190 
FOURTEENTH REPORT. 
THE STATUS OF RANA PALUSTRIS LECONTE IN MICHIGAN. 1 
BY CRYSTAL THOMPSON. 
Little is known of the distribution of the frog liana palustris in 
Michigan. Sager 2 lists it from Michigan but gives no localities. Smith 3 
records it from Ann Arbor, and later, in his report on the reptiles and 
amphibians of Ohio 4 , records it from Michigan in general. Cope 5 reports 
a single specimen from the Detroit River, but this specimen is in the 
University of Michigan Museum and has been re-identified as Rana 
pipiens. Gibbs, Notestein and Clark 6 report it from Detroit, Kalamazoo, 
Montcalm and Van Buren Counties, but unfortunately the specimens 
from which these records were made have not been preserved. 
On April 20, 1911, Helen Thompson and the writer collected a single 
specimen from White’s Woods near Ann Arbor. Later several others 
were collected both by other persons and the writer in the vicinity 
of Ann Arbor. In working over the collection of amphibians in the 
museum, three specimens from Brighton, Livingston county, Michigan, 
were found. One of these was taken from the stomach of a garter 
snake, Thamnophis sirtalis. Two large specimens taken near Hastings, 
Barry County, in May, 1911, were received from Miss Jessie McNall, 
and the writer collected about fifty specimens in Cass County in May, 
1911. The Cass County specimens were all of rather small size but 
were very typical. The majority of them were taken along a ditch 
which runs thru a low marshy region. Others were taken about the 
outlet of a spring on the bank of Long Lake. On August 29, 1911, the 
writer collected a specimen on the bank of the Kalamazoo River in 
Calhoun County, and on August 30 another was taken in a similar loca- 
tion in Kalamazoo County. 
It will be seen from the above records that our knowledge of the 
distribution of this form within the state is very limited, and that more 
data in regard to it are greatly to be desired. 
Altho Rana palustris is frequently confused with the more common 
R. pipiens the differences between them are so great that even the most 
casual observer should have no trouble in distinguishing them. R. 
palustris may be easily identified by the rectangular shape of the spots 
on the back and sides. The ground color is more brownish than that of 
the typical R. pipiens. and there are two distinct rows of rectangular 
darker spots between fhe lateral folds and two rows of more or less 
rectangular spots on either side below them. The folds themselves are 
very broad and not elevated as in R. pipiens. The under part of the 
hind limbs is tinged with bright yellow and this color may even extend 
along the sides of the abdomen. 
'From the University of Michigan Museum of Natural History. 
2 Report of the State Zoologist. Senate Documents, Mich., 1839, 294-305. 
•■'Catalogue of Reptilia and Amphibia of Michigan. Supplement to Science News. 1879. 
■*Geol. Surv. of Ohio, 1882, IV, Part I, 709. 
"Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus., 1889, 406-409. 
6 Seventh Ann. Rept. Mich. Acad. Sci., 1905, 109. 
