| Some workers have included the Pelodytidae as a subfamily of the Pelobatidae and most workers before Griffiths, 1960, Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., Ser. 13, 2: 626-640, and Griffiths, 1963, Biol. Rev. Cambridge Philos. Soc., 38: 273, considered the Sooglossidae to be included in the Pelobatidae (in the sense of including the Megophryidae of this list). Almost all workers regarded the Scaphiopodidae as in the Pelobatidae prior to the study of García-París, Buchholz, and Parra-Olea, 2003, Mol. Phylogenet. Evol., 28: 12-23, who suggested a relationship of Scaphiopodidae (Pelodytidae (Pelobatidae + Megophryidae)). Nevertheless, Rocek, 1981 "1980", Acta Univ. Carol., Prague, Biol., 1980: 140-156, discussed the relationships between the living and fossil taxa and suggested the independent evolution of the Pelobates group and the Scaphiopus group, which he treated as separate families, the Pelobatidae and Scaphiopodidae. See Sage, Prager, and Wake, 1982, J. Zool., London, 198: 481-494, for immunological evidence. Dubois, 1983, Bull. Mens. Soc. Linn. Lyon, 52: 271-272, and Dubois, 1987 "1986", Alytes, 5: 13, arranged the Pelobatidae into four subfamilies (Pelobatinae [for Pelobates], Scaphiopodinae [Scaphiopodidae of this list], Megophryinae [now part of Megophryidae], and Leptobrachiinae [now part of Megophryidae]). See Ford and Cannatella, 1993, Herpetol. Monogr., 7: 94-117, for separation of Pelobatidae (sensu lato) from Megophryidae. Maglia, 1998, Sci. Pap. Nat. Hist. Mus. Univ. Kansas, 10: 1-19, suggested a relationship of (((Pelobatidae) (Pelodytidae)) Megophryidae). Xie and Wang, 2000, Cultum Herpetol. Sinica, 8: 356-370, considered the Megophryidae to be a subfamily of the Pelobatidae and discussed the history of taxonomy of the group. See also http://tolweb.org/tree?group=Pelobatidae&contgroup=Salientia and http://elib.cs.berkeley.edu/aw/lists/Pelobatidae.shtml.