>>Yeah, I had some confusion over that a while back and never found a clear answer. Thank you for pointing it out. Hopefully the pictures were at least enjoyable even though the name was a bit off
>>

Oh no, I am not telling you that the name you use is "off". Scientific names are not etched in stone nor is there a list of correct or current ones. You can continue to use Psuedacris regilla if you like. I just point out that some of the scientists who favor the name Pseudacris are mistaken. That is my disagreement with them.

I think it just makes a lot more sense to retain the Pacific treefrog in the genus Hyla, because Pseudacris would have lost all of its uniqueness and meaning if Hyla regilla, Hyla cadaverina and Hyla crucifer were included in Pseudacris. These 3 species of Hyla were classified as Hyla decades ago because they have large toe discs, whereas Pseudacris have small toe discs. The latest arrangement of Psuedacris plus 3 species of Hyla would destroy that definition of Pseudacris. If some people insist on lumping Pseudacris and Hyla, we may as well do away with the genus Pseudacris altogether and transfer all of the species of Pseudacris back to Hyla.

Yes, your images of this treefrog are enjoyable. Where I live, this is the only treefrog found in the wild. Even though I don't ever want to live next to a creek with these guys singing at night, I do enjoy them tremendously.

[ Reply To This Message ] [ Subscribe to this Thread ] [ Show Entire Thread ]