The gender of ''cleis':correct spelling of Chiasmocleis supercilialbus Morales and McDiarmid, 2009, and Elachistocleis magnus Toledo, 2010 (Anura, Microhylidae)

摘要

Morales and McDiarmid (2009) and Toledo (2010) described and named, respectively, Chiasmocleis supercilialbus and Elachistocleis magnus. We argue that the specific epithets of both names are discordant with the gender of their respective genera and need correction.Mehely (1904) described Chiasmocleis to accommodate a single species, Engystoma albopunctatum Boettger, 1885. Despite not providing an etymology for his new genus, Mehely (1904) changed the gender of the specific epithet to feminine, presumably to be inaccord with the gender of Chiasmocleis, resulting in the combination Chiasmocleis albopunctata. Parker (1927) described Elachistocleis to accommodate Rana ovalis Schneider, 1799 and elevated Rana ovale bicolor Guerin-Meneville, 1838 to full species status, in the combination Elachistocleis bicolor. The type species of Elachistocleis is Rana ovalis Schneider, 1799', by original designation. Originally, Parker (1927) provided the new combination Elachistocleis ovale (specific epithet neuter in gender) for the type species, but later (Parker 1934) corrected the name to Elachistocleis ovalis.