@article {203,
	title = {Phylogenetic signal and the utility of 12S and 16S mtDNA in frog phylogeny},
	journal = {Journal of Zoological Systematics \& Evolutionary Research},
	volume = {42},
	number = {1},
	year = {2004},
	month = {February},
	pages = {2-18},
	abstract = {Genes selected for a phylogenetic study need to contain conserved information that reflects the phylogenetic history at the specific taxonomic level of interest. Mitochondrial ribosomal genes have been used for a wide range of phylogenetic questions in general and in anuran systematics in particular. We checked the plausibility of phylogenetic reconstructions in anurans that were built from commonly used 12S and 16S rRNA gene sequences. For up to 27 species arranged in taxon sets of graded inclusiveness, we inferred phylogenetic hypotheses based on different a priori decisions, i.e. choice of alignment method and alignment parameters, including/excluding variable sites, choice of reconstruction algorithm and models of evolution. Alignment methods and parameters, as well as taxon sampling all had notable effects on the results leading to a large number of conflicting topologies. Very few nodes were supported in all of the analyses. Data sets in which fast evolving and ambiguously aligned sites had been excluded performed worse than the complete data sets. There was moderate support for the monophyly of the Discoglossidae, Pelobatoidea, Pelobatidae and Pipidae. The clade Neobatrachia was robustly supported and the intrageneric relationships within Bombina and Discoglossus were well resolved indicating the usefulness of the genes for relatively recent phylogenetic events. Although 12S and 16S rRNA genes seem to carry some phylogenetic signal of deep (Mesozoic) splitting events the signal was not strong enough to resolve consistently the inter-relationships of major clades within the Anura under varied methods and parameter settings.},
	url = {file://localhost/Users/breda/Desktop/Literature/H/Hertwig\%20et\%20al\%202004.pdf},
	author = {Hertwig, S. and De Sa, Rafael O. and Haas, Alexander}
}
@article {179,
	title = {The amphibian tree of life},
	journal = {Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History},
	volume = {297},
	year = {2006},
	note = {Using Smart Source Parsing292-370},
	pages = {8-291},
	abstract = {<p>The evidentiary basis of the currently accepted classification of living amphibians is discussed and shown not to warrant the degree of authority conferred on it by use and tradition. A new taxonomy of living amphibians is proposed to correct the deficiencies of the old one. This new taxonomy is based on the largest phylogenetic analysis of living Amphibia so far accomplished. We combined the comparative anatomical character evidence of Haas (2003) with DNA sequences from the mitochondrial transcription unit HI (12S and 16S ribosomal RNA and tRNA(Valine) genes, 2,400 bp of mitochondrial sequences) and the nuclear genes histone H3, rhodopsin, tyrosinase, and seven in absentia, and the large ribosomal subunit 28S (approximate to 2,300 bp of nuclear sequences; ca. 1.8 million base pairs; x ($) over bar = 3.7 kb/terminal). The dataset includes 532 terminals sampled from 522 species representative of the global diversity of amphibians as well as seven of the closest living relatives of amphibians for outgroup comparisons.</p>
},
	author = {Frost, Darrel R. and Grant, Taran and Faivovich, Julian and Bain, Raoul H. and Haas, Alexander and Haddad, Celio F. B. and De Sa, Rafael O. and Channing, Alan and Wilkinson, Mark and Donnellan, Stephen C. and Raxworthy, Christopher J. and Campbell, Jonathan A. and Blotto, Boris L. and Moler, Paul and Drewes, R. C. and Nussbaum, Ronald A. and Lynch, John D. and Green, David m and Wheeler, Ward C.}
}
@article {195,
	title = {The tadpole of Tomopterna luganga Channing, Moyer \& Dawood, 2004 (Anura : Ranidae)},
	journal = {Salamandra},
	volume = {42},
	number = {1},
	year = {2006},
	month = {Feb 20 2006},
	pages = {1-12},
	abstract = {<p>The study describes for the first time the larva of the Red Sand Frog, Tomopterna luganga. The description is based on colour photographs of living specimens, preserved specimens, and SEM images of the oral field and internal oral features. Larval stages were obtained from captive breeding experiments. The identity of the species was verified by DNA matching with the holotype and paratypes. Tomopterna luganga tadpoles were very similar to other described larvae within the genus. The Labial Tooth Row Formula 4(2-4)/3(1) of T. luganga distinguishes the species from some of its congeners. However, the currently available data does not allow the development of a reliable determination key for the tadpoles of Tomopterna species.</p>
},
	author = {Haas, Alexander and Mitgutsch, Christian and Hertwig, Stefan and Dawood, Abeda and Channing, Alan}
}
