Find the information such as human life, natural resource,agriculture,forestry, biotechnology, biodiversity, wood and non-wood materials.
Blog List
Friday, 2 December 2016
Description of three new genera, Paratibicen, Gigatibicen, and Ameritibicen, of Cryptotympanini (Hemiptera: Cicadidae) and a key to their species
Published Date 1 December 2016, Vol.9(4):448–454,doi:10.1016/j.japb.2016.09.002 Open Access, Creative Commons license,Funding information Original article Author Young June Lee, Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT, USA Received 18 August 2016. Revised 4 September 2016. Accepted 7 September 2016. Available online 14 September 2016. Abstract Three new genera,Paratibicengen. nov.,Gigatibicengen. nov., andAmeritibicengen. nov., are erected for the former members ofNeotibicenHill & Moulds, 2015 from North America, designatingCicada similarisSmith & Grossbeck, 1907,Cicada auletesGermar, 1834, andCicada dorsataSay, 1825 as their respective type species. Morphological comparisons are made among the three new genera,LyristesHorváth, 1926 (=TibicenLatreille, 1825),AuritibicenLee, 2015,Neotibicen sensu stricto, and other related genera. A key to the species of the generaNeotibicen,Paratibicen,Gigatibicen, andAmeritibicenis provided. Keywords
Auritibicen
Hadoa
Lyristes
Neotibicen
new combinations
North America
Tibicen
Introduction
By the erections of AuritibicenLee, 2015 by Lee (2015) and Neotibicen Hill & Moulds, 2015 and Hadoa Moulds, 2015 in Hill et al (2015), and by the generic reassignments by Sanborn (2015), there have been relocations of many species of the former Lyristes Horváth, 1926 (type species: Cicada plebeja Scopoli, 1763 from Europe; = Tibicen Latreille, 1825 nomen nudum) into different genera. After synonymization of Lyristes altaiensis Schmidt, 1932 with Neotibicen resh (Haldeman, 1852) by Wang et al (2015) (also see Lee 2015 and Sanborn 2015), the genus Lyristes is now comprised of only five species from sub-Mediterranean and Mediterranean areas in the Western Palaearctic Region (in Europe).
Most of the former “Tibicen” species from North America are now placed in the two genera Neotibicen and Hadoa. Neotibicen includes 21 species, excluding an extinct species [Neotibicen bermudianus (Verrill, 1902)] and an invalid name [Neotibicen variegatus (Fabricius, 1794) nomen nudum]. Hadoa includes the following 20 species: H. bifida (Davis, 1916), H. chihuahuaensis (Sanborn, 2007), H. chiricahua(Davis, 1923), H. chisosensis (Davis, 1934), H. distanti (Metcalf, 1963), H. duryi(Davis, 1917), H. fusca (Davis, 1934), H. hidalgoensis (Davis, 1941), H. inaudita(Davis, 1917), H. longiopercula (Davis, 1926), H. minor (Davis, 1934), H. montezuma(Distant, 1881), H. neomexicensis (Stucky, 2013), H. paralleloides (Davis, 1934), H. parallela (Davis, 1923), H. robusta (Distant, 1881), H. simplex (Davis, 1941), H. sugdeni (Davis, 1941), H. texana (Metcalf, 1963), and H. townsendii (Uhler, 1905).
However, it was found through an alpha taxonomic study that there still should exist multiple groups or genera within the current concept of the genus Neotibicen.
Among the species of the genus Neotibicen, the following 11 species form a monophyletic group: N. auriferus (Say, 1825), N. canicularis (Harris, 1841), N. davisi(Smith & Grossbeck, 1907), N. latifasciatus (Davis, 1915), N. linnei (Smith & Grossbeck, 1907), N. lyricen (Degeer, 1773), N. pruinosus (Say, 1825), N. robinsonianus (Davis, 1922), N. superbus (Fitch, 1855), N. tibicen (Linnaeus, 1758), and N. winnemanna (Davis, 1912). These 11 species remain in Neotibicen.
Neotibicen similaris (Smith & Grossbeck, 1907) has its own peculiar morphology as discussed later and thus should be placed in a separate monotypic genus. A new genus, Paratibicen gen. nov., is described for this species.
The following three species form another monophyletic group: N. auletes (Germar, 1834), N. resh (Haldeman, 1852), and N. resonans (Walker, 1850). A new genus, Gigatibicen gen. nov., is described for these three species.
The following six species form another monophyletic group: N. cultriformis (Davis, 1915), N. dealbatus (Davis, 1915), N. dorsatus (Say, 1825), N. figuratus (Walker, 1858), N. pronotalis (Davis, 1938), and N. tremulus (Cole, 2008). Another new genus, Ameritibicen gen. nov., is described for these six species.
A key to the males of all the 21 species of Neotibicen, Paratibicen, Gigatibicen, and Ameritibicen is provided in subsequent sections.
Materials and methods
Many specimens of the species of the new genera and their closely related genera including Lyristes, Auritibicen, Neotibicen sensu stricto, Hadoa Moulds, 2015, and Cacama Distant, 1904 were examined for this study, which are specimens from Kathy B.R. Hill and David C. Marshall’s cicada collection at the collection facility of the University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT, USA (UCONN), and from the present author’s private collection (YJL), including the specimens listed below.
Neotibicen auriferus (Say, 1825): 1♂, Meade County, KS, USA, 05 IX 2007 (UCONN). Neotibicen canicularis (Harris, 1841): 1♂, Manchester, CT, USA, 10 VIII 2008 (YJL); 1♂, Mansfield, CT, USA, 07 VIII 2008 (YJL); 1♂, Storrs, CT, USA, 19 VIII 2008 (YJL). Neotibicen davisi (Smith & Grossbeck, 1907): 1♂, Citrus County, FL, USA, 22 IX 2011 (UCONN). Neotibicen latifasciatus (Davis, 1915): 1♂, Cape May County, NJ, USA, 06 VIII 2010 (UCONN). Neotibicen linnei (Smith & Grossbeck, 1907): 1♂, Kent County, DE, USA, 28 VIII 2004 (UCONN). Neotibicen lyricen (Degeer, 1773): 1♂, Storrs, CT, USA, 30 VII 2008 (YJL); 1♂, Storrs, CT, USA, 6 VIII 2009 (YJL). Neotibicen lyricen engelhardti (Davis, 1910): 1♂, Albemarle County, VA, USA, 17 VIII 2003 (UCONN). Neotibicen pruinosus (Say, 1825): 1♂, Barber County, KS, USA, 5 IX 2007 (UCONN). Neotibicen robinsonianus (Davis, 1922): 1♂, Culpeper County, VA, USA, 17 VIII 2003 (UCONN). Neotibicen superbus (Fitch, 1855): 1♂, Freestone County, TX, USA, 23 VI 2002 (UCONN). Neotibicen tibicen (Linnaeus, 1758): 1♂, Bergen County, NJ, USA, 15 VIII 2015 (YJL); 1♂, Culpeper County, VA, USA, 17 VIII 2003 (UCONN).
Paratibicen similaris (Smith & Grossbeck, 1907) comb. nov.: 1♂, Alachua County, FL, USA, 1 IX 2008 (UCONN).
Gigatibicen auletes (Germar, 1834) comb. nov.: 1♂, Warren County, GA, USA, 16 IX 2009 (UCONN). Gigatibicen resh (Haldeman, 1852) comb. nov.: 1♂, Leflore County, MS, USA, 15 VIII 2010 (UCONN). Gigatibicen resonans (Walker, 1850) comb. nov.: 1♂, Leon County, FL, USA, 21 VII 2008 (UCONN).
Ameritibicen cultriformis (Davis, 1915) comb. nov.: 1♂, Santa Cruz County, AZ, USA, 02 IX 2007 (UCONN). Ameritibicen dealbatus (Davis, 1915) comb. nov.: 1♂, KS, USA, 05 VII 2004 (UCONN). Ameritibicen dorsatus (Say, 1825) comb. nov.: 1♂, Montgomery County, KS, USA, 6 IX 2007 (UCONN). Ameritibicen figuratus (Walker, 1858) comb. nov.: 1♂, Chambers County, AL, USA, 25 VIII 2005 (UCONN). Ameritibicen pronotalis pronotalis (Davis, 1938) comb. nov.: 1♂, IA, USA, 6 IX 2009 (UCONN). Ameritibicen pronotalis walkeri (Metcalf, 1955) comb. nov.: 1♂, Montgomery, KS, USA, 06 IX 2007 (UCONN). Ameritibicen tremulus (Cole, 2008) comb. nov.: 1♂, Comanche County, KS, USA, 5 IX 2007 (UCONN).
Hadoa chiricahua (Davis, 1923): 1♂, Cochise County, AZ, USA, 25 VI 2007 (UCONN). Hadoa duryi (Davis, 1917): 1♂, Gila County, AZ, USA, 29 VI, 2003 (UCONN). Hadoa inaudita (Davis, 1917): 1♂, Otero County, NM, USA, 28 VI 2007 (UCONN). Hadoa neomexicensis (Stucky, 2013): 1♂, Otero County, NM, USA, 28 VI 2007 (UCONN). Hadoa texana (Metcalf, 1963): 1♂, TX, USA, 18 VI 2012 (UCONN). Hadoa townsendii (Uhler, 1905): 1♂, Sierra County, NM, USA, 15 VI 2012 (UCONN).
Cacama valvata (Uhler, 1888): 1♂, Bent County, CO, USA, 4 VII 2004 (UCONN).
The digital images of the male genitalia were captured using a Leica stereo-zoom microscope attached to a computer-assisted imaging system, Auto-Montage by Syncroscopy (Cambridge, UK), at the collection facility of the University of Connecticut. Terminology for morphological features generally follows that of Moulds (2005).
Figure 1.Neotibicen canicularis (Harris, 1841), male, Connecticut, USA. A, Dorsal habitus; B, Ventral habitus; C, Ventral view of the pygofer; D, Lateral view of the pygofer; E, Dorsal beak.
Included species. N. auriferus (Say, 1825), N. canicularis (Harris, 1841), N. davisi(Smith & Grossbeck, 1907) [with the subspecies of N. davisi davisi (Smith & Grossbeck, 1907) and N. davisi hardeni (Davis, 1918)], N. latifasciatus (Davis, 1915), N. linnei (Smith & Grossbeck, 1907), N. lyricen (Degeer, 1773) [with the subspecies of N. lyricen engelhardti (Davis, 1910), N. lyricen lyricen (Degeer, 1773), and N. lyricen virescens (Davis, 1935)], N. pruinosus (Say, 1825) [with the subspecies of N. pruinosus fulvus (Beamer, 1924) and N. pruinosus pruinosus (Say, 1825)], N. robinsonianus (Davis, 1922), N. superbus (Fitch, 1855), N. tibicen (Linnaeus, 1758) [with the subspecies of N. tibicen australis (Davis, 1912) and N. tibicen tibicen(Linnaeus, 1758)], and N. winnemanna (Davis, 1912).
Diagnosis. Head including eyes wider than base of mesonotum. Pronotum with lateral margin weakly ampliated, not dentate. Male opercula about as long as wide or longer than wide, overlapped at inner margins. Wings hyaline. Forewing comparatively long and slender (ratio of forewing length to width 2.65–3.20). Forewing radial cell slightly slenderer than ulnar cell 3. Male abdomen about as long as or slightly longer than head and thorax together. Male abdominal sternite VIII widely rounded or V-shaped in posterior view. Timbal cover completely covering timbal. Pygofer barrel-shaped (with a little widened distal part) in ventral view. Dorsodistal part (between distal shoulders, including dorsal beak and inward curvatures on both sides of dorsal beak) of pygofer lower than distal shoulders but with long and acute dorsal beak, forming a trident-shape in dorsal view, with middle branch longest (Figure 1E). Uncal lobes fused into one, not bifurcate; long, at least one-third the length of pygofer; simple, without projections (see Diagnosis of Paratibicen for comparison); widely and convexly rounded or truncate at apical part in ventral view; curved inwardly in lateral view. Aedeagus thick and with widely truncate apex. Basal lobe of pygofer paramedian, apart from lateral wall of pygofer, not curved laterad at apices, and basally connected to each other.
Type species. Cicada similaris Smith & Grossbeck, 1907 (type locality: Fernandina, FL; Figure 2).
Figure 2.Paratibicen similaris (Smith & Grossbeck, 1907) comb. nov., male, Florida, USA. A, Dorsal habitus; B, Ventral habitus; C, Ventral view of the pygofer; D, Lateral view of the pygofer; E, Dorsal beak.
Included species. P. similaris (Smith & Grossbeck, 1907) comb. nov.
Etymology. The generic name refers to the morphological similarity of this genus to Tibicen, adding the Greek prefix para- to Tibicen. Although Tibicen is treated here as nomen nudum, the name Tibicen has been mainly used for the American species.
Diagnosis. Head including eyes wider than base of mesonotum. Pronotum with lateral margin very weakly ampliated, not dentate. Male opercula longer than wide, overlapped at inner margins. Wings hyaline. Forewing comparatively long and slender (ratio of forewing length to width about 2.9). Forewing radial cell slenderer than ulnar cell 3. Male abdomen slightly longer than head and thorax together. Male abdominal sternite VIII narrowly V-shaped in posterior view. Timbal cover completely covering timbal. Pygofer oblong in ventral view. Dorsodistal part of pygofer not lower than distal shoulders, forming a triangle in dorsal view with long and acute dorsal beak (Figure 2E). Uncal lobes fused into one, not bifurcate; comparatively short, less than one-third the length of pygofer; with a pair of sharp projections below the uncus (Figure 2D); tapering into narrow and triangularly rounded apex in ventral view; curved inwardly in lateral view. Aedeagus thick and with widely truncate apex. Basal lobe of pygofer lateral, attached to lateral wall of pygofer [contradictory to what was said in Lee (2015) in regards to the basal lobes of the “America Tibicen”, which becomes not contradictory when excluding this species or Paratibicen from the “America Tibicen” in Lee (2015)], not curved laterad at apices.
Type species. Cicada auletes Germar, 1834 (type locality: Pennsylvania; Figure 3), by the present designation.
Figure 3.Gigatibicen auletes (Germar, 1834) comb. nov., male, Georgia, USA. A, Dorsal habitus; B, Ventral habitus; C, Ventral view of the pygofer; D, Lateral view of the pygofer; E, Dorsal beak.
The species is designated as the type species for its typical morphological characteristics, its wide distribution, and its abundances.
Included species. M. auletes (Germar, 1834) comb. nov., M. resh (Haldeman, 1852) comb. nov., and M. resonans (Walker, 1850) comb. nov.
Etymology. The generic name is a Latin masculine noun meaning “large Tibicen”, having the prefix of giga-. Although Tibicen is treated here as nomen nudum, the name Tibicen has been mainly used for the American species.
Diagnosis. Head including eyes wider than base of mesonotum. Pronotum with lateral margin weakly ampliated, not dentate. Male opercula about as long as wide, overlapped at inner margins. Wings hyaline. Forewing comparatively long and slender (ratio of forewing length to width 2.90–3.20). Forewing radial cell slenderer than ulnar cell 3. Male abdomen about as long as head and thorax together. Male abdominal sternite VIII rounded in posterior view. Timbal cover completely covering timbal. Pygofer inverted curvilinear triangle in ventral view, with distal part broadened, in ventral view. Dorsodistal part of pygofer lower than distal shoulders, with very short and dull dorsal beak, not higher than distal shoulders (Figure 3E). Uncal lobes fused into one, not bifurcate; comparatively short, less than one-third the length of pygofer; simple, without projections (see Diagnosis of Paratibicen for comparison); widely concave at apical part in ventral view; lightly curved inwardly in lateral view. Aedeagus thick but tapering into thinner but truncate apex, usually hidden under uncus. Basal lobe of pygofer sublateral or paramedian, apart from lateral wall of pygofer, curved laterad at apices.
Type species. Cicada dorsata Say, 1825 (type locality: Atchison County, KS; Figure 4), by the present designation.
Figure 4.Ameritibicen dorsatus (Say, 1825) comb. nov., male, Kansas, USA. A, Dorsal habitus; B, Ventral habitus; C, Ventral view of the pygofer; D, Lateral view of the pygofer; E, Dorsal beak.
The species is designated as the type species for its typical morphological characteristics, its moderately wide distribution, and its abundances.
Included species. A. cultriformis (Davis, 1915) comb. nov., A. dealbatus (Davis, 1915) comb. nov., A. dorsatus (Say, 1825) comb. nov., A. figuratus (Walker, 1858) comb. nov., A. pronotalis (Davis, 1938) comb. nov. [with the subspecies of A. pronotalis pronotalis (Davis, 1938) comb. nov. and A. pronotalis walkeri (Metcalf, 1955) comb. nov.], and A. tremulus (Cole, 2008) comb. nov.
Etymology. The generic name is a Latin masculine noun meaning “American Tibicen”, having the prefix of ameri-, derived from “America”. Although Tibicen is treated here as nomen nudum, the name Tibicen has been mainly used for the American species.
Diagnosis. Head including eyes wider than base of mesonotum. Pronotum with lateral margin weakly ampliated, not dentate. Male opercula about as long as wide, overlapped at inner margins. Wings hyaline. Forewing comparatively short and broad in some species but long and slender in other species (ratio of forewing length to width about 2.60–3.20). Forewing radial cell slightly slenderer than ulnar cell 3. Male abdomen about as long as or slightly longer than head and thorax together. Male abdominal sternite VIII V-shaped in posterior view. Timbal cover completely covering timbal. Pygofer oblong in ventral view. Dorsodistal part of pygofer lower than distal shoulders without dorsal beak (Figure 4E). Uncal lobes fused into one, not bifurcate; comparatively short, less than one-third the length of pygofer; simple, without projections (see Diagnosis of Paratibicen for comparison); tapering into narrow and rounded apex in ventral view; curved inwardly in lateral view. Aedeagus comparatively thick but tapering into thin but truncate apex, thinner than Gigatibicen, with apex usually disposed out of apex of uncus. Basal lobe of pygofer paramedian, apart from lateral wall of pygofer, not curved laterad at apices.
Morphological comparisons among related genera
The former members of Neotibicen are distinguished from Lyristes sensu stricto (from the Western Palaearctic area) by the following characters: pygofer thin and long in lateral view (plump and broad in lateral view in Lyristes); dorsodistal part of pygofer, excluding dorsal beak, lower than distal shoulders (dorsodistal part of pygofer triangular in Lyristes); uncus large, about one-third the length of pygofer or more (comparatively small in Lyristes); and uncus simple, without aedeagus-supporting structures (with a pair of cap-shaped structures protruding below uncal lobe, supporting aedeagus, in Lyristes).
The former members of Neotibicen are distinguished from Auritibicen (from eastern Asia) by the following characters: forewing costa slightly convex before node, making radial cell slightly slenderer than ulnar cell 3 (roundly convex before node, making radial cell broad enough to be slightly wider or about as broad as ulnar cell 3 in Auritibicen); and basal lobe of pygofer sublateral or paramedian, apart from lateral wall of pygofer (attached to lateral wall of pygofer in Auritibicen).
Hadoa is distinguished from the former members of Neotibicen by the narrower head (with exceptions), narrowly V-shaped male abdominal sternite VIII (when excluding Paratibicen from the former members of Neotibicen), and differently positioned basal lobes of pygofer (with some exceptions). The complexity or multigrouping of Hadoawill be discussed separately in the forthcoming study.
Paratibicen is distinguished from all the former members of Neotibicen by the following characters: male abdominal sternite VIII narrowly V-shaped in posterior view; uncus with a pair of sharp projections below uncus; dorsodistal part of pygofer not lower than distal shoulders, forming a triangle in dorsal view with long and acute dorsal beak (Figure 2E); basal lobe of pygofer lateral, attached to lateral wall of pygofer. Paratibicen is thought to be close to Hadoa when considering the similarities in the shape of the male abdominal sternite VIII, the position and shape of the basal lobes of pygofer, the shape of the dorsodistal part of the pygofer, and the shape of the uncus in ventral view.
Neotibicen is distinguished from Gigatibicen gen. nov. by the following characters: pygofer barrel-shaped in ventral view (inverted curvilinear triangle in ventral view, with distal part broadened, in Gigatibicen); dorsodistal part of pygofer with long and acute dorsal beak (Figure 1E) [with very short and dull dorsal beak, not higher than distal shoulders (Figure 3E) in Gigatibicen]; uncus long, at least one-third the length of pygofer (less than one-third the length of pygofer in Gigatibicen); uncus widely and convexly rounded or truncate (widely concave in Gigatibicen) at apical part in ventral view; aedeagus with widely truncate apex (tapering into thin apex in Gigatibicen).
Neotibicen is distinguished from Ameritibicen gen. nov. by the following characters: dorsodistal part of pygofer with long and acute dorsal beak (Figure 1E) [without dorsal beak (Figure 4E) in Ameritibicen]; uncus long, at least one-third the length of pygofer (less than one-third the length of pygofer in Ameritibicen); uncus widely and convexly rounded or truncate at apical part (tapering into narrow apex in Ameritibicen) in ventral view; aedeagus with widely truncate apex (tapering into thin apex in Ameritibicen).
Gigatibicen gen. nov. is distinguished from Ameritibicen gen. nov. by the following characters: male abdominal sternite VIII rounded (V-shaped in Ameritibicen) in posterior view; pygofer inverted curvilinear triangle in ventral view, with distal part broadened, in ventral view (oblong in ventral view in Ameritibicen); dorsodistal part of pygofer with short and dull but distinct dorsal beak (Figure 3E) [without distinct dorsal beak (Figure 4E) in Ameritibicen]; uncus widely concave at apical part (tapering into narrow apex in Ameritibicen) in ventral view; basal lobes curved laterad at apices (not so in Ameritibicen).
Key to the males of the species of Neotibicen, Paratibicen, Gigatibicen, and Ameritibicen
1.
Dorsodistal part of pygofer with long and acute dorsal beak (Figure 1 and Figure 2E); aedeagus with widely truncate apex … 2
-
Dorsodistal part of pygofer with or without very short and dull dorsal beak, not higher than distal shoulders, if any (Figure 3 and Figure 4E); aedeagus tapering into thin apex ….. 13
2.
Uncus simple, without projections (Figure 1D); basal lobe of pygofer paramedian, apart from lateral wall of pygofer (Figure 1C); dorsodistal part of pygofer lower than distal shoulders (Figure 1E) ……. 3 (Neotibicen Hill & Moulds, 2015)
-
Uncus with a pair of sharp projections below uncus (Figure 2D); basal lobe of pygofer lateral, attached to lateral wall of pygofer (Figure 2C); dorsodistal part of pygofer not lower than distal shoulders (Figure 2E)……….….….………………………………………………………(Paratibicen gen nov.) Paratibicen similaris (Smith & Grossbeck, 1907) comb. nov.
3.
Abdominal sternite VIII widely rounded in posterior view ……….….….………………………………………………………4
-
Abdominal sternite VIII V-shaped in posterior view ………10
4.
Uncus not widened toward apex but with nearly straight lateral side up to apex in ventral view; pronotal collar mostly light-colored (dull green or ochraceous) ….….….……………5
-
Uncus slightly widened toward apex, with slightly convex lateral side at apex in ventral view; pronotal collar mostly dark-colored (black to fuscous) …………………………………………………………………Neotibicen lyricen (Degeer, 1773)
5.
Body comparatively small (about 27 mm long); abdominal tergite 1 very short, about one-quarter the median length of tergite 2 and largely hidden under cruciform elevation; white pollinosity on inner corner of timbal covers very minimal or absent ……… Neotibicen canicularis (Harris, 1841)
-
Body comparatively large (longer than 31 mm); abdominal tergite 1 longer than one-quarter the median length of tergite 2 and mostly exposed; white pollinosity on inner corner of timbal covers distinct and prominent …………… 6
6.
Transverse black spots or fascia between posterior margin of pronotal inner area and anterior margin of pronotal collar short or indistinct, not extending to sublateral margin of pronotal collar; forewing comparatively broad (ratio of forewing length to width about 2.75–2.90) …………………7
-
Transverse black fascia between posterior margin of pronotal inner area and anterior margin of pronotal collar distinctly extending to sublateral margin of pronotal collar; forewing comparatively slender (ratio of forewing length to width about 3.00) ……………Neotibicen robinsonianus (Davis, 1922)
Abdominal tergite 3 with or without a pair of short transverse fasciae of white pollinosity on latero-anterior margin of tergite 3………………………………………………….….….… 9
-
Abdominal tergite 3 with a pair of transverse thick and long fasciae of white pollinosity along anterior margin of tergite 3, discontinued only on median part ………………………………………………………………Neotbicen latifasciatus(Davis, 1915)
9.
Abdominal tergite 3 with a pair of small but distinct fasciae of white pollinosity on latero-anterior margin of tergite 3 ……………………………………… Neotibicen pruinosus (Say, 1825)
-
Abdominal tergite 3 with or without indistinct white pollinosity on latero-anterior margin of tergite 3 ………………………………………….… Neotibicen winnemanna(Davis, 1912)
10.
Operculum comparatively short, not reaching posterior margin of abdominal sternite III; uncus not widened toward apex but with nearly straight lateral side up to apex in ventral view; pronotal collar mostly light-colored (dull green or ochraceous) …………………………………………….….….…11
-
Operculum long, reaching or extending beyond posterior margin of abdominal sternite IV; uncus slightly widened toward apex, with slightly convex lateral side at apex in ventral view; pronotal collar mostly dark-colored (black to fuscous) ………………….. Neotibicen tibicen (Linnaeus, 1758)
11.
Abdomen mostly black; operculum comparatively short, not reaching posterior margin of abdominal sternite II ……… 12
-
Abdomen mostly ochraceous to brown; operculum comparatively long, well extending beyond posterior margin of abdominal sternite II ……… Neotibicen superbus (Fitch, 1855)
12.
Uncus in similar width until subapex; rostrum comparatively long, reaching anterior margin of hind coxae …………………... Neotibicen davisi (Smith & Grossbeck, 1907)
Pygofer inverted curvilinear triangle in ventral view (Figure 3C), with distal part broadened; dorsodistal part of pygofer with short and dull dorsal beak; uncus widely concave at apical part in ventral view; basal lobe of pygofer curved laterad at apices …………. 14 (Gigatibicen gen. nov.)
-
Pygofer oblong in ventral view (Figure 4C); dorsodistal part of pygofer without dorsal beak; uncus tapering into narrow apex in ventral view; basal lobe of pygofer not curved laterad at apices …………………………… 16 (Ameritibicen gen. nov.)
14.
Brownish marks on mesonotum not prominent on black ground color; forewing basal membrane and hindwing jugum grayish ………………………………………………….. 15
-
Greenish W-shaped mark and other marks on mesonotum well contrasted with black ground color; forewing basal membrane and hindwing jugum orange-colored ……………… Gigatibicen resh (Haldeman, 1852) comb. nov.
15.
Pronotal collar olive-colored; uncus with apex roundly or triangularly concave in ventral view …………………………….……………… Gigatibicen auletes (Germar, 1834) comb. nov.
-
Pronotal collar rust-colored or reddish brown; uncus with apex medially even (in straight line) in ventral view …………….. Gigatibicen resonans (Walker, 1850) comb. nov.
16.
Forewing very slender (ratio of forewing length to width >3.20); forewing basal cell dark-colored; mesonotal marks around submedian sigilla delicate …………………………………………...… Ameritibicen figuratus (Walker, 1858) comb. nov.
-
Forewing comparatively broad (ratio of forewing length to width <3.00); forewing basal cell tinged with green or ochraceous; mesonotal marks around submedian sigilla broad ……………………………………………………………. 17
17.
Basal lobe of uncus short, with its apex far from base of uncus …………………………………………………………………… 18
-
Basal lobe of uncus very long, almost reaching base of uncus … Ameritibicen cultriformis (Davis, 1915) comb. nov.
18.
Head including eyes about as wide as or wider than abdominal tergite 2 including timbal covers; forewing basal cell not surrounded by fuscous fasciae …………………….. 19
-
Head including eyes distinctly narrower than abdominal tergite 2 including timbal covers; forewing basal cell surrounded by fuscous fascia anteriorly ……………………… 20
19.
Head including eyes wider than abdominal tergite 2 including timbal covers; mesonotum and abdomen covered in large areas with white pollinosity ………………………………………… Ameritibicen pronotalis (Davis, 1938) comb. nov.
-
Head including eyes about as wide as abdominal tergite 2 including timbal covers; mesonotum and abdomen covered in much reduced areas with white pollinosity ……………………………… Ameritibicen dealbatus (Davis, 1915) comb. nov.
20.
Timbal cover mostly ochraceous; basal lobes of pygofer very narrowly separated from each other and with blunt apices ………………… Ameritibicen dorsatus (Say, 1825) comb. nov.
-
Timbal cover mostly black; basal lobes of pygofer widely separated from each other and with more or less acute apices ……………….. Ameritibicen tremulus(Cole, 2008) comb. nov.
Acknowledgments
I am indebted to Kathy B.R. Hill and David C. Marshall (University of Connecticut) for access to their cicada collection at the collection facility of the University of Connecticut. I am grateful to David C. Marshall for reading an earlier version of the manuscript, and to Stéphane Puissant (Museum National d’Histoire Naturelle, Paris, France) and an anonymous reviewer for their valuable comments.
Molecular phylogenetics, diversification, and systematics of Tibicen Latreille 1825 and allied cicadas of the tribe Cryptotympanini, with three new genera and emphasis on species from the USA and Canada (Hemiptera: Auchenorrhyncha: Cicadidae)
Description of a new genus, Auritibicen gen. nov., of Cryptotympanini (Hemiptera: Cicadidae) with redescriptions of Auritibicen pekinensis (Haupt, 1924) comb. nov. and Auritibicen slocumi (Chen, 1943) comb. nov. from China and a key to the species of Auritibicen
Morphology, bioacoustics, and ecology of Tibicen neomexicensis sp. n., a new species of cicada from the Sacramento Mountains in New Mexico, U.S.A. (Hemiptera, Cicadidae, Tibicen)
No comments:
Post a Comment