View the above photo record (by Darren Pietersen) in FrogMAP here.

Find the Knocking Sand Frog in the FBIS database (Freshwater Biodiversity Information System) here.

Family Pyxicephalidae

KNOCKING SAND FROG – Tomopterna krugerensis

Passmore & Carruthers, 1975

Identification

Habitat

T. krugerensis inhabits the Savanna Biome at altitudes ranging from sea level to 1500 m, in areas with annual rainfall of 500–>1000 mm. It seems to prefer sandy soils and breeds in temporary water bodies such as large and small pans, vleis, and floodplains.

Behaviour

Breeding begins after the first rains and continues into midsummer. Males call from the open or from partially concealed positions at the water’s edge. Approximately 5000 eggs are laid singly in shallow water (Passmore and Carruthers 1975). The tadpoles and details of development are unknown.

Status and Conservation

T. krugerensis is widespread and does not require conservation measures.

Distribution

T. krugerensis is distributed in a broad band across southern Africa, from northeastern South Africa and southern Mozambique, through southern Zimbabwe and Botswana to Namibia and southern Angola. Its distribution in the atlas region is rather patchy, especially in Limpopo and North West provinces. This may be due to the fact that only distribution records based on advertisement calls have been included in the map. It is almost indistinguishable, morphologically, from T. cryptotis and T. tandyi, but has an easily recognizable call. The distribution records are therefore reliable in terms of the present taxonomic status and diagnosis of this species. The southernmost record is from Hluhluwe (2832AB) in KwaZulu-Natal.

Further Resources

Virtual Museum (FrogMAP > Search VM > By Scientific or Common Name)

More common names: Sandveld-sandpadda (Afrikaans)

Recommended citation format for this species text:

Channing A, Tippett RM.  Knocking Sand Frog Tomopterna krugerensis. BDI, Cape Town.
Available online at http://thebdi.org/2021/11/23/knocking-sand-frog-tomopterna-krugerensis/

Recommended citation format: 

This species text has been updated and expanded from the text in the
2004 frog atlas. The reference to the text and the book are as follows:

Channing A 2004 Tomopterna krugerensis Knocking Sand Frog. In Minter LR
et al 2004.

Minter LR, Burger M, Harrison JA, Braack HH, Bishop PJ, Kloepfer D (eds)
2004. Atlas and Red Data Book of  the Frogs of South Africa, Lesotho and
Swaziland. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, and Avian Demography
Unit, Cape Town.

View the above photo record (by Nick Evans) in FrogMAP here.

Find the Mistbelt Moss Frog in the FBIS database (Freshwater Biodiversity Information System) here.

Family Pyxicephalidae

MISTBELT MOSS FROG – Anhydrophryne ngongoniensis

(Bishop & Passmore, 1993)

Identification

The small size of the adult frog (16–22 mm), coupled with the softness of its call, probably explain why this species remained undetected until fairly recently. Males produce a soft, trilled, cricket-like call, repeated three or four times with an interval of about one second between calls. The call consists of 8–10 pulses with a duration of 55 ms, and the frequency at the midpoint is 4.5 kHz (Bishop and Passmore 1993; Passmore and Carruthers 1995). Males call in bouts of up to seven calls, often alternating with an adjacent male.

The dorsal colouration is fairly consistent with no sexual dimorphism, being a sandy to golden brown background with four indistinct stripes composed of small dark brown spots. A broad, dark brown stripe (bordered ventrally and dorsally by a thin white/silvery stripe) begins at the tip of the snout and passes through the nostril, eye and tympanum to end at the axilla. The belly is white, while the ventral surfaces of the limbs and throat are pale yellow.

Habitat

The breeding and non-breeding habitat is in Short Mistbelt Grassland, Moist Upland Grassland, and Afromontane Forest. Preferred sites are located on fairly steep slopes (30–40°) on either side of seepage channels, covered with a dense growth of indigenous grasses, but at Ngele the species occurs in Afromontane Forest. Most of the known sites are surrounded by exotic tree plantations. The frogs are usually found at the bases of grass and sedge tussocks amongst a network of loose tunnels in the humus layer.

Behaviour

In misty weather, males call throughout the day and night, but only during the night in less humid conditions. During the day males call from well concealed positions at the bases of grass tussocks, while at night they climb to calling positions about 20 cm below the tips of the grass stems and are easily seen. Males do not possess a vocal sac and produce a quiet call. Eleven to 14 unpigmented eggs are laid on damp soil or vegetation at the bases of grass tussocks. The tadpoles undergo direct development, emerging as fully formed froglets approximately 27 days after egg laying (Bishop and Passmore 1993).

Although there are no documented accounts of predators, these are likely to include snakes, other frog species and invertebrates, while prey includes ants, termites, insect larvae, and other small invertebrates characteristic of the grassland leaf litter.

Status and Conservation

Status

In the description of this species, the authors (Bishop and Passmore 1993) recommended that it be classified Vulnerable. Harrison et al. (2001) and this publication list it as Critically Endangered in view of its small area of occupancy (<10km2), rapid rate of habitat loss (>50% over the past 50 years) and an estimated global population size of less than 2500 individuals in six fragmented and isolated sub-populations.

A. ngongoniensis occurs in the Ngele Forest Reserve and is protected by the KwaZulu-Natal Nature Conservation Ordinance, No. 15 of 1974, as amended.

The population at Poortjie, east of Franklin, occurs on land under management of Singisi Forest Products. The conservation importance of the site was brought to the attention of this tree-farming company, that has responded positively by appointing a consultant to draw up a management plan and monitoring protocol. The largest known population of Leptopelis xenodactylus (Endangered) also occurs at this site, which was therefore highlighted as one of the most important frog localities in the Eastern Cape/KwaZulu-Natal region (cf. Burger and Harrison 2002). Efforts were underway as of January 2003 to obtain permanent protection for the site, the first initiative in South Africa to establish a nature reserve specifically for the protection of frogs.

Threats

The major threat to A. ngongoniensis is habitat loss and fragmentation due to afforestation and other agricultural practices. The ongoing encroachment of alien trees and plantations is likely to alter moisture regimes, and the presence of quantities of woody vegetation can cause lethally hot fires, presenting a potential threat. Timber harvesting, which can drastically alter habitat over a short period of time, also presents a potential future threat.

In addition, all the grassland types in which this species occurs are poorly conserved, and in the absence of fire, Afromontane forest and grassy fynbos may invade these grasslands (Bredenkamp et al. 1996).

Recommended conservation actions

Urgent conservation action was recommended by Harrison et al. (2001) as rapid deterioration or loss of its habitat could easily lead to the extinction of this species. A population and habitat viability assessment was recommended. In addition, the remaining protected areas of moist upland grasslands, such as the Coleford and Himeville nature reserves, should be intensively searched for new populations of this species.

Management recommendations include the establishment of a monitoring programme, and management of wild populations, habitat and limiting factors. In view of an extremely restricted and fragmented distribution, priority should be given to the conservation and management of the remaining habitat of this species before it becomes extinct.

Distribution

A. ngongoniensis is endemic to a small area of mistbelt on the eastern escarpment in KwaZulu-Natal and the Eastern Cape where it occurs at altitudes in excess of 1000 m. At the time of the species’ description (Bishop and Passmore 1993), it was known from only three localities in the Ixopo region, all within a single quarter-degree grid cell (3030AA). Although another three localities in three different grid cells were discovered during the atlas period, the species’ area of occupancy still appears to be restricted to less than 10 km². The new localities are Ngele Forest Reserve near Weza (3029DA), Poortjie in the Mpur forestry area east of Franklin (3029BC), and south of Donnybrook (2929DD). Even the predicted distribution of this species does not extend its range significantly (Armstrong 2001). The atlas data are reliable.

Further Resources

Virtual Museum (FrogMAP > Search VM > By Scientific or Common Name)

More common names: Mistbelt Chirping Frog; Ngongoni Moss Frog (Alternative Common Names); Misbeltkwetterpadda (Afrikaans)

Recommended citation format for this species text:

Bishop PJ, Tippett RM.  Mistbelt Moss Frog Anhydrophryne ngongoniensis. BDI, Cape Town.
Available online at http://thebdi.org/2021/11/19/mistbelt-moss-frog-anhydrophryne-ngongoniensis/

Recommended citation format: 

This species text has been updated and expanded from the text in the
2004 frog atlas. The reference to the text and the book are as follows:

Bishop PJ 2004 Anhydrophryne ngongoniensis Mistbelt Moss Frog. In Minter LR
et al 2004.

Minter LR, Burger M, Harrison JA, Braack HH, Bishop PJ, Kloepfer D (eds)
2004. Atlas and Red Data Book of  the Frogs of South Africa, Lesotho and
Swaziland. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, and Avian Demography
Unit, Cape Town.

View the above photo record (by Robert Tibbitt-Eggleton) in FrogMAP here.

Find the Karoo Toad in the FBIS database (Freshwater Biodiversity Information System) here.

Family Bufonidae

KAROO TOAD – Vandijkophrynus gariepensis

A. Smith, 1848

Habitat

V. gariepensis has been recorded from the Nama Karoo, Succulent Karoo, Fynbos, Thicket and Grassland biomes and occurs in both summer- and winter-rainfall regions. It is adapted to survive in extremely arid areas and, in at least parts of its range, it can tolerate very low temperatures. On the Nuweveldberg Mountains in Karoo National Park, specimens were observed moving about in the snow; these frogs may have been disturbed and forced to seek shelter in new refuges (H. Braack pers obs.).

The species is found in a variety of habitats, including open, sandy areas in the semi-arid Karoo, and grassland in the eastern parts of its range. In the Free State and most of Lesotho, it occurs in mountainous and rocky areas where it may be found under rocks, in burrows under rocks, and occasionally in abandoned termitaria(Trinervitermes sp.). At high elevations in the KwaZulu-Natal Drakensberg, V. g. nubicolus occurs in short, sparse, open grassland where specimens have been found under vegetation or stones, in swampy areas, and in temporary pools.

Breeding habitats include a variety of water bodies, both permanent and temporary, such as streams, dams, roadside rain pools, quarries, pans, seepages and spongy bogs. The species has even been found breeding in water-filled hoof prints of cattle in the Drakensberg, and in a small pool under a leaking tap at Sendelingsdrift in the Richtersveld!

Behaviour

In Namaqualand, V. gariepensis is an opportunistic breeder. Most breeding takes place during the winter rains, but also during summer if sufficient water is available (Channing 1988). It has been recorded spawning in September and February in the Western Cape (Visser 1979a), and breeds in late summer and autumn in the summer-rainfall Karoo and Bushmanland (H. Braack pers. obs.). Tadpoles were collected during September in both Worcester (Western Cape) and near Harrismith (Free State), while in the Richtersveld, calling was heard September–March (H. Braack pers. obs.). In Lesotho, V. g. gariepensis tadpoles were collected in early October and in November and December in pools and at the sides of streams (new atlas data). Males may call during daylight hours in overcast or rainy weather, as well as at night.

Wager (1965) recorded the following breeding details for V. g. nubicolus. Strands of 100 or more eggs are laid in small shallow depressions in sponge-like bogs fed by springs on the summit of the Drakensberg. The tadpoles form a squirming mass and grow to a maximum length of 24 mm after only a few days. According to Lambiris (1988e), metamorphosis is usually completed after c.20 days.

In the Drakensberg Mountains, prey consists of small arthropods (Lambiris 1988e). Two specimens of V. gariepensis that were offered to a captive Water Mongoose Atilax paludinosus, were flipped over onto their backs and eaten from the belly, presumably to avoid toxins in the dorsal glands: one specimen was partly eaten while the second was entirely consumed (Stuart 1981).

Status and Conservation

V. gariepensis is recorded from Mountain Zebra National Park in the Eastern Cape, Gamka Nature Reserve in Western Cape Province (Branch 1990) and Richtersveld National Park in Northern Cape Province (Branch and Braack 1995). It also occurs in Karoo National Park at Beaufort West and in Karoo Nature Reserve at Graaff Reinet. In the Free State it has been recorded from Golden Gate Highlands and Qwa-Qwa national parks and Tussen-die-Riviere Game Farm (Bates 1997). Although it has not been found in Blyde River Canyon Nature Reserve in Mpumalanga, it occurs nearby in Long Tom Pass.

V. gariepensis has an extensive distribution range and is abundant, but some isolated populations may be speciating. Branch and Braack (1995) noted that “a detailed study of vocalization, supplemented with biochemical analysis, of montane isolates of V. g. nubicolus and V. g. inyangae may demonstrate a suite of cryptic species”. These isolated populations should be considered evolutionarily significant units, warranting protection and regular monitoring.

Distribution

V. gariepensis is distributed mainly south of 28°S and west of 30°E, but its range extends northward along the Transvaal Drakensberg range, through Mbabane in northwestern Swaziland, to the Lydenburg-Sabie area of Mpumalanga Province (2530BA). Atlas records indicate that the species has a much larger range in the Northern Cape Province than is shown on Poynton’s (1964) map.

Outside of the atlas region, the species crosses the Gariep (Orange) River (often reduced to a trickle in the dry season) into southern Namibia, while an isolated population is present on the Nyanga Mountains in eastern Zimbabwe. The advertisement call of the latter, V. gariepensis inyangae, is unknown, but based on mitochondrial-DNA sequences, Cunningham and Cherry (2000) considered it to be a distinct species.

The subspecies V. gariepensis nubicolus occurs along the summit of the KwaZulu-Natal Drakensberg from Mont-aux-Sources (2828DD) southward to Sani Pass (2929CA) and to Naude’s Nek (3028CA) in the southwest. It occurs at altitudes up to c.3400 m. Although specimens from this area differ consistently from typical V. g. gariepensis in certain ways, most notably in colour pattern (see Passmore and Carruthers 1995), the same characters are of less diagnostic value in populations from the eastern Free State (Bates 1995) and Lesotho (Bates and Haacke 2003).

While populations from Mpumalanga and Swaziland were treated as V. gariepensis gariepensis by Poynton (1964) and Boycott (1992), Jacobsen (1989) referred populations in Mpumalanga to V. g. nubicolus. Branch and Braack (1989) referred to two ecomorphs occurring in Karoo National Park, namely a “brightly-patterned nubicola form from the upper plateau” and “more typical gariepensis that is larger and duller in colour, from the lower plains”. Branch and Braack (1995) suggested that V. g. nubicolus be raised to species status and that certain isolated montane populations, currently referred to V. g. nubicolus (e.g., Bamboesberg Mountains 3126CA; Nuweveldberg Mountains, Karoo National Park 3222BC), may prove to be separate species. Further investigation is needed to clarify these issues.

In the Richtersveld, V. gariepensis occurs along the banks of the Gariep River, while a similar species, V. robinsoni, inhabits springs and temporary water sources. However, the latter has a substantially different advertisement call and, in this area, can also be distinguished from V. gariepensis by its orange back with green spots, poorly developed parotoid glands, weakly developed tarsal fold, small tympanum, relatively smooth skin, and relatively large eye (Branch and Braack 1995).

In Namaqualand, V. robinsoni loses the bright colouration that is typical of the species in the rocky Richtersveld and Ghaamsberg areas, and approaches the drab colour and pattern generally attributed to V. gariepensis. Conversely, juvenile V. gariepensisin rocky habitats frequently show the bright colour patterns attributed to V. robinsoni (H. Braack pers. comm.). In this area the two species may be positively identified by their advertisement calls. At Nieuwoudtville (3119AC), V. gariepensis and V. angusticeps have been found breeding in the same pools, and are extremely difficult to separate except by call (H. Braack pers. obs.).

The atlas data for V. gariepensis is reliable, except in areas of sympatry with V. robinsoni and V. angusticeps where records based on identification using morphology alone should be viewed with circumspection.

Further Resources

Virtual Museum (FrogMAP > Search VM > By Scientific or Common Name)

More common names: Karooskurwepadda (Afrikaans)

Recommended citation format for this species text:

Bates MF, Tippett RM.  Karoo Toad Vandijkophrynus gariepensis. BDI, Cape Town.
Available online at http://thebdi.org/2021/11/19/karoo-toad-vandijkophrynus-gariepensis/

Recommended citation format: 

This species text has been updated and expanded from the text in the
2004 frog atlas. The reference to the text and the book are as follows:

Bates MF 2004 Vandijkophrynus gariepensis Karoo Toad. In Minter LR
et al 2004.

Minter LR, Burger M, Harrison JA, Braack HH, Bishop PJ, Kloepfer D (eds)
2004. Atlas and Red Data Book of  the Frogs of South Africa, Lesotho and
Swaziland. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, and Avian Demography
Unit, Cape Town.

View the above photo record (by Itxaso Quintana) in FrogMAP here.

Find the Paradise Toad in the FBIS database (Freshwater Biodiversity Information System) here.

Family Bufonidae

PARADISE TOAD – Vandijkophrynus robinsoni

Branch and Braack, 1996

Habitat

V. robinsoni occurs widely in winter-rainfall Namaqualand and Richtersveld, within the Succulent Karoo and Fynbos (specifically renosterveld) biomes, but also extends eastward into the summer-rainfall Nama Karoo, where it appears to be restricted to inselbergs in Bushmanland.

The species is generally found in or near rocky, sometimes mountainous, areas that offer numerous refugia in rock cracks and holes. Water bodies used for breeding may be temporary or permanent and are usually small, shallow seepages, springs, vleis, seasonal streams and rivers, rain-filled depressions, or man-made dams. In streams, breeding takes place in side-pools or slow-moving backwaters. Large perennial rivers, such as the Gariep and Olifants, are apparently avoided.

Behaviour

V. robinsoni is a terrestrial, partially rupicolous species that shelters in rock cracks and holes in rocky areas close to permanent or seasonal water sources. It may be locally abundant, and it shares water resources with other Namaqualand endemics, for example, Strongylopus springbokensis and Cacosternum namaquense, as well as with Tomopterna delalandii and Amietia fuscigula.

Vocalization has been recorded from March to October, usually following good rains, indicating that breeding occurs mainly during winter and spring. Males call from the bank or while “seated” in the water, from protected or exposed situations. Grappling with other males for position occurs frequently, and male aggression calls (a variant of the “meeuwing” advertisement call) are often heard. Vocalization (advertisement calls) and amplexus have been observed on several occasions in the presence of metamorphosing tadpoles, indicating that the breeding season is prolonged, or, at least, that it does not consist of a single “explosive” event.

Amplexus is axillary and, as with other bufonids, breeding males develop a black nuptial pad on the thumb. Single males have not been observed attempting to displace amplectant males and this, together with the larger female size, suggests a reproductive strategy involving selection by females.

Some 2000 eggs are laid in strings in water, attached loosely to vegetation or other objects. Tadpoles are typical of those of most southern African bufonids and development is rapid. Apparent schooling behaviour by tadpoles is caused by rapidly drying ponds; under favourable conditions the tadpoles are not gregarious. Mortality amongst eggs and tadpoles is often high because of the rapid drying of pools, or as a result of flash floods. Growth of froglets in captivity is rapid.

The diet, based on the dissection of the stomach contents of four adults, consists mainly of beetles (at least five species), with occasional termites and solpugids. An adult male was seen to feed on a male Cacosternum namaquense. Captive adults readily accepted mealworms and crickets. Predators of V. robinsoni have not been recorded.

Status and Conservation

Branch and Braack (1995) considered V. robinsoni to be restricted to small, spring-fed pools in rocky, arid mountains of the Vandersterrberg in the Richtersveld. Owing to its very localized distribution, threats of habitat destruction and water extraction for livestock farming, and increasing needs of human populations in the region, the species was considered to be “very vulnerable”. However, additional records collected during the early phases of the atlas project indicated that V. robinsoni might have a much wider distribution. Harrison et al. (2001) therefore listed the species as Data Deficient, and its conservation status remained unresolved. Subsequently, during more extensive fieldwork associated with the atlas project, the known range of V. robinsoni has increased considerably. At present, the species is not considered to be threatened and it has been assigned the status of Least Concern (this publication).

V. robinsoni has been recorded in the Richtersveld Contractual National Park and the Goegap Nature Reserve. It is protected in terms of the Western Cape Nature Conservation Ordinance (Ordinance 19 of 1974, as amended), and by the Northern Cape Provincial Ordinance of 2000.

Although the species does not appear to be unduly threatened at present, population monitoring in conservation and other identified areas is recommended. Clarification of the taxonomic status of this species is needed (see above).

Distribution

V. robinsoni is currently known from the Richtersveld, Bushmanland and Namaqualand regions of the Northern and Western Cape provinces of South Africa. Originally thought to occur only in isolated, rocky pools within the northern mountain desert region, recent atlas surveys have extended the known range as far south as the Vanrhynsdorp area (3118BC, BD), and eastward to Ghaamsberg in the Aggeneys area (2919AC). Additional discoveries are likely from springs and gorges in the rocky granite inselbergs of Bushmanland and other inaccessible areas. It is probable that V. robinsoni will be found in southern Namibia in areas adjacent to the Richtersveld (Branch and Braack 1995), and that current gaps in its seemingly disjunct distribution will be filled by further surveys. A photograph (M. Griffin) of a specimen from Rosh Pinah, southern Namibia (2716DD), has similar colouration and habitat to V. robinsoni and may be referable to this species.

V. robinsoni occurs in sympatry with V. gariepensis, and they are closely related (Cunningham and Cherry 2000). In Namaqualand, V. robinsoni lacks the bright colouration typical in the rocky Richtersveld and Ghaamsberg areas, and has a drab colour and pattern similar to that of V. gariepensis. Conversely, juvenile V. gariepensis in rocky habitats frequently show the bright colour patterns characteristic of V. robinsoni. However, V. robinsoni is distinguished from V. gariepensis by its characteristic vocalization and various morphological features, including: poorly developed parotoid glands, weakly developed tarsal fold, small tympanum, relatively smooth skin, and large eyes.

Historical records of V. robinsoni and V. gariepensis in Namaqualand are confused in that a number of observations of tadpoles and non-calling adult specimens were automatically attributed to V. gariepensis on the assumption that V. robinsoni was restricted to the Richtersveld. However, atlas data used for the distribution map of V. robinsoni are based on the calls of males (which are strikingly different to those of V. gariepensis), and these records are reliable, although not comprehensive.

Occurrence of the two Vandijkophrynus taxa in the Namaqualand region was confirmed by morphology and vocalization (Branch and Braack 1995). These authors conservatively maintained common taxonomic usage (e.g. Poynton 1964), and assigned the juvenile types of V. gariepensis to the olive-coloured, strongly tuberculate toad commonly associated with plains and valley bottoms throughout the Karoo region. This action, whilst recognizing the existence of an additional taxon restricted to the rocky areas of the Richtersveld, maintained nomenclatural stability of the widespread karroid taxon.

However, the discovery that the rock-associated taxon (V. robinsoni) is more widely distributed through Namaqualand, and is more common there than the karroid form, may necessitate a nomenclatural re-adjustment. If Smith’s juvenile types are (as now seems possible) more likely referable to the rock-living taxon, then Vandijkophrynus gariepensis A. Smith 1848 is the correct name for this taxon and V. robinsoni becomes a junior synonym. V. gariepensis will then have a more restricted distribution than currently accepted and a replacement name will be required for the more widespread Karoo taxon. In such an eventuality V. tuberculosus Bocage, 1896 (type locality: Linokana, Western Transvaal and Bechuanaland) or V. granti Boulenger, 1903 (type locality: Deelfontein, near Richmond, Cape Province) are available. Resolution of this problem may be possible if DNA-sequence data can be obtained from Smith’s juvenile types of B. gariepensis, currently housed in the Natural History Museum, London.

Further Resources

Virtual Museum (FrogMAP > Search VM > By Scientific or Common Name)

More common names: Paradyskloof-skurwepadda (Afrikaans)

Recommended citation format for this species text:

Branch WR, Braack HH, Tippett RM.  Paradise Toad Vandijkophrynus robinsoni. BDI, Cape Town.
Available online at http://thebdi.org/2021/11/19/paradise-toad-vandijkophrynus-robinsoni/

Recommended citation format: 

This species text has been updated and expanded from the text in the
2004 frog atlas. The reference to the text and the book are as follows:

Branch WR, Braack HH 2004 Vandijkophrynus robinsoni Paradise Toad. In Minter LR
et al 2004.

Minter LR, Burger M, Harrison JA, Braack HH, Bishop PJ, Kloepfer D (eds)
2004. Atlas and Red Data Book of  the Frogs of South Africa, Lesotho and
Swaziland. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, and Avian Demography
Unit, Cape Town.

Cover photo by Faansie Peacock.

Find the Southern Ghost Frog in the FBIS database (Freshwater Biodiversity Information System) here.

Family Heleophrynidae

Identification

The Southern Ghost Frog female attains 49mm in length whilst males are a little smaller, reaching 43mm in length. The dorsal colour varies from yellowish-brown to bright green with reddish-brown blotching. Externally, this species is distinguishable from the Cape Ghost Frog (Heleophryne purcelli) only by the males advertisement call.

Habitat

The Southern Ghost Frog occurs in clear, slow to swift-flowing streams in forested, high-rainfall areas that receive 900–1200 mm p.a. (Boycott 1982). The vegetation in these areas is described as Wet Mountain Fynbos with Afromontane Forest communities (Moll et al. 1984), but this species appears to be restricted to the forests.

In the closed-canopy forests the stream gradient is sometimes low. The water is dark brown owing to the presence of humic compounds, and meanders slowly between moss-covered boulders. The habitat resembles that of H. orientalis in this respect.

Behaviour

In August, an adult female with small developing eggs in the reproductive tract was found dead on the road in Outeniqua Mountain Pass. It had been raining earlier in the day. On another occasion in August, an adult female was collected from a soil pit, in a pine plantation, 600 m from the nearest river in the Outeniqua Mountains (P.J. Lourens pers. comm.). These observations indicate considerable movements away from breeding habitat in the non-breeding season.

Although breeding activity has been observed November–February, H. regis exhibits peak breeding in mid-summer (December–January) when river and stream flow is reduced (Boycott 1982). Adult males call from positions close to waterfalls and cascades, but also from beneath rocks in slower flowing sections of streams. At waterfalls and cascades, rock cracks, crevices and caves are formed and these are prime calling sites. Calling males have also been recorded from wet rock faces, under spongy moss and in overhanging vegetation, such as tree fern branches, directly above small waterfalls and cascades. During the day, adults have been seen out in the open at the bottom of pools. Males sometimes take up positions close to each other. Two or more calling males have been seen, only centimetres apart, under small stones in a streambed (pers. obs.). FitzSimons (1946) recorded six specimens under a single rock at Deepwalls near Knysna. The formation of breeding aggregations is also exhibited by H. orientalis.

The eggs and oviposition sites of H. regis are described here for the first time. As with H. purcelli, H. orientalis and H. hewitti, the eggs of H. regis are large-yolked and yellow. They are laid under rocks at the edges of quiet pools or under large flat rocks lying across streams (pers. obs.). Once, at around midday in the Outeniqua Mountains, a large rock lying across a slow flowing section of the Perdeberg River was lifted, revealing a pair and a partially laid clutch of eggs. Several eggs were attached to one another by a jelly-like substance protruding from the female’s cloaca. A total of 36 eggs had been laid and later another 47 eggs were released, making up a clutch of 83 eggs. Visser (1990) gave clutch size, derived from dissected females, as 114–197 eggs. However, from six clutches found either in the field, or released in captivity by gravid females, it was apparent that smaller clutches are laid by smaller females. Clutches ranged from 78 to 171 eggs (pers. obs.).

In early January, a clutch of 137 eggs was collected when a large rock (c.30 × 40 cm) at the edge of a shady pool (10 × 2 m) was overturned. The eggs appeared to be freshly laid as no development could be seen with a small hand lens. In the laboratory, the eggs were placed on stream gravel in shallow trays, with fresh water that was changed daily from a nearby stream. After four days, the tadpoles hatched with a large amount of yolk. They remained fairly still on the gravel, twitching now and then, and stayed this way for three or four days until most of the yolk had been absorbed, after which they started swimming actively. On another occasion, fertilized eggs collected at the time of laying (mid-December), hatched after 16 days. On this occasion, the eggs were kept in a plastic bag in a coolbox for the duration of a one-week fieldtrip, and this may have affected their development. After one week, the eggs showed clear development with a recognizable head and the body of the tadpole curving around the yolk.

Tadpoles are found beneath submerged and partly submerged rocks in streams and rocky pools. They are preyed upon by dragonfly nymphs (A. Turner pers. comm.). Metamorphs leave the water November–January, after c.12 months in the larval stage (Boycott 1982).

Status and Conservation

The Southern Ghost Frog is secure at present. The species’ habitat is relatively well protected in several private and public protected areas.

Distribution

The Southern Ghost Frog is endemic to the coastal mountain ranges of the Eastern and Western Cape provinces of South Africa. It occurs from the Huis and Perdeberg rivers in the Outeniqua Mountains in the west (3322CC), eastward along the Tsitsikamma and Kareedouw mountain ranges, to Jack-se-bos in the Krom River Forest Reserve (3424AB) in the east (Boycott 1982). Recorded altitude for the species is 230–790 m.

The atlas data are reliable and reasonably complete.

Further Resources

The use of photographs by Faansie Peacock, Joseph Heymans, and Luke Kemp is acknowledged.

Southern Ghost Frog Heleophryne regis Hewitt, 1909

Other Common Names: Royal Ghost Frog (Alt. English); Suidelike spookpadda (Afrikaans).

Recommended citation format: Boycott, RC; Tippett, RM. (2025). Southern Ghost Frog Heleophryne regis. Biodiversity and Development Institute, Cape Town. Available online at https://thebdi.org/2021/11/19/southern-ghost-frog-heleophryne-regis/

This species text has been updated and expanded from the text in the
2004 frog atlas: Boycott, RC. (2004). Southern Ghost Frog Heleophryne regis. In Minter LR
et al 2004.

References: 

Minter, LR; Burger, M; Harrison, JA; Braack, HH; Bishop, PJ; Kloepfer, D. (Editors). (2004). Atlas and Red Data Book of  the Frogs of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, and Avian Demography
Unit, Cape Town.

Carruthers, V; du Preez, L. (2017). Frogs of southern Africa: A Complete Guide. Struik Nature, Cape Town.

Channing, A. (2001) Amphibians of Central and Southern Africa. Protea Book House, Pretoria

Claus, B; Claus, R. (2002). Common Amphibians and Reptiles of Botswana. Gamsberg Macmillan, Windhoek.

Similar Species

Cape Ghost Frog (Heleophryne purcelli)

Cover photo by Alison Sharp.

Find the Rattling Frog in the FBIS database (Freshwater Biodiversity Information System) here.

Family Hyperoliidae

Identification

The Rattling frog attains a length of 44mm. The dorsal surface is smooth, and the markings on the back consist of 3 black longitudinal stripes, each split along its length, on a yellowish-brown to grey background. The undersides are pale cream and granular, often with fine dark mottling between the granules. The male’s throat disk is dark. The limbs are long and slender with bright yellow feet.

Habitat

The Rattling Frog inhabits the Grassland Biome over most of its range, but is also found in Fynbos in the Western Cape Province. In disturbed areas, it also occurs in pasture, clearings in forested areas (e.g., Tsitsikamma) and the grassy corridors between plantations of exotic trees. It occurs at altitudes ranging from near sea level to 1700 m.

Breeding habitats include pans, ponds, dams, and marshes in open grassland or grassy fynbos. During daytime in the breeding season, these frogs may be found under loose stones or tufts of grass near water (Wager 1986).

Behaviour

During the non-breeding season, this frog is terrestrial, hibernating in holes made by other animals or under logs or rocks. De Waal (1978) reported that individuals of this species are often found hibernating deep in the burrows of the Giant Girdled Lizard Cordylus giganteus. Rose (1962) obtained numerous specimens from amongst the roots of decaying Restionaceae reeds.

Breeding begins with the first good spring rains and extends into February. Male Rattling Frogs often call from concealed positions in or under grass tufts where they sit upright to allow full movement of the large, inflated vocal sac. On dark, warm, still evenings, they tend to be less shy, and males have been observed calling 300 mm above the ground, clinging to grass stems or bulrushes. They are agile, climbing from one grass stem to the next with the greatest of ease. As is the case with Kassina senegalensis, S. wealii seldom hops or jumps, but walks with a few quick paces, pausing intermittently.

Male Rattling Frogs call from the water’s edge or several meters from the water. Pairs will often enter amplexus some distance from the water, and then make their way to the oviposition site, where the female will lay her eggs in shallow water. The eggs are 1.7 mm in diameter, surrounded by capsules of 2.4 mm diameter, and are attached to vegetation and other objects underwater. The clutch contains 100–500 eggs (Wager 1965; Channing 2001). Tadpoles develop slowly, and metamorphosis is completed after about eight weeks (Wager 1965).

When threatened, these frogs often sham death by lying on their backs with feet tucked in. A few moments after being released they quickly turn over and walk away. The skin contains small amounts of toxic peptides that can cause severe physiological reactions if eaten by a predator (Roseghini et al. 1988).

Status and Conservation

Although the Rattling Frog is not abundant throughout its range, large breeding populations were encountered at several places during the atlas period, for example, at Dullstroom, Mpumalanga Province, and Boesmansberge, Eastern Cape Province. S. wealii occurs in several provincial nature reserves and national parks, and is not threatened.

Distribution

The Rattling Frog is endemic to the atlas region. In the Western Cape Province, it is distributed along the coastal plain to the east of Cape Town. In the Eastern Cape Province, the distribution broadens north-eastward into southern KwaZulu-Natal Province and northward into the eastern and northern parts of the Free State Province. A single recent record exists from Lesotho (2927DC), but the species probably occurs more widely in that country. In the interior, the distribution extends north-eastward through Gauteng, north-western KwaZulu-Natal, central Mpumalanga and western Swaziland. The most northerly record was from 2430DD. The two historical records from the Richards Bay area (2832AB, AD) are disjunct from the main distribution.

The atlas data are accurate and comprehensive, but incomplete in places such as Lesotho.

Further Resources

The use of photographs by Alison Sharp is acknowledged.

Rattling Frog Semnodactylus wealii (Boulenger, 1882)

Other Common Names: Weale’s Long-toed Frog; Running Frog (Alternative Common Names); Ratelpadda (Afrikaans)

Recommended citation format: du Preez, LH; Tippett, RM. (2025). Rattling Frog Semnodactylus wealii. Biodiversity and Development Institute, Cape Town. Available online at https://thebdi.org/2021/11/18/rattling-frog-semnodactylus-wealii/

This species text has been updated and expanded from the text in the
2004 frog atlas: du Preez, LH. (2004). Rattling Frog Semnodactylus wealii. In Minter LR et al 2004.

References: 

Minter, LR; Burger, M; Harrison, JA; Braack, HH; Bishop, PJ; Kloepfer, D. (Editors). (2004). Atlas and Red Data Book of  the Frogs of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, and Avian Demography
Unit, Cape Town.

Carruthers, V; du Preez, L. (2017). Frogs of southern Africa: A Complete Guide. Struik Nature, Cape Town.

Channing, A. (2001) Amphibians of Central and Southern Africa. Protea Book House, Pretoria

Similar Species

Bubbling Kassina (Kassina senegalensis)

View the above photo record (by Luke Kemp) in FrogMAP here.

Find the Amatola Toad in the FBIS database (Freshwater Biodiversity Information System) here.

Family Bufonidae

AMATOLA TOAD – Vandijkophrynus amatolicus

Hewitt, 1925

Identification

Vandijkophrynus amatolicus is a small toad, with females reaching a maximum snout–vent length of 37 mm. The dorsum is usually uniform dark grey or olive-brown with a distinct, pale, vertebral stripe. Well developed parotoid glands and numerous small, flattened warts are present on the dorsal surface. This species was originally described as a subspecies of V. angusticeps, which is restricted to the Western Cape, but the latter is larger, reaching 58 mm in body length, and has dark, irregular dorsal patches on either side of a thin vertebral line (Boycott 1988d). Also, a fringe of webbing around the fingers and toes of V. angusticeps is absent in V. amatolicus. Differences in advertisement call structure distinguish V. amatolicus from B. angusticeps (Passmore and Carruthers 1995; Channing 2001). Both species possess a pupillary umbraculum, a structure absent in V. gariepensis.

Habitat

This species inhabits high-altitude Moist Upland Grassland, but is absent from adjacent indigenous forest and plantation areas. Specimens may be found sheltering under rocks and logs in grassland and also in areas where forest has been cleared, such as the settlement of Hobbiton-on-Hogsback and at Hogsback Inn (Boycott 1988d).

The breeding habitat is shallow temporary pools, and seeps on mountain slopes.

Behaviour

Breeding has been recorded from October to December (Channing 2001). After heavy rains, the males congregate in large numbers at breeding sites, where they call from concealed positions under grass. The advertisement call is a brief nasal squawk, with long intervals between calls (Passmore and Carruthers 1995).

Single strings of eggs are deposited in shallow water, with single clutches estimated to contain several hundred eggs. These may be difficult to spot against the background of vegetation or muddy substrate (Wager 1986; Channing 2001). The tadpoles are brown in colour and benthic in habit.

Status and Conservation

Status

Despite its limited range, V. amatolicus is locally abundant, and congregates in large numbers to breed (Wager 1986; Boycott 1988d; Channing 2001). It is known from the following protected areas: State Forests between Keiskammahoek and Hogsback, SAFCOL Forestry areas, Kubisi Indigenous Forest, and the Hogsback Indigenous Forest. It is a protected species in terms of the Cape Nature Conservation Ordinance (Ordinance 19 of 1974, as amended for the Eastern Cape Province), and the National Forests Act 19408 of 1998, section 7.

V. amatolicus was previously listed as Restricted (Branch 1988), Vulnerable (IUCN 2000) and Near Threatened (Harrison et al. 2001). Reassessment for this publication found this species to be Endangered in view of its restricted extent of occurrence and area of occupancy, fragmented range, and ongoing threats to populations.

Threats

The grassland habitat of V. amatolicus is threatened by overgrazing (cattle), silviculture, and the associated altered fire regimes and depletion of available surface water. Silviculture poses the single greatest threat as it results in a totally altered vegetation structure and causes fragmentation of the grassland habitat. It is estimated that some 20% of the habitat of Vandijkophrynus amatolicus has been lost in this way over the past 20 years (Harrison et al. 2001).

Recommended conservation actions

None of the protected areas in which V. amatolicus occurs (listed above) has statutory status. It is recommended that at least one population of V. amatolicus be given formal protection by the proclamation of a statutory provincial nature reserve, and that this population be monitored by the relevant authority. Within this reserve, limiting factor (e.g., encroachment of alien vegetation) management, as well as population monitoring and life history research, should be undertaken. As can be seen from the brief description of its life history, little is known about this species.

The taxonomic and genetic status of a small Vandijkophrynus species that occurs on the Kammanasie Mountains, and closely resembles V. amatolicus, requires clarification (see V. angusticeps account).

Hogsback and its surrounds are a well-known tourist destination. Education of the public regarding this frog and its habitat should arouse interest and may result in greater protection.

Distribution

V. amatolicus is endemic to the Eastern Cape Province, where it has a restricted range in the Winterberg and Amatola mountains, between Katberg and Keiskammahoek (Boycott 1988d). Recorded altitudes for the species are 1400–1800 m.

V. amatolicus was originally recorded from a single grid cell near Hogsback (Poynton 1964) and later from six localities (Katberg, Katberg Pass, Gaika’s Kop, Hogsback Mountain, Hogsback settlement and Keiskammahoek), in four grid cells (Boycott 1988d). During the atlas project the species was recorded from only one grid cell, namely 3226DB.

The atlas data are reliable but incomplete. Further surveys in optimum breeding conditions may reveal additional populations.

Further Resources

Virtual Museum (FrogMAP > Search VM > By Scientific or Common Name)

More common names: Amatola-skurwepadda (Afrikaans)

Recommended citation format for this species text:

Boycott RC, Tippett RM.  Amatola Toad Vandijkophrynus amatolicus. BDI, Cape Town.
Available online at http://thebdi.org/2021/11/17/amatola-toad-vandijkophrynus-amatolicus/

Recommended citation format: 

This species text has been updated and expanded from the text in the
2004 frog atlas. The reference to the text and the book are as follows:

Boycott RC 2004 Vandijkophrynus amatolicus Amatola Toad. In Minter LR
et al 2004.

Minter LR, Burger M, Harrison JA, Braack HH, Bishop PJ, Kloepfer D (eds)
2004. Atlas and Red Data Book of  the Frogs of South Africa, Lesotho and
Swaziland. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, and Avian Demography
Unit, Cape Town.

View the above photo record (by Nick Evans) in FrogMAP here.

Find the Nile Grass Frog in the FBIS database (Freshwater Biodiversity Information System) here.

Family Ptychadenidae

NILE GRASS FROG – Ptychadena nilotica

(Seetzen, 1855)

Habitat

In Malawi, P. nilotica is recorded from swamps, marshes and pans in open, lowland savanna (Stewart 1967). In South Africa it seems to prefer permanent and semi-permanent pans and pools (Passmore 1978) but has also been recorded from brackish coastal pools (Lambiris 1989a). In the atlas region it inhabits Mixed Lowveld Bushveld, Sweet Lowveld Bushveld, Subhumid Lowveld Bushveld, and Coastal Lowveld Grassland, at altitudes up to 300 m. Annual rainfall in these habitats is 500–>1000 mm. During the day, adults conceal themselves in grass at the edges of pools, often sitting in shallow water (Stewart 1967).

Behaviour

Because these frogs occur at or near permanent bodies of water, they are probably active throughout the year. They feed on terrestrial beetles, bugs, spiders, earthworms and snails, as well as aquatic and semi-aquatic organisms such as tadpoles and froglets (Stewart 1967; Channing 2001). When disturbed, they leap into or away from the water, simultaneously expelling a jet of water from the bladder (Stewart 1967; Passmore and Carruthers 1995). When captured they adopt a rigid posture, and sometimes produce a foamy skin secretion and emit a moaning sound (Channing 2001).

Breeding takes place in the wet season from spring to autumn (Stewart 1967). Males call from concealed positions at the edges of shallow pans or pools in open grassy wetlands or open woodland marshes, and have also been observed calling from roadside ditches and a quarry (Jacobsen 1989; Lambiris 1989a; Passmore and Carruthers 1995). In addition to the advertisement call, several other call types are produced in different social contexts (Passmore 1978).

Aside from the record of small black and white eggs laid in shallow water at the edge of Lake Chilwa (Channing 2001), there appears to be no further information on the eggs or tadpoles of this species.

Status and Conservation

Although P. nilotica is widely distributed in Africa, it has a marginal distribution in the atlas region and, from a national perspective, may warrant conservation action. A survey is necessary to locate breeding populations possibly missed during the atlas project. At present, not enough information is available to comment on the conservation status of this species within the atlas region.

Distribution

P. nilotica is widespread in savannas from Sierra Leone eastward through West Africa, and northward to Egypt. Its range extends southward to Angola, northern Namibia, northern Botswana and southern Mozambique. The species is also recorded from Madagascar, Seychelles and the Mascarene Islands, although it is possible that these populations represent a different taxon (Poynton 1964; Poynton and Broadley 1985b; Glaw and Vences 1994). In the atlas region, P. nilotica is uncommon and marginal in its distribution. It is recorded from the southeastern border of Mpumalanga to the coastal plain of northern KwaZulu-Natal, as far south as Shaka’s Kraal (2931AC).

Few records were collected during the atlas survey but the distribution range reflected in the map is regarded as reasonably accurate. The gaps within this range are probably the result of inadequate collecting rather than a real absence of the species.

Further Resources

Virtual Museum (FrogMAP > Search VM > By Scientific or Common Name)

More common names: Mascarene Grass Frog (Alternative English Name); Nylgraspadda, Maskareense graspadda (Afrikaans)

Recommended citation format for this species text:

Minter LR, Passmore NI, Tippett RM.  Nile Grass Frog Ptychadena nilotica. BDI, Cape Town.
Available online at http://thebdi.org/2021/11/17/nile-grass-frog-ptychadena-nilotica/

Recommended citation format: 

This species text has been updated and expanded from the text in the
2004 frog atlas. The reference to the text and the book are as follows:

Minter LR, Passmore NI 2004 Ptychadena nilotica Nile Grass Frog. In Minter LR
et al 2004.

Minter LR, Burger M, Harrison JA, Braack HH, Bishop PJ, Kloepfer D (eds)
2004. Atlas and Red Data Book of  the Frogs of South Africa, Lesotho and
Swaziland. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, and Avian Demography
Unit, Cape Town.

Cover photo by Andrew Hankey.

Find the African Bullfrog Frog in the FBIS database (Freshwater Biodiversity Information System) here.

Family Pyxicephalidae

Identification

The African Bullfrog is a large and robust species reaching a length of 120mm. The dorsal surface is light brown with greyish to brown patches and long dorsal ridges. A pale yellowish to green vertebral stripe is often present. The head is broad but the snout is more pointed than that of the Giant Bullfrog. The upper jaw carries irregular vertical bars that help to distinguish it from the Giant Bullfrog which lacks similar markings. The African Bullfrog also has a white crescent-shaped marking on the tympanum (diagnostic). The ventral surface is smooth and white to creamy yellow. The throat is sometimes mottled. The sexes are similar but breeding males are often bright green and males are larger than females.

At present there appear to be no reliable, diagnostic, morphological characters that allow one to distinguish P. edulis from small individuals of P. adspersus (Channing et al. 1994a). For this reason, museum specimens and literature records, unless accompanied by call or other relevant behavioural data, have to be treated with circumspection.

Habitat

The African Bullfrog inhabits flat, low-lying areas in open, grassy woodland, that becomes flooded after heavy rain. Prime breeding habitat includes shallow, grassy pans that can support large breeding populations (e.g., in Kruger National Park, Naboomspruit, Vivo, Soekmekaar and Giyani districts). Smaller breeding aggregations form in artificial impoundments such as roadside furrows, borrow pits, waterholes, ponds and dams (Jacobsen 1989; L.R.M. pers. obs). Channing et al. (1994a) found this species breeding in rice paddies in Mozambique.

Within the atlas region, the African Bullfrog inhabits several woodland vegetation types in the north-eastern parts of the Savanna Biome, from sea level to an altitude of about 1500 m (Jacobsen 1989).

Behaviour

The African Bullfrog spends up to 10 months of the year in a dormant state beneath the soil surface (Mitchell 1946). The production of a cocoon to prevent desiccation has not been observed, but Stewart (1967) noted that “when hibernating during the dry season, eyes are closed and depressed to the level of the head”.

Breeding takes place at night (cf. P. adspersus) after heavy rain. No aggressive behaviour was observed in a breeding population near Beira (Channing et al. 1994a), but in Kruger National Park, males calling at distances of 0.5–1.5 m from each other in shallow, flooded grassland were seen charging one another (L.R.M. pers. obs.). However, this species does not appear to display the same level of aggressive behaviour as  the Giant Bullfrog P. adspersus. Males call from the water, with only the head and vocal sac projecting above the surface. Guarding of tadpole swarms and channel construction by males were observed in a breeding population of P. edulis near Jock of the Bushveld Rest Camp in the Kruger National Park (H. Braack pers. comm.).

Food items include a variety of invertebrates and small vertebrates, including frogs. Several bird species, Nile Monitors Varanus niloticus and humans are known to prey on this species (Peters 1882; Stewart 1967; Channing 2001).

Status and Conservation

The occurrence of the African Bullfrog in the atlas region is marginal in terms of its global distribution. Within this area it is relatively common and does not appear to be at risk. Large populations are known to occur in private and provincial nature reserves and national parks, such as the Kruger National Park.

The effect of human predation outside protected areas should be evaluated. More detailed studies of habitat requirements, breeding biology, duration of the larval stage and development are recommended for this species.

Distribution

The African Bullfrog was formerly synonymized with P. adspersus (Poynton 1964) and later treated as a subspecies of P. adspersus (Parry 1982; Poynton and Broadley 1985b; Lambiris 1989a). This taxon was again recognised as a full species by Channing et al. (1994a) on the basis of clear differences in advertisement call and breeding behaviour.

Outside of the atlas region, P. edulis occurs in Mozambique (Channing et al. 1994a) and extends into Kenya (Channing 2001). The species is probably also widespread in Central and East Africa. Its presence along the north-eastern border of South Africa indicates that P. edulis is also likely to occur in Botswana and Zimbabwe.

In the atlas region, records based on calls were collected in the north-eastern parts of North West Province, Limpopo Province, eastern Mpumalanga Province, northern and eastern Swaziland and north-eastern KwaZulu-Natal as far south as Empangeni (2831DD).

Fieldwork involving the collection of advertisement calls and knowledge of intra- and inter-specific variation in the morphology of adults, juveniles and tadpoles, is required before the distribution of this species can be accurately mapped (Channing et al. 1994a; Channing 2001).

The atlas data are reasonably reliable given the problems outlined above, but are not comprehensive.

Further Resources

The use of photographs by Andrew Hankey is acknowledged. Other images by Ryan Tippett.

African Bullfrog Pyxicephalus edulis Peters, 1854

Other Common Names: Edible Bullfrog, Lesser Bullfrog (Alt. English); Kleinbrulpadda (Afrikaans).

Recommended citation format: Cook, CL; Minter, LR; Tippett, RM. African Bullfrog Pyxicephalus edulis. BDI, Cape Town. Available online at http://thebdi.org/2021/11/17/african-bullfrog-pyxicephalus-edulis/

This species text has been updated and expanded from the text in the
2004 frog atlas: Du Preez, LH; Cook CL. (2004). African Bullfrog Pyxicephalus edulis. In Minter LR
et al 2004.

References: 

Minter, LR; Burger, M; Harrison, JA; Braack, HH; Bishop, PJ; Kloepfer, D. (Editors). (2004). Atlas and Red Data Book of  the Frogs of South Africa, Lesotho and
Swaziland. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, and Avian Demography
Unit, Cape Town.

Carruthers, V; du Preez, L. (2017). Frogs of southern Africa: A Complete Guide. Struik Nature, Cape Town.

Channing, A. (2001) Amphibians of Central and Southern Africa. Protea Book House, Pretoria

Claus, B; Claus, R. (2002). Common Amphibians and Reptiles of Botswana. Gamsberg Macmillan, Windhoek.

Similar Species

Giant Bullfrog (Pyxicephalus adspersus)

View the above photo record (by Ryan van Huysteen) in FrogMAP here.

Find the Water Lily Frog in the FBIS database (Freshwater Biodiversity Information System) here.

Family Hyperoliidae

WATER LILY FROG – Hyperolius pusillus

Cope, 1862

Habitat

H. pusillus inhabits open savanna and grassland, breeding in shallow pans, ponds, vleis and dams with water lilies Nymphaea sp., or at least some form of floating vegetation. In the atlas region it occurs in a variety of bushveld vegetation types, from Coastal Bushveld-Grassland along the coast of the Eastern Cape and KwaZulu-Natal, to Mixed Lowveld Bushveld in the low-lying areas of Limpopo Province, east of the Great Escarpment. During the atlas survey, breeding populations were also found in ponds in plantations of pine and Eucalyptus, south of Piet Retief (2730BA, 2730BC).

Behaviour

Very little is known about the non-breeding behaviour of H. pusillus. In Durban (2931CC), breeding takes place from the beginning of October to the end of March (Alexander 1987). Males form dense choruses on floating vegetation and leave the breeding site only in the early hours of the morning to ascend into surrounding trees (Passmore and Carruthers 1995). On occasions, males have even been found calling from the tree canopy at the start of the chorus in the early evening, apparently stimulated to call from these atypical sites by the chorus at the breeding site.

Choruses are characterised by high levels of aggressive behaviour between males, especially in the early evening when calling is at its peak. At such times, a minimum distance of 25 cm is maintained between calling males by means of the advertisement call, an encounter call, and physical contact between calling males (Cleminson 1991). During territorial disputes, males often butt one another with their vocal sacs (Passmore and Carruthers 1995).

About 500 light green eggs are laid in groups of 20–120, in a single layer between the overlapping margins of lily leaves, with the jelly surrounding the eggs acting as a glue to keep the leaves together (Wager 1965). While this specialized oviposition site reduces predation, it may also be a limiting factor at sites where population densities are high (Telford 1982).

H. pusillus adults feed on ants and flying termites, and are preyed upon by the Yellowbilled Egret Egretta intermedia (Channing 2001). The call sites favoured by this species make it particularly vulnerable to predation by pisaurid spiders (L.R. Minter and A. Turner pers. obs.).

Status and Conservation

H. pusillus is a relatively abundant species, often occurring in large numbers at breeding sites. Populations in developed and managed areas, such as golf courses and parks, appear to be stable, and some have been observed to re-establish themselves following serious disturbance. In Durban, several individuals translocated from Bluff Nature Reserve to Pigeon Valley established a new breeding population (Alexander 1990).

This species is protected in a number of established national and provincial conservation areas, and seems to require no additional conservation action at present. It is protected from collection by provincial conservation ordinances in the relevant provinces.

Distribution

H. pusillus is distributed from southern Somalia, southward through East Africa to Mozambique, eastern Zimbabwe and Swaziland (Poynton and Broadley 1987; Channing 2001). Within the atlas region it occurs as far south as Cebe (3228DA) in the Eastern Cape. The species usually occurs in low-lying coastal areas but, further inland in the northern parts of the atlas region, it is found at higher altitudes, as in Malawi and northwestern Botswana (Channing 2001).

This species has an unmistakable call, and the atlas data are reasonably complete and reliable.

Further Resources

Virtual Museum (FrogMAP > Search VM > By Scientific or Common Name)

More common names: Waterleliepadda (Afrikaans)

Recommended citation format for this species text:

Alexander GJ, Tippett RM.  Water Lily Frog Hyperolius pusillus. BDI, Cape Town.
Available online at http://thebdi.org/2021/11/16/water-lily-frog-hyperolius-pusillus/

Recommended citation format: 

This species text has been updated and expanded from the text in the
2004 frog atlas. The reference to the text and the book are as follows:

Alexander GJ 2004 Hyperolius pusillus Water Lily Frog. In Minter LR
et al 2004.

Minter LR, Burger M, Harrison JA, Braack HH, Bishop PJ, Kloepfer D (eds)
2004. Atlas and Red Data Book of  the Frogs of South Africa, Lesotho and
Swaziland. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, and Avian Demography
Unit, Cape Town.