14-day water change of 100%, the larvae grow quickly and, depending on the temperature, have completed the metamorphosis after about 60-80 days. The freshly converted frogs grow very fast with good feeding with springtails and can cope with small Drosophila after only a week as another feed.
Ranitomeya amazonica "Iquitos" male carrying tadploe
Ranitomeya amazonica "Iquitos" female carrying tadpole
R. amazonica "French Guyana" (formerly ventrimaculata)
Ranitomeya amazonica Burbot just before the shore
Ranitomeya amazonica "Iquitos"
courtesy to : www.dendrobase.de/index.php?aktiv=17969
1- Iquitos - Nominal Morph :
This is the morph originally described by Schulte (1999). It occurs in the vicinity of Iquitos, Peru. Most frogs of this morph have reddish or orange dorsolateral stripes, though some are yellow and appear very similar to the closely related R. variabilis.
2- Arena Blanca Morph :
his is a relatively recently discovered morph of R. amazonica. It also occurs in the vicinity of Iquitos. For some time we suspected that these frogs may have belonged to a new species, although extensive genetic data place them nested within the amazonica clade. Many individuals bear a striking resemblance to the sympatric R. reticulata; we suspect this may represent another instance of Muellerian mimicry in poison frogs.
3- Others :
Below photos seen in French Guyana for unkown morphs
Thomas Ostrowski © 2006
For more information about resources for the above article .. click here
Madagascar Dart frogs
South America Dart Frogs - Species
Ranitomeya genus :
Ranitomeya Species :
Ranitomeya genus :
Ranitomeya Species :