Desmognathus carolinensis
Dunn, 1916
Carolina Mountain Dusky Salamander
G4Apparently SecureGlobal Rank
Least concernIUCN
LowThreat Impact
Identity
Unique IDELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.105137
Element CodeAAAAD03130
Record TypeSPECIES
ClassificationSpecies
Classification StatusStandard
Name CategoryVertebrate Animal
IUCNLeast concern
Endemicendemic to a single nation
KingdomAnimalia
PhylumCraniata
ClassAmphibia
OrderCaudata
FamilyPlethodontidae
GenusDesmognathus
Other Common NamesCarolina mountain dusky salamander (EN)
Concept ReferenceTilley, S. G., and M. J. Mahoney. 1996. Patterns of genetic differentiation in salamanders of the Desmognathus ochrophaeus complex (Amphibia: Plethodontidae). Herpetological Monographs 10:1-41.
Taxonomic CommentsThis species formerly was included in Desmognathus ochrophaeus. Based on patterns of allozyme variation, Tilley and Mahoney (1996) split D. ochrophaeus into four species: D. ochrophaeus, D. carolinensis, D. ocoee, and D. orestes. Populations on opposite sides of a stream may exhibit relatively high levels of genetic differentiation (White et al. 2000). Highton (2000) stated that further study is needed to determine whether D. carolinensis includes more than one species, which he concluded is likely.
Beamer and Lamb (2008) examined mtDNA variation among Desmognathus populations in the Gulf and Atlantic coastal plains (and some nearby localities outside the Coastal Plain). Based on these genetic results, in conjunction with morphological observations, they concluded that the taxonomic and geographic scopes of several Desmognathus species should be modified from their traditional concepts. Among other conclusions, the authors determined that some Atlantic Coastal Plain populations previously regarded as D. auriculatus fall into clades containing D. fuscus or D. fuscus and D. carolinensis. Hence, further taxonomic study is warranted.
Tilley et al. (2013) reported on a molecularly distinctive form in the southern Bald Mountains and northern foothills of the Great Smoky Mountains that is phenotypically indistinguishable from this species. This form appears to hybridize with both D. carolinensis and D. santeetlah in the Blue Ridge Physiographic Province, and with an innominate lowland form further west in the Ridge and Valley Physiographic Province (Crother 2017). Beamer and Lamb (2020), in their discussion of Desmognathus mtDNA phylogenetics, discussed the intercalation of mtDNA haplotypes with various populations of Desmognathus fuscus (Frost 2020).
Conservation Status
Rank Method Rank calculation - Biotics v2
Review Date2025-06-29
Change Date2001-10-17
Edition Date2025-06-29
Edition AuthorsHammerson, G. (2002); rev. R. L. Gundy (2025)
Threat ImpactLow
Range Extent5000-20,000 square km (about 2000-8000 square miles)
Number of Occurrences21 - 80
Rank ReasonsThis species has a small range in western North Carolina and adjacent eastern Tennessee. It is common, the population appears stable, and most occurrences are on conservation lands.
Range Extent CommentsThis species occurs in the southwestern Blue Ridge Physiographic Province in western North Carolina and adjacent eastern Tennessee, United States. It is found from somewhere between Linville Falls and McKinney Gap (Burke and McDowell counties, North Carolina) on the Blue Ridge Divide and Iron Mountain Gap on the North Carolina-Tennessee boundary (Mitchell-Unicoi counties, North Carolina-Tennessee) to the valley of the Pigeon River (Haywood and Buncombe counties), North Carolina; this area includes the Blue Ridge, Black, Bald, and Unaka mountains (Tilley and Mahoney 1996). Using Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF) (2025) records from 2000-2025, range extent is estimated to be 10,072 km² (RARECAT 2025).
Occurrences CommentsNumber of occurrences has not been determined but probably falls within the indicated range.
Threat Impact CommentsClearcutting of dry sites strongly depletes local populations (Petranka et al. 1993), but the species is in minimal need of protection (Petranka 1998).
Ecology & Habitat
Habitat
At lower elevations and in winter usually concentrates near seepage areas, springs, and small streams; may range into adjacent wooded areas in wet weather. More terrestrial at higher elevations, characteristic inhabitant of floor of spruce-fir forests. Often abundant on wet rock faces. Eggs are laid in wet rock crevices or under rocks, logs, or moss in seepage areas or near small streams.
Ecology
Based on removal sampling in 30 x 30 m plots in North Carolina, Petranka and Starnes (2001) estimated minimum density at 10,666 individuals per hectare.
Terrestrial HabitatsForest - HardwoodForest - ConiferForest - MixedBare rock/talus/screeCliff
Palustrine HabitatsBog/fenRiparian
Other Nations (1)
United StatesN4
| Province | Rank | Native |
|---|
| Tennessee | S2 | Yes |
| North Carolina | S3 | Yes |
References (15)
- Beamer, D. A., and T. Lamb. 2008. Dusky salamanders (Desmognathus, Plethodontidae) from the Coastal Plain: multiple independent lineages and their bearing on the molecular phylogeny of the genus. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 47:143-153.
- Beamer, D. A., and T. Lamb. 2020. Towards rectifying limitations on species delineation in dusky salamanders (<i>Desmognathus</i>: Plethodontidae): An ecoregion-drainage sampling grid reveals additional cryptic clades. Zootaxa 4734: 1-61.
- Blackburn, L., P. Nanjappa, and M. J. Lannoo. 2001. An Atlas of the Distribution of U.S. Amphibians. Copyright, Ball State University, Muncie, Indiana, USA.
- Crother, B. I. (editor). 2017. Scientific and standard English names of amphibians and reptiles of North America north of Mexico, with comments regarding confidence in our understanding. 8th edition. SSAR Herpetological Circular 43:1-104. [Updates in SSAR North American Species Names Database at: https://ssarherps.org/cndb]
- Frost, D.R. 2020. Amphibian Species of the World: an Online Reference. Version 6.0. American Museum of Natural History, New York, USA. Online: http://research.amnh.org/herpetology/amphibia/index.html
- Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF). 2025. Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF) data portal. Online. Available: https://www.gbif.org/ (accessed 2025).
- Hairston, N. G. 1980. Species packing in the salamander genus <i>Desmognathus</i>: what are the interspecific interactions involved? American Naturalist 115(3): 354-366.
- Highton, R. 2000. Detecting cryptic species using allozyme data. Pages 215-241 in R. C. Bruce, R. G. Jaeger, and L. D. Houck, editors. The biology of plethodontid salamanders. Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, New York. xiii + 485 pp.
- Petranka, J. W. 1998. Salamanders of the United States and Canada. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C.
- Petranka, J. W., and S. S. Murray. 2001. Effectiveness of removal sampling for determining salamander density and biomass: a case study in an Appalachian streamside community. Journal of Herpetology 35:36-44.
- Petranka, J. W., M. E. Eldridge, and K. E. Haley. 1993. Effects of timber harvesting on southern Appalachian salamanders. Conservation Biology 7(2): 363-370.
- <p>NatureServe's Rapid Analysis of Rarity and Endangerment Conservation Assessment Tool (RARECAT). 2025. Version: 2.1.1 (released April 04, 2025).</p>
- Tilley, S. G., and M. J. Mahoney. 1996. Patterns of genetic differentiation in salamanders of the <i>Desmognathus ochrophaeus</i> complex (Amphibia: Plethodontidae). Herpetological Monographs 10:1-41.
- Tilley, S. G., J. Bernardo, L. A. Katz, L. López, J. D. Roll, R. L. Eriksen, J. Kratovil, N. K. J. Bittner, and K. A. Crandall. 2013. Failed species, innominate forms, and the vain search for species limits: cryptic diversity in dusky salamanders (<i>Desmognathus</i>) of eastern Tennessee. Ecology and Evolution 3: 2547-2567.
- White, M. M., F. Vallejo, and S. R. Reilly. 2000. Fine-scale genetic differentiation in the Carolina mountain dusky salamander, Desmognathus carolinensis. Journal of Herpetology 34:298-302.