Ceuthomantis
genus of amphibians
Ceuthomantis is a small genus of craugastorid frogs, also treated as comprising their own monogeneric family Ceuthomantidae. They are found in the southern and eastern parts of the Guiana Highlands in Venezuela, Guyana, and Brazil. The generic name is derived from the Greek noun mantis, which means treefrog, and adjective keuthos, which means hidden, in allusion to the hidden existence of this genus in the tepuis of the Guiana Shield.
Taxonomy
Ceuthomantis was first described as the only genus in its own family Ceuthomantidae, but is now merged with Pristimantinae; the oldest name for this taxon is Ceuthomantinae. The AmphibiaWeb maintains Ceuthomantidae as a monogeneric family.
Ceuthomantis is closely related to Dischidodactylus, with which they share a synapomorphy: completely or almost completely divided ungual flaps. Both genera also have dorsal skin composed of small, flat, pliable (not keratinized) warts, and lack nuptial pads in adult males. They differ in that Dischidodactylus possesses a dentigerous process of the vomer, and in that Ceuthomantis lack basal toe webbing.
Description
Ceuthomantis are greenish frogs with narrow heads. They have T-shaped terminal phalanges and paired, dorsal, gland-like protrusions in the post-temporal and sacral regions; the function of the latter is unknown.
Begin with the source’s own compact description: “Ceuthomantis” is genus of amphibians. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through Ceuthomantis, genus and amphibians, not as a finished interpretation.
Why this record matters
The phrase “genus of amphibians” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.
Datasets, specimens, observations and peer-reviewed methods provide the appropriate test for the technical claims summarized here. The source revision retrieved here is dated Sep 13, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q2947136. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference.
Current terminology should not be projected backward without checking the classification used when the underlying evidence was created. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Check terminology, classification and the date of the cited evidence. Scientific names and technical consensus can change while older records retain historical value.
- Current terminology
- Classification context
- Finding cited technical literature
Primary datasets, specimen catalogues, standards bodies and the most recent peer-reviewed literature.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Ceuthomantis”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Ceuthomantis primary sources, Ceuthomantis archive and Ceuthomantis research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Ceuthomantis”?
- Has classification or technical consensus changed since the cited source?
- Is the terminology current, historical or disputed?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Ceuthomantis” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.