A few are available in Europe. At this moment I'm waiting to get a few froglets from a friend of mine but they are very rare. The species is very aggresive and it's a grounddwelling frog just as reticulatus is. These are probably close relatives.
There's the Peruvian form that was imported as quinquevittatus some 10 years ago. I don't think the ones available now are descendants from the imports though. My guess is that some where smuggled not very long ago.
Legal status of these is not really known because of the imports 10 years ago.
The Ecuadorian form without the yellow lateral stripes must be illegal because they where never legally imported.
I don't know if any are available in the US but I doubt it..
hello guys, actually those frogs are not too far from Iquitos, the thing is that the collectors for smuggling don't like to go out to look of rmore and more, they just want to sell the frogs at not more than 10 mins of Iquitos
In 1998 198 D. reticulatus were imported, plus 636 in 1999 and 176 in 2000. (stats from CITES trade database). The retics that came in on these importations ranged from looking like the standard retics with the solid red back and maybe a few dots towards the rump to some that had broken dashes to a few that were completely lined down the back. The latter looked a lot like what folks are calling D. duellmanii. I still am confused as to how they would be classified and why. The frog described by Shockfrog sounds exactly like what we saw come in.
Some of these lined retics or whatever they should be called are still in the US hobby, and are legal to boot.
From what I understand, there are striped retics and then there are a couple morphs of duellmani (all red, red & yellow, others?). I don't know a whole lot about it, but maybe Mark Pepper will step in and add something a little more concrete to the post .
as you wish Jon, though with this group of frogs little is concrete and much is speculation at this time.
first the retics Christina describes can all be found within close proximity to Iquitos, and i would not doubt they would be what people in europe and japan refer to as duellmani or red duellmani, but it is possible that striped retics are being sold as duellmani. the pops i am familiar with from standard retic, to spotted and fully striped all behave the same, the only difference from the standard retics than i can tell is some individuals in one of the striped populations lack the red chin spot...
the red duellmani which look often almost identical to the striped retics are generaly from up the rio napo region and into ecuador. i am not familiar with the chin patterns of these frogs as i have never seen them in the feild, but dorsal and lateral views look nearly identical to some striped retics i have seen pics of another "duellmani" type frog supposedly collected near nauta, the chin was remiiscent of an ventri type frog, but everything else appeared to be striped retic, maybe this is the red duelmanni, I personally am highly sckeptical of the collection data on this one.
the frog i know as "duellmani" is from the tamshiyacu region and has generally three orange dorsal stripes with two yellow lateral stripes, this frog also has similar pops in western brazil, apparently this is being rediscribed at the moment. this one is a beautiful frog , primarily terrestrial as well, often lives in sympatry with flavovittatus and an interesting ventrimaculatus. the colours on this frog are incredible, and has to be seen to be fully apreciate it.
ill be back in peru for another 6 weeks at the end of this month, so i may know more then, actually i'll probably come back more confused than ever, but i will have some more pics atleast.
Christina, the last pic in the quinq guide could be the red duellani to, if it is indeed from ecuador likely not a striped retic, and if it is an arboreal frog again likely not a duellmani, really need more info than a blurry dorsal shot and the country of origin. I gree is does look similar to some striped retics i have seen. My gut would say its "duellmani-esque" but again this is just speculation.
What are your thoughts on the differences between Red Amazonicus and Red Vents or do you think there isn't a difference anymore? Is there any truth to the hour glass markings on the chin that suggest Red Amazonicus?
Recent molecular work in our lab (Kyle Summers lab) shows that D. duellmani as it was originally described does not appear to be a valid species. Rather, it is really a striped form of reticulatus, which goes well with what other people have been saying. The Tamshiyacu-Tahauyo 'duellmani' (with yellow sides) is actually not related in any way to the true nominal duellmani. It is much more closely related to the fantasticus group. Mark is correct in saying this frog is currently being described as a new species. As far as amazonicus goes, as far as I am concerned this species is BS. The Iquitos-region ventrimaculatus group is so widely variable that it is more than likely we are just looking at variation among a freely-interbreeding population. For example, coloration/pattern (full-Y mark, nose spot, yellow, orange, red) motifs are not discrete but continuous, which seems to indicate much mixing. A melting pot for vents if you will. But this is conjecture and should be cleared up within the foreseeable future.
The Tamshiyacu-Tahauyo 'duellmani' (with yellow sides) was also imported from Europe by John Uhern at least twice that I know of. I don't know if any of these animals are still around, but he probably imported the better part of several dozen over the years.
Whoa Ric or Evan, BS is a little strong! This is a legitimate question that I had rolling around my noggin. I have looked at many, many pictures and I can't tell if there is a difference at all. To me they look like Rent Vents or some variation thereof. When you say this will be cleared up in the foreseeable future, I take this to mean that there will be molecular work done in Kyle Summer’s lab. What kind of time frame can we expect?
Sorry, I didn't mean to say your question was BS! But I mean in general, I think 'amazonicus' is a bogus species. Then again I could be wrong. This could be cleared up by next fall if Jason Brown and I can collect many more Iquitos samples (toe clips) this summer. He has been working on a molecular Dendrobates phylogeny but it still could use some stronger resolution in the ventrimaculatus group, particularly around Iquitos, S. Ecuador, and Manaus (possibly a new mimicry example here!) This stuff however might not be published for a year or so, but you guys will probably hear the results on here long before they make it into the journals.
As far as the mixing goes, that is an excellent question. Ideally one would try to maintain pure locality morphs without muddling blood from other adjacent locales. But how much gene flow occurs in nature? Nobody really knows. None perhaps. If you were to mix nominal duellmani and reticulatus you would most likely be producing a natural and viable hybrid. but if you were to mix nominal duellmani and Tamshiyacu 'duellmani' you would be producing a genetic anomaly. So I guess the answer lies in the phylogenetic relationships. But of course I would prefer to err on the side of caution and maintain pure locality morphs in the hobby - it is always easier to add new blood to a gene pool than to take bad blood out.