DOCSLIB.ORG

Bibliography – Auchenorrhyncha

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Bibliography – Auchenorrhyncha Bibliography of Oklahoma Auchenorrhyncha Ahring, R. M. & D. E. Howell. 1968. A Suggested Method of Collecting Insects Associated with Forage Grass Seed Production. Journ. Econ. Entom. 61(4):975-981. Ball, E. D. & R. H. Beamer. 1940. A Revision of the Genus Athysanella and Some Related Genera (Homoptera – Cicadellidae). Univ. Kansas Sci. Bull. 41(22):5-82. Bartlett, C. R. and L. L. Deitz. 2000. Revision of the New World Delphacid Planthopper Genus Pissonotus (Hemiptera: Fulgoroidea). Thomas Say Publications in Entomology: Monographs. 234 pp. Beamer, R. H. 1947. Some New Species of Delphacodes (Continued) with Two Old Ones. Journ. Kansas Entom. Soc. 20(2):58-71. Blocker, H. D. 1967. Classification of the Western Hemisphere Balclutha (Homoptera: Cicadellidae). Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus. 122(3581):1-55. Blocker, H. D. & J. W. Johnson. 1990a. Classification of Athysanella (Gladionura) (Homoptera: Cicadellidae: Deltocephalinae). Journ. Kansas Entom. Soc. 63(1):9-45. Blocker, H. D. & J. W. Johnson. 1990b. Classification of Athysanella (Amphipyga) (Homoptera: Cicadellidae: Deltocephalinae). Journ. Kansas Entom. Soc. 63(1):101-132. Blocker, H. D. & J. W. Johnson. 1990c. Classification of Five Subgenera of Athysanella (Homoptera: Cicadellidae: Deltocephalinae). Journ. Kansas Entom. Soc. 63(2):304-315. Blocker, H. D. & R. Reed. 1976. Leafhopper Populations of a Tallgrass Prairie (Homoptera: Cicadellidae): Collecting Procedures and Population Estimates. Journ. Kansas Entom. Soc. 49(2):145-154. Breakey, E. P. 1932. A Review of the Nearctic Species of Macropsis (Homoptera, Cicadellidae). Ann. Entom. Soc. America 25(4):787-840. Cole, J. A. 2008. A New Cryptic Species of Cicada Resembling Tibicen dorsatus Revealed by Calling Song (Hemiptera: Auchenorrhyncha: Cicadidae). Ann. Entom. Soc. America 101(5):815-823. DeLong, D. M. 1948. The Leafhoppers, or Cicadellidae, of Illinois (Eurymelinae – Balcluthinae). Bull. Illinois Nat. Hist. Surv. 23(2):97-376. Dennis, C. J. 1963. Membracidae in a Southern Oklahoma Woods. Proc. Oklahoma Acad. Sci. 43:95-98. Dennis, C. J. 1964. Membracidae of Southeastern Oklahoma. Proc. Oklahoma Acad. Sci. 44:47-51. Dennis, C. J. 1965. Oklahoma Treehoppers (Homoptera, Membracidae). Proc. Oklahoma Acad. Sci. 45:50-64. Doering, K. C. 1940. Part III: A Contribution to the Taxonomy of the Subfamily Issinae in America North of Mexico (Fulgoridae, Homoptera). Univ. Kansas Sci. Bull. 26(2):83-167. Doering, K. C. 1941. A Contribution to the Taxonomy of the Subfamily Issinae in America North of Mexico (Fulgoridae, Homoptera), Part IV. Univ. Kansas Sci. Bull. 27(10):185-233. Drew, W. A., F. L. Spangler & D. Molnar. 1974. Oklahoma Cicadidae (Homoptera). Proc. Oklahoma Acad. Sci. 54:90-97. Flynn, J. E. & J. P. Kramer. 1983. Taxonomic Study of the Planthopper Genus Cedusa in the Americas (Homoptera: Fulgoroidea: Derbidae). Entomography 2:121-260. Hamilton, K. G. A. 1975. Revision of the Genera Paraphlepsius Baker and Pendarus Ball (Rhynchota: Homoptera: Cicadellidae). Mem. Entom. Soc. Canada No. 96:1-129. Hedrick – Zeller, M. M. & S. W. Wilson. 2010. The Planthopper Genus Pentagramma in the United States: Morphology of the Male and Female Genitalia (Hemiptera: Delphacidae). Journ. Kansas Entom. Soc. 83(3):231-239. Hepner, L. W. 1942.A Taxonomic Revision of the Genus Eutettix in America North of Mexico (Homoptera, Cicadellidae). Univ. Kansas Sci. Bull. 28(13):253-293. Johnson, J. W. & H. D. Blocker. 1979. Eight New Species of the Subgenus Amphipyga, Genus Athysanella (Homoptera: Cicadellidae). Journ. Kansas Entom. Soc. 52(2):377-386. Kondratieff, B. C., J. P. Schmidt, P. A. Opler & M. C. Gerhart. 2005. Survey of Selected Arthropod Taxa of Fort Sill, Comanche County, Oklahoma. III. Arachnida: Ixododae, Scorpiones, Hexapoda: Ephemeroptera, Hemiptera, Homoptera, Coleoptera, Neuroptera, Trichoptera, Lepidoptera, and Diptera. C. P. Gillette Museum of Arthropod Diversity, Colorado St. Univ. 266 p. Kopp, D. D. & T. R. Yonke. 1973a. The Treehoppers of Missouri: Part 1. Subfamilies Centrotinae, Hoplophorioninae, and Membracinae (Homoptera: Membracidae). Journ. Kansas Entom. Soc. 46(1):42-64. Kopp, D. D. & T. R. Yonke. 1973b. The Treehoppers of Missouri: Part 2. Subfamily Smiliinae; Tribes Acutalini, Ceresini, and Polyglyptini (Homoptera: Membracidae). Journ. Kansas Entom. Soc. 46(2):233-276. Kopp, D. D. & T. R. Yonke. 1973c. The Treehoppers of Missouri: Part 3. Subfamily Smiliinae; Tribe Smiliini. Journ. Kansas Entom. Soc. 46(3):375-421. Kopp, D. D. & T. R. Yonke. 1974. The Treehoppers of Missouri: Part 4. Subfamily Smiliinae; Tribe Telamonini. Journ. Kansas Entom. Soc. 47(1):80-130. Kramer, J. P. 1979. Taxonomic Study of the Planthopper Genus Myndus in the Americas (Homoptera: Fulgoroidea: Cixiidae). Trans. American Entom. Soc. 105:301-389. Kramer, J. P. 1981. Taxonomic Study of the Planthopper Genus Cixius in the United States and Mexico (Homoptera: Fulgoroidea: Cixiidae). Trans. American Entom. Soc. 107:1-68. Mead, F. W. & J. P. Kramer. 1982. Taxonomic Study of the Planthopper Genus Oliarus in the United States (Homoptera: Fulgoroidea: Cixiidae). Trans. American Entom. Soc. 107:381-569. Metcalf, Z. P. 1958. General Catalogue of the Hemiptera. Fascicle IV, Fulgoroidea, Part 15, Issidae. North Carolina St. Coll., Raleigh, North Carolina. 561 p. Nielson, M. W. 1965. A Revision of the Genus Cuerna (Homoptera, Cicadellidae). USDA Tech. Bull. No. 1318. 48 p. Nielson, M. W. 1968. The Leafhopper Vectors of Phytopathogenic Viruses (Homoptera, Cicadellidae) Taxonomy, Biology, and Virus Transmission. USDA Tech. Bull. No. 1382. 386 p. Oman, P. W. 1933. A Classification of North American Agallian Leaf Hoppers. USDA Tech. Bull. No. 372. 93 p. Overall, L. M., E. J. Rebek & A. C. Wayadande. 2010. New Distribution Records of the Glassy – Winged Sharpshooter, Homalodisca vitripennis (Germar), in Oklahoma. SW Entom. 35(2):193-195. Ross, H. H., G. C. Decker & H. B. Cunningham. 1964. Adaptation and Differentiation of Temperate Phylogenetic Lines from Tropical Ancestors in Empoasca. Evolution 18(4):639-651. Sanborn, A. F., M. S. Heath, J. Sueur & P. K. Phillips. 2005. The Genus Neocicada Kato, 1932 (Hemiptera: Cicadomorpha: Cicadidae), with Descriptions of Three New Species. Syst. Entom. 30:191-207. Sanborn, A. F. & P. K. Phillips. 2004. Neotype and Allotype Description of Tibicen superbus (Hemiptera: Cicadomorpha: Cicadidae) with Descriptions of Its Biogeography and Calling Song. Ann. Entom. Soc. America 97(4):647-652. Sanborn, A. F. & P. K. Phillips. 2013. Biogeography of the Cicadas (Hemiptera: Cicadidae) of North America, North of Mexico. Diversity 5:166-239. Stoner, A., D. E. Bryan & W. A. Drew. 1962. A Partial Inventory of Insect Populations in Tallgrass Prairie Pastures in North Central Oklahoma. Proc. Oklahoma Acad. Sci. 42:143-157. Wheeler, A. G., Jr. 2006. Prairiana Orizaba Ball and Reeves (Hemiptera: Cicadomorpha: Cicadellidae), Colonist of the Introduced African Bunchgrass Eragrostis curvula (Poaceae), with Notes on the Use of Little Bluestem, Schizachyrium scoparium (Poaceae), by P. kansana Ball. Proc. Entom. Soc. Washington 108(4):868-877. Wilson, S. W. & A. G. Wheeler, Jr. 2010. Planthopper (Hemiptera: Fulgoroidea) Diversity of Weeping Lovegrass (Eragrostis curvula), an Introduced Host of Little – Known, Rarely Collected Native Species. Entom. Americana 116(3/4):98-106. Young, D. A., Jr. & B. P. Beirne. 1958. A Taxonomic Revision of the Leafhopper Genus Flexamia and a New Related Genus (Homoptera, Cicadellidae). USDA Tech. Bull. No. 1173. 53 p. .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Proceedings of the United States National Museum
    A CONTRIBUTION TOWARD A MONOGRAPH OF THE HO- MOPTEROUS INSECTS OF THE FAMILY DELPHACID^ OF NORTH AND SOUTH AMERICA. By David L. Crawford, Of Stanford University, California. INTRODUCTION. The family Delphacidas was until quite recently and, in fact, by some authors, is yet considered as a subfamily of the larger group Fulgoridse. By most students now, however, it is separated from its near relatives as a distinct family, chiefly on account of the large, movable spur, or calcar, at the base of the posterior tibias. The most noticeable characteristic of the group as a whole is its homogeneity in general aspect and appearance. There are a few characters which are constant enough in subgroups to serve as diag- nostic characters, and there are others which are too variable to serve that purpose. Some of the latter have, however, been used by many of the previous students with the result that genera and species have multiplied beyond reason and confusion has more and more crept in. This latter fact has been reahzed more strongly as my work on the group has progressed, and it has at last become necessary to rearrange the classification of the genera to some extent in order to avoid much of the prevalent confusion. At the suggestion of Prof. C. F. Baker, of Pomona College, Clare- mont, Cahfornia, the task of working over several collections of speci- mens of this family and naming the species was undertaken some months ago. His own collection of over 2,000 specimens, together with the United States National Museum collection of a still larger number, many of which, also, had been collected by Professor Baker, were placed before me for study.
    [Show full text]
  • Charles R. Bartlett & Gernot Kunz (2015) A
    Zootaxa 3963 (4): 598–600 ISSN 1175-5326 (print edition) www.mapress.com/zootaxa/ Erratum ZOOTAXA Copyright © 2015 Magnolia Press ISSN 1175-5334 (online edition) http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.3963.4.7 http://zoobank.org/urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:374DEA43-B853-4291-8CB9-17C59DE8BDDB CHARLES R. BARTLETT & GERNOT KUNZ (2015) A new genus and species of delphacid planthopper (Hemiptera: Fulgoroidea: Delphacidae) from Central America with a preliminary regional species list. Zootaxa, 3946(4): 510–518. Table 1 was inadvertently omitted from the text. It is provided as follows. Table 1. List of delphacid species found in Costa Rica and adjacent countries (L = literature record, S = specimen record, E = error). Costa Species Nicaragua Rica Panama References and Comments Delphacidae Asiracinae: Asiracini Metcalf 1943, Maes & O’Brien 1988, Maes & Tellez Robleto 1988, Bartlett Copicerus irroratus Swartz, 1802 L, S L, S L, S et al. 2014 Asiracinae: Idiosystanini Metcalf 1943, Maes & Tellez Robleto 1988, Hedrick-Zeller & Wilson 2010; Pentagramma bivittata Crawford, 1914 L, S L, S Bartlett et al. 2014 Asiracinae: Tetrasteirini Tetrasteira solata Barringer & Bartlett, 2011 L, S Barringer & Bartlett 2011 Tetrasteira trimaculata Barringer & Bartlett 2011 L, S L, S Barringer & Bartlett 2011 Asiracinae: Ugyopini Ugyops brunneus (Fowler, 1905) L Fowler 1905, Metcalf 1943 Ugyops godmani (Fowler, 1905) L L, S Fowler 1905, Metcalf 1943 Ugyops palliatus Fennah, 1964 L Fennah 1964 Ugyops stigmatus (Crawford, 1914) L, S Crawford, 1914, Metcalf 1938, 1943 Ugyops sp. S Plesiodelphacinae Crawford, 1914, Maes & O’Brien Burnilia pictifrons (Stål, 1864) L 1988 Burnilia n. sp. S Delphacinae: Saccharosydnini Neomalaxa flava Muir, 1918 S S Maes & O’Brien 1988, Maes & Saccharosydne saccharivora Tellez Robleto 1988, Bartlett et al.
    [Show full text]
  • The Influence of Prairie Restoration on Hemiptera
    CAN THE ONE TRUE BUG BE THE ONE TRUE ANSWER? THE INFLUENCE OF PRAIRIE RESTORATION ON HEMIPTERA COMPOSITION Thesis Submitted to The College of Arts and Sciences of the UNIVERSITY OF DAYTON In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for The Degree of Master of Science in Biology By Stephanie Kay Gunter, B.A. Dayton, Ohio August 2021 CAN THE ONE TRUE BUG BE THE ONE TRUE ANSWER? THE INFLUENCE OF PRAIRIE RESTORATION ON HEMIPTERA COMPOSITION Name: Gunter, Stephanie Kay APPROVED BY: Chelse M. Prather, Ph.D. Faculty Advisor Associate Professor Department of Biology Ryan W. McEwan, Ph.D. Committee Member Associate Professor Department of Biology Mark G. Nielsen Ph.D. Committee Member Associate Professor Department of Biology ii © Copyright by Stephanie Kay Gunter All rights reserved 2021 iii ABSTRACT CAN THE ONE TRUE BUG BE THE ONE TRUE ANSWER? THE INFLUENCE OF PRAIRIE RESTORATION ON HEMIPTERA COMPOSITION Name: Gunter, Stephanie Kay University of Dayton Advisor: Dr. Chelse M. Prather Ohio historically hosted a patchwork of tallgrass prairies, which provided habitat for native species and prevented erosion. As these vulnerable habitats have declined in the last 200 years due to increased human land use, restorations of these ecosystems have increased, and it is important to evaluate their success. The Hemiptera (true bugs) are an abundant and varied order of insects including leafhoppers, aphids, cicadas, stink bugs, and more. They play important roles in grassland ecosystems, feeding on plant sap and providing prey to predators. Hemipteran abundance and composition can respond to grassland restorations, age of restoration, and size and isolation of habitat.
    [Show full text]
  • Working List of Prairie Restricted (Specialist) Insects in Wisconsin (11/26/2015)
    Working List of Prairie Restricted (Specialist) Insects in Wisconsin (11/26/2015) By Richard Henderson Research Ecologist, WI DNR Bureau of Science Services Summary This is a preliminary list of insects that are either well known, or likely, to be closely associated with Wisconsin’s original native prairie. These species are mostly dependent upon remnants of original prairie, or plantings/restorations of prairie where their hosts have been re-established (see discussion below), and thus are rarely found outside of these settings. The list also includes some species tied to native ecosystems that grade into prairie, such as savannas, sand barrens, fens, sedge meadow, and shallow marsh. The list is annotated with known host(s) of each insect, and the likelihood of its presence in the state (see key at end of list for specifics). This working list is a byproduct of a prairie invertebrate study I coordinated from1995-2005 that covered 6 Midwestern states and included 14 cooperators. The project surveyed insects on prairie remnants and investigated the effects of fire on those insects. It was funded in part by a series of grants from the US Fish and Wildlife Service. So far, the list has 475 species. However, this is a partial list at best, representing approximately only ¼ of the prairie-specialist insects likely present in the region (see discussion below). Significant input to this list is needed, as there are major taxa groups missing or greatly under represented. Such absence is not necessarily due to few or no prairie-specialists in those groups, but due more to lack of knowledge about life histories (at least published knowledge), unsettled taxonomy, and lack of taxonomic specialists currently working in those groups.
    [Show full text]
  • The Leafhoppers of Minnesota
    Technical Bulletin 155 June 1942 The Leafhoppers of Minnesota Homoptera: Cicadellidae JOHN T. MEDLER Division of Entomology and Economic Zoology University of Minnesota Agricultural Experiment Station The Leafhoppers of Minnesota Homoptera: Cicadellidae JOHN T. MEDLER Division of Entomology and Economic Zoology University of Minnesota Agricultural Experiment Station Accepted for publication June 19, 1942 CONTENTS Page Introduction 3 Acknowledgments 3 Sources of material 4 Systematic treatment 4 Eurymelinae 6 Macropsinae 12 Agalliinae 22 Bythoscopinae 25 Penthimiinae 26 Gyponinae 26 Ledrinae 31 Amblycephalinae 31 Evacanthinae 37 Aphrodinae 38 Dorydiinae 40 Jassinae 43 Athysaninae 43 Balcluthinae 120 Cicadellinae 122 Literature cited 163 Plates 171 Index of plant names 190 Index of leafhopper names 190 2M-6-42 The Leafhoppers of Minnesota John T. Medler INTRODUCTION HIS bulletin attempts to present as accurate and complete a T guide to the leafhoppers of Minnesota as possible within the limits of the material available for study. It is realized that cer- tain groups could not be treated completely because of the lack of available material. Nevertheless, it is hoped that in its present form this treatise will serve as a convenient and useful manual for the systematic and economic worker concerned with the forms of the upper Mississippi Valley. In all cases a reference to the original description of the species and genus is given. Keys are included for the separation of species, genera, and supergeneric groups. In addition to the keys a brief diagnostic description of the important characters of each species is given. Extended descriptions or long lists of references have been omitted since citations to this literature are available from other sources if ac- tually needed (Van Duzee, 1917).
    [Show full text]
  • Arthropods of Elm Fork Preserve
    Arthropods of Elm Fork Preserve Arthropods are characterized by having jointed limbs and exoskeletons. They include a diverse assortment of creatures: Insects, spiders, crustaceans (crayfish, crabs, pill bugs), centipedes and millipedes among others. Column Headings Scientific Name: The phenomenal diversity of arthropods, creates numerous difficulties in the determination of species. Positive identification is often achieved only by specialists using obscure monographs to ‘key out’ a species by examining microscopic differences in anatomy. For our purposes in this survey of the fauna, classification at a lower level of resolution still yields valuable information. For instance, knowing that ant lions belong to the Family, Myrmeleontidae, allows us to quickly look them up on the Internet and be confident we are not being fooled by a common name that may also apply to some other, unrelated something. With the Family name firmly in hand, we may explore the natural history of ant lions without needing to know exactly which species we are viewing. In some instances identification is only readily available at an even higher ranking such as Class. Millipedes are in the Class Diplopoda. There are many Orders (O) of millipedes and they are not easily differentiated so this entry is best left at the rank of Class. A great deal of taxonomic reorganization has been occurring lately with advances in DNA analysis pointing out underlying connections and differences that were previously unrealized. For this reason, all other rankings aside from Family, Genus and Species have been omitted from the interior of the tables since many of these ranks are in a state of flux.
    [Show full text]
  • A Review of New World Asiracinae (Hemiptera: Auchenorrhyncha: Delphacidae) with Five New Taxa
    ZOBODAT - www.zobodat.at Zoologisch-Botanische Datenbank/Zoological-Botanical Database Digitale Literatur/Digital Literature Zeitschrift/Journal: Cicadina = Beiträge zur Zikadenkunde Jahr/Year: 2011 Band/Volume: 12 Autor(en)/Author(s): Barringer Lawrence E., Bartlett Charles R. Artikel/Article: A review of New World Asiracinae (Hemiptera: Auchenorrhyncha: Delphacidae) with five new taxa. 7-39 Cicadina 12: 7-39©Arbeitskreis (2011) Zikaden Mitteleuropas e.V. - download unter www.biologiezentrum.at 7 A review of New World Asiracinae (Hemiptera: Auchenorrhyncha: Delphacidae) with five new taxa Lawrence E. Barringer1, Charles R. Bartlett1 Abstract: The genera of New World asiracine planthoppers are reviewed and discussed in the context of new taxa discovered in canopy fogging samples from Ecuador. Twelve nomative genera, including 3 Ugyopinae and 9 Asiracinae (1 new) are reported from the New World, although the generic identity o f the single A siraca species could not be verified. A key to New World asiracinae genera, excluding A siraca, is provided. The new taxa include Pentasteira gen. nov. (Asiracinae: Platysystatini) with 1 species (P. albifrons n. sp.) and a new Tetrasteira (Asiracinae: Tetrasteirini), prompting a generic revision with three new described species (T. vulgaris, n. sp., T. trimaculata n. sp., and T. solata n. sp.). A key to the species o f Tetrasteira is provided. Tetrasteira vulgaris n. sp. has been taken in large numbers in canopy fogging samples from terre firme forest in the Amazon basin in Ecuador. Zusammenfassung: Die Gattungen der Asiracinae der Neuen Welt werden im Kontext mit neu entdeckten Taxa aus Ecuador diskutiert und revidiert. Twölf nominelle Gattungen, davon drei Ugyopinae und neun Asiracinae (eine neu) werden aus der Neuen Welt gemeldet.
    [Show full text]
  • Southern Gulf, Queensland
    Biodiversity Summary for NRM Regions Species List What is the summary for and where does it come from? This list has been produced by the Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (SEWPC) for the Natural Resource Management Spatial Information System. The list was produced using the AustralianAustralian Natural Natural Heritage Heritage Assessment Assessment Tool Tool (ANHAT), which analyses data from a range of plant and animal surveys and collections from across Australia to automatically generate a report for each NRM region. Data sources (Appendix 2) include national and state herbaria, museums, state governments, CSIRO, Birds Australia and a range of surveys conducted by or for DEWHA. For each family of plant and animal covered by ANHAT (Appendix 1), this document gives the number of species in the country and how many of them are found in the region. It also identifies species listed as Vulnerable, Critically Endangered, Endangered or Conservation Dependent under the EPBC Act. A biodiversity summary for this region is also available. For more information please see: www.environment.gov.au/heritage/anhat/index.html Limitations • ANHAT currently contains information on the distribution of over 30,000 Australian taxa. This includes all mammals, birds, reptiles, frogs and fish, 137 families of vascular plants (over 15,000 species) and a range of invertebrate groups. Groups notnot yet yet covered covered in inANHAT ANHAT are notnot included included in in the the list. list. • The data used come from authoritative sources, but they are not perfect. All species names have been confirmed as valid species names, but it is not possible to confirm all species locations.
    [Show full text]
  • Beitrag Zur Kenntnis Der Neotropischen Membraciden Gattung Tylopelta Fowler, 1894 531-540 ©Zoologisches Museum Hamburg, 531
    ZOBODAT - www.zobodat.at Zoologisch-Botanische Datenbank/Zoological-Botanical Database Digitale Literatur/Digital Literature Zeitschrift/Journal: Entomologische Mitteilungen aus dem Zoologischen Museum Hamburg Jahr/Year: 1969 Band/Volume: 4 Autor(en)/Author(s): Strümpel Hans Artikel/Article: Beitrag zur Kenntnis der neotropischen Membraciden Gattung Tylopelta Fowler, 1894 531-540 ©Zoologisches Museum Hamburg, www.zobodat.at 531 Ent. Mitt. Zool. Mus. Hamburg Bd. 4 (1974), S. 531—540 Beitrag zur Kenntnis der neotropischen Membraciden Gattung Tylopelta F ow ler, 1894 Von H ans S trümpel x) (Mit 13 Abbildungen im Text)2) In der vorliegenden Arbeit werden einige Anmerkungen zu Arten der Gattung Tylopelta (Homoptera, Membracidae) hinsichtlich der Wertigkeit diagnostischer Merkmale gemacht. Das zur Untersuchung herangezogene Material stammt aus den Sammlungen des Zoologischen Instituts und Zoologischen Museums Hamburg, der California Academy of Science, San Francisco, The American Museum of Natural History, New York, und dem Moravske Museum Brno. Als F owler 1894 die Gattung Tylopelta aufstellte, charakterisierte er sie wie folgt: „Genus Tropidoscytae (Tropidoscyta S tal , 1869, ist jetzt Sy­ nonym für Erechtia W alker , 1858 — Anmk. d. Verf.) affine, sed pronoto maxime inaequali et gibbero areisque tegminum (discoidalibus tribus, api- calibus quique) minus oblongis“, und er fügte hinzu: „Allied to Tropi­ doscyta, but distinguished by the extremly uneven outline of the prono- tum, which is level or almost level in the last-mentioned genus, but in the present genus is deeply and broadly excised in the middle and again before the apex; besides the central and two side carinae there is only one short and broad carina above the eyes; the tegmina have the areas less oblong.“ Diese Charakterisierung bezog sich auf eine einzige Art und zwar auf Tropidoscyta gibbera S tal (Generotypus).
    [Show full text]
  • First Host Plant Record for Pacarina (Hemiptera, Cicadidae)
    Neotropical Biology and Conservation 15(1): 77–88 (2020) doi: 10.3897/neotropical.15.e49013 SHORT COMMUNICATION First host plant record for Pacarina (Hemiptera, Cicadidae) Annette Aiello1, Brian J. Stucky2 1 Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute, Panama 2 Florida Museum of Natural History, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA Corresponding author: Brian J. Stucky ([email protected]) Academic editor: P. Nunes-Silva | Received 4 December 2019 | Accepted 20 February 2020 | Published 19 March 2020 Citation: Aiello A, Stucky BJ (2020) First host plant record for Pacarina (Hemiptera, Cicadidae). Neotropical Biology and Conservation 15(1): 77–88. https://doi.org/10.3897/neotropical.15.e49013 Abstract Twenty-nine Pacarina (Hemiptera: Cicadidae) adults, 12 males and 17 females, emerged from the soil of a potted Dracaena trifasciata (Asparagaceae) in Arraiján, Republic of Panama, providing the first rearing records and the first definitive host plant records for any species of Pacarina. These reared Pacarina appear to be morphologically distinct from all known species of Pacarina and likely repre- sent an undescribed species. In light of this finding, we also discuss the taxonomy, biogeography, and ecology of Pacarina. Keywords cicada, Dracaena, host plant, rearing, taxonomy Introduction As far as is known, all cicadas are herbivores that spend the vast majority of their long life cycles as nymphs, living deep underground and feeding on the xylem sap of plant roots (Beamer 1928; Cheung and Marshall 1973; White and Strehl 1978). Be- cause of their relative inaccessibility to researchers, very little information is availa- ble about the host plant associations of juvenile cicadas. Consequently, even though adult cicadas are among the most conspicuous and familiar of all insects, the host plants of most cicada species’ nymphs remain unknown.
    [Show full text]
  • For Japananus Hyalinus
    Rapid Pest Risk Analysis (PRA) for Japananus hyalinus STAGE 1: INITIATION 1. What is the name of the pest? Japananus hyalinus (Osborn) Hemiptera Cicadellidae Japanese maple leafhopper Synonyms: Japananus meridionalis Bonfils Platymetopius cinctus Matsumura Platymetopius hyalinus Osborn 2. What initiated this rapid PRA? In 1999 two leafhoppers identified as J. hyalinus were intercepted on Acer palmatum 'Katsura' imported from South Korea. An entry for this species was included on the UK Plant Health Pest Risk Register in 2013 and identified as a priority to update a previous PRA written in 1999 (Fera 2013), in particular to assess its potential establishment given the spread of J. hyalinus across Europe (Mifsud et al. 2010). 3. What is the PRA area? The PRA area is the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. STAGE 2: RISK ASSESSMENT 4. What is the pest’s status in the EC Plant Health Directive (Council Directive 2000/29/EC1) and in the lists of EPPO2? The pest is not listed in the EC Plant Health Directive and is not recommended for regulation as a quarantine pest by EPPO, nor is it on the EPPO Alert List. 5. What is the pest’s current geographical distribution? J. hyalinus was first identified from the USA, but it is widely believed to originate from eastern Asia, though some authors dispute this due to the main host plant in Europe being the native Acer campestre, rather than ornamentally grown Asian species (Nickel and Remane 2002). It was first introduced into Europe in Austria in 1961, but its range has expanded considerably in recent years (Mifsud et al.
    [Show full text]
  • A Synopsis of the Tribe Micrutalini Haupt (Homoptera, Membracidae, Smiliinae) 1
    A synopsis of the tribe Micrutalini Haupt (Homoptera, Membracidae, Smiliinae) 1 Albino M. Sakakibara 2 ABSTRACT. The tribe Micrutalini and its two genera, Trachytalis Fowler and Micrutalis Fowler, are redescribed. The following species are treated and, in some cases, nomenclatural changes introduced: Trachytalis isabellina Fowler, 1895; T distinguenda Fowler, 1895; T retrofasciata (Lethierry, 1890), comb.n.; Micrutalis atrovena Goding, 1930; M balteata (Fairmaire, 1846) = Acutalis lucidus Buckton, 1902, syn.n.; M bella Goding, 1929; M biguttula (Fairmaire, 1846), comb.n.; M binaria (Fairmaire, 1846) = Acutalisflaviventris Lethierry, 1890, syn.n.; M callan­ gensis Goding, 1930; M calva (Say, 1830); M. discalis (Walker, 1858); M dorsalis (Fitch, 1851); M dubia Fowler, 1895 = M zeteki Goding, 1928, syn.n.; M flava Goding, 1929; M jlavozonata (Faitmaire, 1846), comb.n. = Acutalis geniculata Stiil, 1862, syn.n. = Acutalis modesta Stãl, 1862, syn.n.; M godfreyi Sakakibara, 1976; M incerta Sakakibara, 1976; M lata Goding, 1930; M litterata (Fairmaire, 1846), comb.n.;M lugubrina(Stãl, 1862);M malleiferaFowler, 1895=M binariamutabilis Fowler, 1895, syn.n.; M minutus Buckton, 1902; M nigrolineata (Stiil, 1864); M nigromarginata Funkhouser, 1940; M notatipennis Fowler, 1895; M occidentalis (Goding, 1893); M pallens Fowler, 1895; M parva (Goding, 1893); M plagiata (Stãl, 1862) = Acutalis variabilis Berg, 1879, syn.n. = M chapadensis Goding, 1930, syn.n.; M punctifera (Walker, 1858); M semialba (Stãl, 1862); M stipulipennis Buckton, 1902; M tau Goding, 1930; M trifurcata Goding, 1893; M tripunctata (Fairmaire, 1846) = Acutalis moesta Stãl, 1859, syn.n. = M tartaredoides Goding, 1930, syn.n .. New species: Micrutalis diminuta sp.n. (Ecuador, Pichincha); Micrutalis divisa sp.n.
    [Show full text]