*Rana (Pelophylax) (ridibunda) lessonae* was Re: Nano

[David Marjanovic <david.marjanovic@gmx.at>]

> While on Varanus, a well established genus containing dozens of species on
> three continents (there are no indications it will be split up, if 
> anything
> super-sized Megalania may be sunk into the genus, Amer Natural 146: 
> 398-414 1995),
> shows far more variation in in detailed anatomy and gross form than the
> entire Tyrannosauridae, which have long been known to be a conservative, 
> uniform
> group. Check out a gorgosaur and a T rex skeleton in the same museum and 
> note
> how little difference there really is. See how much more difference there 
> is
> between the broad snouted ora and a slender nosed dwarf Varanus literally
> hundreds of times smaller. Makes one think.

I guess *Varanus* is simply a 19th- or perhaps 18th-century genus. For 
example, Linné recognized two genera of frogs: *Rana* and *Bufo*. (*Pipa 
pipa* was *Rana pipa*.) Nowadays *Rana* (with tons of subgenera and 
superspecies = "species groups") is apparently synonymous with Raninae, and 
there is evidence that *Bufo* (with its exorbitant number of "species 
groups") is paraphyletic with respect to some or all of the 30-odd other 
bufonid genera. (In total there are some 350 species of Bufonidae, most of 
them in *Bufo*.)

*Varanus* likewise has a couple of subgenera.

It is not surprising that the newest paper on *Rana* phylogeny(*) uses the 
PhyloCode instead of inventing ranks between genus and subgenus and between 
subgenus and superspecies.

(*) Only concerned with the New World species -- formerly *Rana (Amerana)*, 
the useless *Rana (Aurorana)*, *Rana (Aquarana)*, *Rana (Pantherana)*, and a 
IIRC few others -- as well as one species of Palaearctic brown frog, *Rana 
(Rana) (temporaria) temporaria*. No indication about the position of any of 
those relative to the Palaearctic green = water frogs, *Rana (Pelophylax)*, 
as well as relative to an ?African? clade of more subgenera like *Rana 
(Amnirana)*. Grumble, moan.