Roadless Areas
Home/Species/ Southern Leopard Frog

Lithobates sphenocephalus

(Cope, 1886)

Southern Leopard Frog

G5Secure Found in 19 roadless areas NatureServe Explorer →
G5SecureGlobal Rank
Least concernIUCN
Identity
Unique IDELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.104396
Element CodeAAABH01220
Record TypeSPECIES
ClassificationSpecies
Classification StatusStandard
Name CategoryVertebrate Animal
IUCNLeast concern
Endemicendemic to a single nation
KingdomAnimalia
PhylumCraniata
ClassAmphibia
OrderAnura
FamilyRanidae
GenusLithobates
Synonyms
Rana pipiens sphenocephalaCope, 1886Rana sphenocephalaCope, 1889
Other Common Names
southern leopard frog (EN)
Concept Reference
Frost, D. R. 1985. Amphibian species of the world. A taxonomic and geographical reference. Allen Press, Inc., and The Association of Systematics Collections, Lawrence, Kansas. v + 732 pp.
Taxonomic Comments
An older name, Rana utricularia (unjustifiably changed from the original Rana utricularius Harlan), was applied to this species by Pace (1974), and subsequently by various other authors, upsetting the long-standing use of the name sphenocephala; there is substantial doubt that Harlan meant to apply the name utricularius to this species and not to what is now known as Rana pipiens; because the apparent misinterpretations made by Pace (1974) have led to an uncertainty as to which name should be used, the ICZN was petitioned to give precedence to sphenocephala over utricularius whenever the two names are considered to be synonyms (see Brown et al. 1990 and references cited therein for a detailed account of this issue). In 1992, the ICZN ruled that sphenocephala has precedence over utricularius whenever the two names are considered to be synonyms (Bull. Zool. Nomen. 49(2):171-173). Pace (1974) and Collins (1990) regarded the peninsular Florida population as a subspecies (Rana utricularia sphenocephala) distinct from (but intergrading with) the subspecies to the north (Rana utricularia utricularia). According to Brown et al. (1990), the basis for regarding populations in these areas to be separate subspecies is mistaken. Hillis and Davis (1986) examined the evolutionary history of Rana using rDNA analyses but did not address the problem of the taxonomic status of Florida populations of R. sphenocephala, nor did the biochemical analyses of Case (1978).
Conservation Status
Review Date2002-12-31
Change Date2001-11-26
Edition Date2010-01-26
Edition AuthorsHammerson, G.
Range Extent200,000 to >2,500,000 square km (about 80,000 to >1,000,000 square miles)
Range Extent Comments
Range includes the lowlands of the southeastern United States, from southern New York to the Florida Keys, and west to eastern Kansas, central Oklahoma, and eastern Texas (Conant and Collins 1991). Introduced on Little Bahama Bank (Schwartz and Henderson 1991). Hybridizes with Rana blairi along the Missouri River floodplain in Missouri (Parris 1999).
Occurrences Comments
Represented by many and/or large occurrences throughout most of the range.
Threat Impact Comments
Traffic on roads near ponds may be a local threat. Palis (1994, Herpetol. Rev. 25:119) reported large numbers of road-killed individuals adjacent to a pond in Florida. Within a single population, families of leopard frogs vary in their tolerance to the insecticide carbaryl (Bridges and Semlitsch 2001).
Ecology & Habitat

Description

Southern leopard frogs are green or brown, usually with irregularly spaced rounded dark spots on the back and a few dark spots on the sides of the body. A continuous usually yellowish ridge extends along each side of the back. The head is pointed, and usually there is a light spot in the center of the eardrum. The hind toes are extensively webbed. Maximum size is around 5.1 inches (13 cm) snout-vent length. Breeding males have vocal sacs at the angles of the jaw; the sacs are spherical when inflated. The forelimbs of mature amles are more massive than those of females, and the base of the thumb is larger in males than in females. The breeding call is a short chuckling or ratchetlike trill. Larvae have faint to dark mottling on the body and tail, and the eyes are positioned on top of head, not at the margin of the head, when viewed from above. Maximum size of larvae is about 3 inches (7.6 cm) in total length. Egg masses are baseball sized when the jelly is fully expanded and contain roughly 1,000-1,500 eggs.

Habitat

Southern leopard frogs occur in the vicinity of virtually any freshwater habitat and in some locations inhabit slightly brackish marshes. In summer they may disperse from water into moist upland vegetation. Breeding occurs in still, shallow, permanent or temporary waters of many kinds. Males call usually from shallow or deep water while floating or submerged, sometimes while hidden in crayfish burrows. Egg masses may be attached to vegetation or float free in shallow water.

Reproduction

Breeding occurs usually in March-June in the northern part of the range and in any month in the far south (but often November-March with filling of ephemeral ponds) (Doody and Young 1995, J. Herpetol. 29:614-616). Individual females deposit globular masses of up to several thousand eggs. Larvae hatch in a few to several days, metamorphose in summer or fall, or may overwinter and metamorphose the following year. Relatively small differences in hydroperiod can have large effects on juvenile recruitment (Ryan and Winne 2001).
Terrestrial Habitats
Forest - HardwoodForest - ConiferForest - MixedGrassland/herbaceous
Palustrine Habitats
TEMPORARY POOLHERBACEOUS WETLANDSCRUB-SHRUB WETLANDFORESTED WETLANDBog/fenRiparian
Other Nations (1)
United StatesN5
ProvinceRankNative
GeorgiaS5Yes
MissouriS5Yes
AlabamaS5Yes
South CarolinaS5Yes
IowaS4Yes
TexasS5Yes
ArkansasS5Yes
IllinoisS5Yes
KentuckyS5Yes
FloridaS5Yes
IndianaS4Yes
New JerseyS5Yes
PennsylvaniaS1Yes
MississippiS5Yes
MarylandS4Yes
DelawareS5Yes
OklahomaSNRYes
LouisianaS5Yes
KansasS5Yes
North CarolinaS5Yes
VirginiaS4Yes
District of ColumbiaS2Yes
TennesseeS5Yes
Threat Assessments
ThreatScopeSeverityTiming
1 - Residential & commercial development——High (continuing)
1.1 - Housing & urban areas——High (continuing)
1.2 - Commercial & industrial areas——High (continuing)
4 - Transportation & service corridors——High (continuing)
4.1 - Roads & railroads——High (continuing)

—

Roadless Areas (19)
Arkansas (4)
AreaForestAcres
Blue MountainOuachita National Forest9,755
Brush HeapOuachita National Forest4,205
Dismal CreekOzark-St. Francis National Forest9,160
Indian CreekOzark-St. Francis National Forest7,855
Florida (7)
AreaForestAcres
Alexander Springs CreekOcala National Forest2,954
Clear LakeApalachicola National Forest5,592
Farles PrairieOcala National Forest1,901
Gum BayApalachicola National Forest11,645
Long BayApalachicola National Forest5,726
Natural Area WsaOsceola National Forest2,543
SavannahApalachicola National Forest1,927
Illinois (1)
AreaForestAcres
Ripple HollowShawnee National Forest3,788
Louisiana (1)
AreaForestAcres
Saline Bayou W & S River CorridorKisatchie National Forest5,355
Mississippi (1)
AreaForestAcres
Sandy Creek Rare Ii AreaHomochitto National Forest2,620
North Carolina (3)
AreaForestAcres
Catfish Lake NorthCroatan National Forest11,299
Pond Pine BCroatan National Forest2,961
Sheep Ridge AdditionCroatan National Forest5,808
Texas (1)
AreaForestAcres
Little Lake CreekNational Forests in Texas596
Virginia (1)
AreaForestAcres
Seng MountainJefferson National Forest6,428
References (26)
  1. Bartlett, R. D., and P. P. Bartlett. 1999a. A field guide to Texas reptiles & amphibians. Gulf Publishing Company, Houston, Texas. xviii + 331 pp.
  2. Bartlett, R. D., and P. P. Bartlett. 1999b. A field guide to Florida reptiles and amphibians. Gulf Publishing Company, Houston, Texas. xvi + 278 pp.
  3. Behler, J. L., and F. W. King. 1979. The Audubon Society field guide to North American reptiles and amphibians. Alfred A. Knopf, New York. 719 pp.
  4. 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.
  5. Bridges, C. M. and R. D. Semlitsch. 2001. Genetic variation in insecticide tolerance in a population of southern leopard frogs (<i>Rana sphenocephala</i>): implications for amphibian consevation. Copeia 2001:7-13.
  6. Brown, L. E., H. M. Smith, and R. S. Funk. 1990. <i>Rana sphenocephala</i> Cope, 1886 (Amphibia, Anura): proposed precedence over <i>Rana utricularius</i> Harlan, 1826). Bull. Zool. Nomen. 47:283-285.
  7. Case, S. M. 1978. Biochemical systematics of members of the genus <i>Rana </i>native to western North America. Syst. Zool. 27:299-311.
  8. Collins, J. T. 1990. Standard common and current scientific names for North American amphibians and reptiles. 3rd ed. Society for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles. Herpetological Circular No. 19. 41 pp.
  9. 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]
  10. Frost, D. R. 1985. Amphibian species of the world. A taxonomic and geographical reference. Allen Press, Inc., and The Association of Systematics Collections, Lawrence, Kansas. v + 732 pp.
  11. Frost, D. R. 2010. Amphibian Species of the World: an Online Reference. Version 5.4 (8 April 2010). Electronic Database accessible at http://research.amnh.org/herpetology/amphibia/index.php. American Museum of Natural History, New York, USA.
  12. 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
  13. Hedges, S.B. 1993. Global amphibian declines: a perspective from the Caribbean. Biodiversity and Conservation. 2:290-303.
  14. Hedges, S.B. 1999. Distribution of amphibians in the West Indies. Patterns of Distribution of Amphibians. A Global Perspective. Duellman, W.E.,editor. The Johns Hopkins Press. Baltimore, Maryland.
  15. Hedges, S.B. 2001. Caribherp: database of West Indian amphibians and reptiles (http://www.caribherp.net). Pennsylvania State University. University Park, PA.
  16. Hillis, D. M., and S. K. Davis. 1986. Evolution of ribosomal DNA: fifty million years of recorded history in the frog genus <i>Rana</i>. Evolution 40:1275-1288.
  17. Johnson, T.R. 1977. The Amphibians of Missouri. University of Kansas Museum of Natural History, Public Education Series 6: ix + 134 pp.
  18. Martof, B. S., W. M. Palmer, J. R. Bailey, and J. R. Harrison, III. 1980. Amphibians and reptiles of the Carolinas and Virginia. University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, North Carolina. 264 pp.
  19. Minton, S. A., Jr. 1972. Amphibians and reptiles of Indiana. Indiana Academy Science Monographs 3. v + 346 pp.
  20. Minton, S. A., Jr. 2001. Amphibians & reptiles of Indiana. Revised second edition. Indiana Academy of Science, Indianapolis. xiv + 404 pp.
  21. Mount, R. H. 1975. The reptiles and amphibians of Alabama. Auburn University Agricultural Experiment Station, Auburn, Alabama. vii + 347 pp.
  22. Pace, A.E. 1974. Systematic and biological studies of the leopard frogs (<i>Rana pipiens</i> Complex) of the United States. Misc. Publ. Mus. Zool., Univ. Michigan 148:1-140.
  23. Parris, M. J. 1999. Hybridization in leopard frogs (<i>Rana pipiens</i> complex): larval fitness components in single-genotype populations and mixtures. Evolution 53:1872-1883.
  24. Phillips, C. A., R. A. Brandon, and E. O. Moll. 1999. Field guide to amphibians and reptiles of Illinois. Illinois Natural History Survey Manual 8. xv + 282 pp.
  25. Ryan, T. J., and C. T. Winne. 2001. Effects of hydroperiod on metamorphosis in <i>Rana sphenocephala</i>. American Midland Naturalist 145:46-53.
  26. Schwartz, A., and R. W. Henderson. 1991. Amphibians and Reptiles of the West Indies: Descriptions, Distributions, and Natural History. University of Florida Press, Gainesville, Florida. xvi + 720 pp.