Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-c4f8m Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-17T11:44:44.433Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

FIVE GENERA OF NEW-WORLD “SHOVEL-HEADED” AND “SPOON-BILL” LEAFHOPPERS (HEMIPTERA: CICADELLIDAE: DORYCEPHALINI AND HECALINI)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

K.G.A. Hamilton
K.G.A. Hamilton*
Affiliation:
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada K1A 0C6
*
1 E-mail: hamiltona@em.agr.ca).
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

New-world leafhoppers with strongly flattened heads are here assigned to three tribes: Deltocephalini (six genera), Dorycephalini (two genera), and Hecalini (seven genera). Revised keys are presented to the new-world genera, and 44 new-world species of the Nearctic genera Attenuipyga Oman (Dorycephalini) and Neohecalus Linnavuori, the Holarctic genera Hecalus Stål and Memnonia Ball, and the widespread new-world genus Spangbergiella Signoret (Hecalini). In Dorycephalini, Attenuipyga (with subgenus Dorycara Emeljanov, stat.nov.) has nine species, including Attenuipyga (s.s.) joyceaesp.nov. from Manitoba and Dorycephalus sinuatus Beamer, 1942b = Dorycephalus minor Osborn, 1920, syn.nov. In Hecalini, 10 species in Hecalus, 3 in Neohecalus, and 15 in Memnonia are recognized, including 20 species formerly in Parabolocratus Fieber, plus Hecalus finnamoreisp.nov., Neohecalus magnificussp.nov., Memnonia anthalopussp.nov., Memnonia maiasp.nov., and Memnonia panzerisp.nov. from the northern prairies and Memnonia leptaleasp.nov. from the Gulf states. Parabolocratus continuus DeLong, 1938 and Parabolocratus planus Shaw, 1932 are reduced to subspecific status in Hecalus montanus, and three names are synonymized: Parabolocratus inflatus DeLong, 1938 = Hecalus montanus (Ball, 1900); Parabolocratus rotundus DeLong, 1938 = Hecalus major (Osborn, 1915); and Parabolocratus elongatus DeLong, 1938 = Memnonia grandis (Shaw, 1932) syn.nov.

Résumé

Les cicadelles du Nouveau Monde qui possèdent une tête très aplatie sont classifiées ici en trois tribus, les Deltocephalini (six genres), les Dorycephalini (deux genres) et les Hecalini (sept genres). Des clés révisées permettront de distinguer les genres du Nouveau Monde et d’identifier 44 espèces du Nouveau Monde appartenant aux genres néarctiques Attenuipyga Oman (Dorycephalini) et Neohecalus Linnavuori, aux genres holarctiques Hecalus Stål et Memnonia Ball et au genre du Nouveau Monde à vaste répartition, Spangbergiella Signoret (Hecalini). Chez les Dorycephalini, Attenuipyga (avec le sous-genre Dorycara Emeljanov, stat.nov.) contient neuf espèces dont Attenuipyga (s.s.) joyceaesp.nov., du Manitoba et Dorycephalus sinuatus Beamer, 1942b = Dorycephalus minor Osborn, 1920, syn.nov. Chez les Hecalini, il faut reconnaître 10 espèces d’Hecalus, 3 de Neohecalus et 15 de Memnonia, dont 20 espèces appartenant auparavant au genre Parabolocratus Fieber, plus Hecalus finnamoreisp.nov., Neohecalus magnificussp.nov., Memnonia anthalopussp.nov. Memnonia maiasp.nov. et Memnonia panzerisp.nov. des prairies du nord et Memnonia leptaleasp.nov. des états du Golfe du Mexique. Parabolocratus continuus DeLong, 1938 et Parabolocratus planus Shaw, 1932 sont ramenés au rang de sous-espèces d’Hecalus montanus et trois espèces sont synonymisées, Parabolocratus inflatus DeLong, 1938 = Hecalus montanus (Ball, 1900), Parabolocratus rotundus DeLong, 1938 = Hecalus major (Osborn, 1915) et Parabolocratus elongatus DeLong, 1938 = Memnonia grandis (Shaw, 1938) syn.nov.

[Traduit par la Rédaction]

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 132 , Issue 4 , August 2000 , pp. 429 - 503
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 2000

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anufriev, G.A., Emeljanov, A.F. 1988. 1. Homoptera Cicadinea (Auchenorrhyncha) — cicadas. pp. 12–495in Lera, P.A. (Ed.), Key to the identification of insects of the far east USSR in six volumes. Vol. 2: Homoptera and Heteroptera. Leningrad: Nauka [In Russian]Google Scholar
Baker, C.F. 1897. Some new and little known Dorydini (Jassinae). The Canadian Entomologist 29: 157–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ball, E.D. 1900. Notes on the Acocephalina (Homoptera–Jassidae). Proceedings of the Iowa Academy of Science [for] 1899, 7: 64–72Google Scholar
Ball, E.D. 1901. A review of the Tettigonidae of North America north of Mexico. Proceedings of the Iowa Academy of Science 8: 35–75Google Scholar
Ball, E.D. 1933. Some new genera and species of western leafhoppers. Bulletin of the Brooklyn Entomological Society 28(5): 223–8Google Scholar
Ball, E.D. 1937. New N.A. leafhoppers belonging to Parabolocratus and related genera. Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington 50: 129–32Google Scholar
Beamer, R.H. 1936 a. Two new species of western leafhoppers (Homoptera–Cicadellidae). Journal of the Kansas Entomological Society 9: 31–2Google Scholar
Beamer, R.H. 1936 b. The genus Dicyphonia Ball (Homoptera–Cicadellidae). Journal of the Kansas Entomological Society 9: 66–71Google Scholar
Beamer, R.H. 1938. Some new species of leafhoppers (Homoptera–Cicadellidae). Journal of the Kansas Entomological Society 11: 77–84Google Scholar
Beamer, R.H. 1942 a. A new species of Dorycephalus. Journal of the Kansas Entomological Society 15: 55–6Google Scholar
Beamer, R.H. 1942 b. A new species of Dorycephalus. Pan-Pacific Entomologist 18: 135Google Scholar
Beamer, R.H. 1948. A new Lonatura and Parabolocratus (Homoptera–Cicadellidae). Journal of the Kansas Entomological Society 21: 62–4Google Scholar
Berg, C. 1879. Hemiptera Argentina (continuacion). Anales de la Sociedad Cientifica Argentina 8: 241–72Google Scholar
Berg, C. 1884. Addenda et Emandanda ad Hemiptera Argentina. Anales de la Sociedad Cientifica Argentina 17: 20–41, 97–118 (March). Reprinted in May 1884 in Hamburg by Frederking and Graf, pp. 125–78Google Scholar
Britton, W.E. 1938. Additions to the check list of the insects of Connecticut. Connecticut State Geological and Natural History Survey, first supplement to Bulletin 31Google Scholar
Brown, H.E. 1939. An annotated list of the species of Jassinae known to occur in Indiana (Homoptera, Cicadellidae). American Midland Naturalist 21: 663–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dash, P.C., Viraktamath, C.A. 1997. New species of grass feeding Hecaline leafhopper genera Glossocratus and Hecalus (Hemiptera: Cicadellidae) from India. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society 94(1): 127–38Google Scholar
DeLong, D.M. 1923 a. Family Cicadellidae. pp. 56–163in Britton, W.E. (Ed.), Guide to the insects of Connecticut. Vol. 4. Hartford: State Geological and Natural History SurveyGoogle Scholar
DeLong, D.M. 1923 b. The distribution of the leafhoppers of Presque Isle, Pa., and their relation to plant formations. Annals of the Entomological Society of America 16: 363–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeLong, D.M. 1938. Some new species of Parabolocratus (Homoptera: Cicadellidae). Ohio Journal of Science 38: 301–3Google Scholar
DeLong, D.M. 1944. A new genus (Tenucephalus) and species of Mexican leafhopper related to Parabolocratus. Ohio Journal of Science 44: 236–7Google Scholar
DeLong, D.M. 1948. The leafhoppers, or Cicadellidae, of Illinois (Eurymelinae–Balcluthinae). Illinois Natural History Survey Bulletin 24(2): 91–376CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeLong, D.M., Linnavuori, R.E. 1978. Studies on Neotropical leafhoppers (Homoptera: Cicadellidae). Entomologica Scandinavica 9: 111–23Google Scholar
Denno, R.F. 1994. Life history variation in planthoppers. Chap. 4 in Denno, R.F., Perfect, T.J. (Eds.), Planthoppers: their ecology and management. New York: Chapman and HallCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dietrich, C.H., Jokela, J., Black, W.C. IV,. 1997. Utility of DNA sequence data for leafhopper and treehopper (Homoptera: Membracoidea) phylogenetics. pp. 49–50in Fletcher, M.J., Day, M., Gillespie, P., Stevens, M., Moulds, M. (Eds.), Program and Abstract Book, 9th International Auchenorrhyncha Congress, 17–21 February 1997, Sydney, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
Distant, W.L. 1908. Rhynchota. Vol. IV. Homoptera and appendix (Pt.). In Bingham, C.T. (Ed.), The fauna of British India including Ceylon and Burma. London: Taylor and FrancisGoogle Scholar
Distant, W.L. 1916. Rhynchota. Vol. VI. Appendix. In Bingham, C.T. (Ed.), The fauna of British India including Ceylon and Burma. London: Taylor and FrancisGoogle Scholar
Emeljanov, A.F. 1966. New Palaearctic and some Nearctic Cicadinea (Homoptera, Auchenorrhyncha). Entomologicheskoe Obozrenie 45(1): 95–133Google Scholar
Evans, J.W. 1947. A natural classification of leaf-hoppers (Jassoidea, Homoptera). Transactions of the Entomological Society of London 98: 105–271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, J.W. 1966. The leafhoppers and froghoppers of Australia and New Zealand (Homoptera: Cicadelloidea and Cercopoidea). Australian Museum Sydney Memoir 12Google Scholar
Fattig, P.W. 1955. The Cicadellidae or leaf hoppers of Georgia. Emory University Museum Bulletin 11Google Scholar
Fieber, F.X. 1866. Neue Gattungen und Arten in Homopteren (Cicadina Bur.) Verhandlungen der kaiserlich-königlichen Zoologisch-Botanischen Gesellshaft in Wien 16: 497–516Google Scholar
Freytag, P.H., Ma, N. 1988. An unusual new genus and species of Hecaline leafhopper from Venezuela (Homoptera: Cicadellidae). Entomological News 99(3): 153–6Google Scholar
Gibson, E.H., Cogan, E.S. 1915. A preliminary list of the Jassoidea of Missouri with notes on species. Ohio Journal of Science 15: 71–8Google Scholar
Hamilton, K.G.A. 1976. Cicadellidae (Rhynchota: Homoptera) described by Provancher, with notes on his publications. Le Naturaliste canadien 103: 29–45Google Scholar
Hamilton, K.G.A. 1979. Synopsis of the North American Philaenini (Rhynchota: Homoptera, Cercopidae) with a new genus and four new species. The Canadian Entomologist 111: 127–41Google Scholar
Hamilton, K.G.A. 1983. Classification, morphology and phylogeny of the family Cicadellidae (Rhynchota: Homoptera). pp. 15–37in Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Leafhoppers and Planthoppers of Economic Importance. London: Commonwealth Institute of EntomologyGoogle Scholar
Hamilton, K.G.A. 1986. Revision of Helochara Fitch (Rhynchota: Homoptera: Cicadellidae). Journal of the Kansas Entomological Society 59(1): 173–80Google Scholar
Hamilton, K.G.A. 1992. Leafhopper evidence for origins of northeastern relict prairies (Insecta: Homoptera: Cicadellidae). pp. 61–70in Wickett, R.G. et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 13th North American Prairie Conference. Windsor: Preney Print and LithoGoogle Scholar
Hamilton, K.G.A. 1995. Evaluation of leafhoppers and their relatives (Insecta: Homoptera: Auchenorrhyncha) as indicators of prairie preserve quality. pp. 211–26 in Hartnett, D.C. (Ed.), Proceedings of the 14th North American Prairie Conference: Prairie Biodiversity. Manhattan: Kansas State UniversityGoogle Scholar
Hamilton, K.G.A. 1996. Cretaceous Homoptera from Brazil: implications for classification. pp. 89–110in Schaefer, C.W. (Ed.), Studies on Hemipteran phylogeny. Lanham: Thomas Say Publications in EntomologyGoogle Scholar
Hamilton, K.G.A. 1999. Leafhoppers (Insecta: Homoptera: Cicadellidae) as indicators of endangered ecosystems. pp. 103–13 in Proceedings of the 1997 Conference of the Canadian Council on Ecological Areas, September 14–16, 1997, Fredericton, New Brunswick, Canadain Forest Service.Google Scholar
Ishihara, T. 1959. The genus Parabolocratus in Japan (Hemiptera). Kontyu 27: 77–80Google Scholar
Johnson, C.W. 1927. Biological survey of the Mount Desert region, conducted by William Proctor, part 1. The insect fauna, with reference to the flora and other biological features. Philadelphia: Wistar Institute of Anatomy and BiologyGoogle Scholar
Knull, D.J. 1941. A new Dorycephalus (Homoptera: Cicadellidae). Annals of the Entomological Society of America 34(2): 437–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kwon, Y.J., Lee, C.E. 1979. Revision of the tribe Hecalini Distant from Korea (Homoptera: Cicadellidae: Aphrodinae). Nature and Life 9(1): 41–8Google Scholar
Lawson, P.B. 1922. A list of the Cicadellidae of Kansas. Kansas University Science Bulletin 30: 331–6Google Scholar
Lawson, P.B. 1932. The genus Spangbergiella (Homoptera, Cicadellidae) in America north of Mexico. Journal of the Kansas Entomological Society 5(4):116–22Google Scholar
Li, Z-Z. 1990. A new species of the genus Hecalus from Guizhou Province, China (Homoptera: Hecalinae). Acta Entomologica Sinica 33(1): 92–3 [In Chinese]Google Scholar
Linnavuori, R. 1957. The neotropical Hecalinae (Hom. Cicadellidae). Suomen Hyönteistieteellinen Aikakauskirja 23(3): 133–43Google Scholar
Linnavuori, R. 1959. Revision of the Neotropical Deltocephalinae and some related subfamilies (Homoptera). Annales Zoologici Societatis Zoologicae Botanicae Fennicae ‘Vanamo’ 20(1)Google Scholar
Linnavuori, R. 1961. Hemiptera (Homoptera): Cicadellidae. South African animal life: results of the Lund University Expedition in 1950–51, 8: 452–86Google Scholar
Linnavuori, R. 1975 a. Studies on Neotropical Deltocephalinae (Homoptera, Cicadellidae). Notulae Entomologicae 55: 49–52Google Scholar
Linnavuori, R. 1975 b. Revision of the Cicadellidae (Homoptera) of the Ethiopian region, III. Deltocephalinae, Hecalini. Acta Zoologica Fennica 143: 1–37Google Scholar
Linnavuori, R., DeLong, D.M. 1977. The leafhoppers (Homoptera: Cicadellidae) known from Chile. Brenesia 12/13: 163–267Google Scholar
Linnavuori, R. 1978 a. Genera and species of Hecalini (Homoptera, Cicadellidae, Deltocephalinae) known to occur in Mexico. Suomen Hyonteistieteellinen Aikakauskirja 44: 48–53Google Scholar
Linnavuori, R. 1978 b. Seventeen new species and three new genera of Central and South American Deltocephalini (Homoptera: Cicadellidae). Brenesia 14/15: 195–226Google Scholar
Ma, N. 1988. A review of the genus Spangbergiella (Homoptera: Cicadellidae: Deltocephalinae). Journal of the Kansas Entomological Society 61(4): 363–9Google Scholar
Metcalf, Z.P. [and Wade V]. 1963 a. Part 9: Hecalidae. General catalogue of the Homoptera, Fascicle VI: Cicadelloidea. Washington: U.S. Department of AgricultureGoogle Scholar
Metcalf, Z.P. [and Wade V]. 1963 b. Part 8: Aphrodidae. General catalogue of the Homoptera, Fascicle VI: Cicadelloidea. Washington: U.S. Department of AgricultureGoogle Scholar
Morrison, W.P. 1973. A revision of the Hecalinae (Homoptera: Cicadellidae) of the Oriental region. Pacific Insects 15: 379–438Google Scholar
Nast, J. 1972. Palaearctic Auchenorrhyncha (Homoptera): an annotated check list. Warszawa: Polish Scientific PublishersGoogle Scholar
Oman, P.W. 1936. A generic revision of American Bythoscopinae and South American Jassinae. Bulletin of the University of Kansas 37(14):Google Scholar
University of Kansas Science Bulletin 24(16): 343–420Google Scholar
Oman, P.W. 1947. The types of Auchenorrhynchous Homoptera in the Iowa State College Collection. Iowa State College Journal of Science 21(2): 161–228Google Scholar
Oman, P.W. 1949. The Nearctic leafhoppers (Homoptera: Cicadellidae): a generic classification and check list. Memoirs of the Entomological Society of Washington 3Google Scholar
Oman, P.W. 1985. A synopsis of the Nearctic Dorycephalinae (Homoptera: Cicadellidae). Journal of the Kansas Entomological Society 58: 314–36Google Scholar
Oman, P.W., Knight, W.J., Nielson, M.W. 1990. Leafhoppers (Cicadellidae): a bibliography, generic check-list and index to the world literature 1965–1985. Wallingford: C.A.B. International Institute of EntomologyGoogle Scholar
Osborn, H. 1894. Description of a new species of Dorycephalus. The Canadian Entomologist 26: 216Google Scholar
Osborn, H. 1912. Leafhoppers affecting cereals, grasses and forage crops. Bulletin of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Bureau of Entomology 108: 5–123Google Scholar
Osborn, H. 1915. Bulletin 238. Leafhoppers of Maine. Papers from the Maine Agricultural Experiment Station: Entomology 78: 81–160Google Scholar
Osborn, H. 1920. Notes on the generic affinities of certain Cicadellidae (Homoptera) with descriptions of a new genus and two new species. Ohio Journal of Science 20: 153–66Google Scholar
Osborn, H. 1922. Homoptera in the vicinity of Cranberry Lake. New York State College of Forestry Technical Bulletin 16: 24–54, 153–66Google Scholar
Osborn, H. 1928. The leafhoppers of Ohio. Ohio Biological Survey 3(4), Bulletin 14Google Scholar
Osborn, H., Ball, E.D. 1897 a. Contributions to the Hemipterous fauna of Iowa. Proceedings of the Iowa Academy of Sciences 4: 172–234Google Scholar
Osborn, H., Ball, E.D. 1897 b. Studies of the life histories of grass feeding Jassidae. Bulletin of the Iowa Agricultural Experiment Station 34: 612–40Google Scholar
Osborn, H., Ball, E.D. 1898. Studies of North American Jassoidea. New species, dimorphic forms, and early stages of Jassidae. Proceedings of the Davenport Academy of Natural Sciences 7: 74–100Google Scholar
Osborn, H., Knull, D.J. 1939. Meadow and pasture insects. Columbus: Educator's PressGoogle Scholar
Provancher, L. 1872. Description de plusieurs Hémiptères nouveaux. Le Naturaliste canadien 4: 350–2Google Scholar
Rao, V.R.S., Ramakrishnan, U. 1990. The Indian species of Hecalus with descriptions of three new species. Memoirs of the Indian Museum 11Google Scholar
Readio, P.A. 1922. Ovipositors of Cicadellidae (Homoptera). Kansas University Science Bulletin 14(8): 215–98Google Scholar
Ross, H.H. 1957. Evolutionary developments in the leafhoppers, the insect family Cicadellidae. Systematic Zoology 6(2): 69, 87–97Google Scholar
Ross, H.H. 1974. Biological systematics. Reading: Addison-WesleyGoogle Scholar
Sanders, J.G., DeLong, D.M. 1923. Nine new species of Cicadellidae (Homoptera) from the United States and Canada. Proceedings of the Washington Entomological Society 25: 151–6Google Scholar
Shaw, J.G. 1932. The genus Parabolocratus in North America (Homoptera, Cicadellidae). Journal of the Kansas Entomological Society 5: 38–52Google Scholar
Signoret, V. 1879. Essai sur les Jassides Stål, Fieb. et plus particulièrement sur les Acocéphalides Puton: 2me partie. Annales de la Société Entomologique de France 9(5): 259–80Google Scholar
Singh, G.S. 1969. Fifteen new species of jassids (Cicadellidae) from Himachal Pradesh and Chandigarh. Research Bulletin of the Punjab University 20: 339–61Google Scholar
Stål, C. 1854. Nya Hemiptera. Öfversigt af Kongl. [Svenska] Vetenskaps Akademiens Förhandlingar 11: 231–55Google Scholar
Stål, C. 1864. Hemiptera nonnulla nova vel minus cognita. Annales de la Société Entomologique de France 4(4): 47–68Google Scholar
Stål, C. 1870. Hemiptera insularum Philippinarum. Öfversigt af Kongl. [Svenska] Vetenskaps Akademiens Förhandlingar 27: 607–776Google Scholar
Steams, L.A. 1927. The Cicadellidae (Homoptera) of Virginia. Virginia Agricultural Experiment Station Technical Bulletin 31: 3–21Google Scholar
Uhler, P.R. 1877. Report upon the insects collected by P.R. Uhler during the explorations of 1875. Bulletin of the United States Geological and Geographical Survey of the Territories 3(2): 355–475Google Scholar
Van Duzee, E.P. 1894. A catalogue of the described Jassoidea of North America. Transactions of the American Entomological Society 21: 245–317Google Scholar
Van Duzee, E.P. 1909. Observations on some Hemiptera taken in Florida in the spring of 1908. Bulletin of the Buffalo Society of Natural Sciences 9: 149–230Google Scholar
Van Duzee, E.P. 1916. Check list of Hemiptera (excepting the Aphididae, Aleurodidae, and Coccidae) of America north of Mexico. Berkeley: University of CaliforniaGoogle Scholar
Van Duzee, E.P. 1917. Catalogue of Hemiptera of America north of Mexico excepting the Aphididae, Aleurodidae, and Coccidae. California Agricultural Experiment Station Entomology Technical Bulletin 2Google Scholar
Villiers, A. 1956. Contribution à l'étude du peuplement de la Mauritanie. Description de nouveaux Hémiptères. Bulletin de l'Institut Français d'Afrique Noire 18: 834–42Google Scholar
Wirtner, P.M. 1904. A preliminary list of the Hemiptera of western Pennsylvania. Annals of the Carnegie Museum 3: 183–232Google Scholar
Wolcott, G.N. 1936. “Insectae Borinquenses”: a revised annotated check-list of the insects of Puerto Rico. Journal of Agriculture of the University of Puerto Rico 20(1): 1–600Google Scholar