Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T01:01:52.003Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A REVIEW OF THE NORTHERN HEMISPHERE APHRODINA (RHYNCHOTA: HOMOPTERA: CICADELLIDAE), WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO THE NEARCTIC FAUNA

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

K. G. A. Hamilton
K. G. A. Hamilton
Affiliation:
Biosystematics Research Institute, Canada Department of Agriculture, Ottawa
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The subtribe Aphrodina of the Aphrodini is an essentially Palaearctic group with eight Nearctic species, of which six are apparently all recently introduced from Europe to North America. The subtribe comprises four genera: Aphrodes Curtis with six species, Planaphrodes n. gen. with 15 species, Stroggylocephalus Flor with four species, and Anoscopus Kirschbaum with nine species.

The genera and species of the Nearctic Region are keyed, and notes are provided on North American literature pertaining to distribution, nomenclature, and the earliest records of the introduced species. The northern hemisphere species are illustrated, and their apparent relationships are discussed.

By type examination, the synonymy of Cicada rustica Fabricius 1775 with Aphrophora salicis (DeGeer) 1773 is confirmed and the following new synonymies are established: Acucephalus circumflexus Provancher 1889 = Anoscopus albiger (Germar) 1821; Acocephalus bifasciatus nigricans Matsumura 1912 = Planaphrodes sahlbergi (Signoret) 1879; and Acucephalus bifasciatus guttatus Matsumura 1912 = Planaphrodes japonica (Dlabola) 1960, as Planaphrodes guttata (Mm.). An index of all usages of trivial names in the Aphrodina is given.

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 107 , Issue 10 , October 1975 , pp. 1009 - 1027
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1975

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

Amyot, C. J. B. 1847. Entomologie francaise. Rhynchotes. Ann. Soc. ent. Fr. (2me ser.) 5: 143–238.Google Scholar
Ball, E. D. 1899. Notes on the Acocephalina (Homoptera-Jassidae). Proc. Iowa Acad. Sci. 7: 64–72.Google Scholar
Beirne, B. P. 1954. Notes on the North American species of Aphrodes (Homoptera: Cicadellidae). Can. Ent. 86: 199–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beirne, B. P. 1956. Leafhoppers (Homoptera: Cicadellidae) of Canada and Alaska. Can. Ent. 88, Suppl. 2. 180 pp.Google Scholar
Blöte, H. C. 1927. Aflevering II. Homoptera (Q XXI) A. Jassidae, Membracidae. Fauna van Nederland. 143 pp.Google Scholar
Bliven, B. P. 1957. Some Californian mirids and leafhoppers, including two new genera and four new species. Occid. Ent. 1: 1–7.Google Scholar
Burmeister, H. C. C. 1835. Schnabelkerfe. Rhynchota. Handbuch der Entomologie 2(1). 396 pp.Google Scholar
Burmeister, H. C. C. 1838. Genera insectorum iconibus illustravit et descriptsit, Rhynchota. 48 pp.Google Scholar
Cantoreanu, M. 1968. Eine neue cycaden-art: Aphrodes dobrogicus n. sp. aus Rumanien. Revue roum. Biol., Ser. Zool. 13(1): 53–55.Google Scholar
China, W. E. 1938. Die Arthropodenfauna von Maderia nach den Ergebnissen der Reise von Prof. Dr. O. Lundblad Juli-August 1935. III. Arkiv. Zool. 30 A (2): 1–68.Google Scholar
China, W. E. 1950. A check list of the British Hemiptera-Homoptera Auchenorrhyncha. Entomologist's Mag. 86: 243–251.Google Scholar
Chiykowski, L. N. 1961. Transmission of clover phyllody virus by Aphrodes bicinctus (Schrank) in North America. Nature 192: 581.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chiykowski, L. N. 1970. Notes on the biology of the leafhopper Aphrodes bicincta (Homoptera: Cicadellidae) in the Ottawa area. Can. Ent. 102: 750–758.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Curtis, J. 1829. A Guide to an Arrangement of British Insects; being a catalogue of all the named species hitherto discovered in Great Britain and Ireland. 256 pp.Google Scholar
Curtis, J. 1833. Characters of some undescribed genera and species indicated in the “Guide to an Arrangement of British Insects”. Ent. Mag. 1: 186–199.Google Scholar
Curtis, J. 1836. Acucephalus. Br. Ent. 13: 620.Google Scholar
Curtis, J. 1837. Aphrodes. Br. Ent. 14: 633.Google Scholar
de Fourcroy, A. F. 1785. Secunda section insectorum. Insecta Hemiptera. Ent. Parisiensis. 231 pp.Google Scholar
DeGeer, C. 1773. Des Cigales. Memoires pour Servir à l'histoire des Insectes 5: 158–228.Google Scholar
Dlabola, J. 1957. Die Zikaden Afghanistans (Homoptera-Auchenorrhyncha) nach den Ergebnissen der von Herrn J. Klapperich in den Jahren 1952–1953 nach Afghanistan unternommenen Expedition. Mitt. münch. ent. Ges. 47: 265–303.Google Scholar
Dlabola, J. 1960. Unika und Typen in der Zikadensammlung G. Horváths (Homoptera, Auchenorrhyncha) II. Acta Zool. 6(3–4): 237–256.Google Scholar
Dlabola, J. 1965. Ergebnisse der zoologischen Forschungen von Dr. Z. Kaszab in der Mongolei. 54. Homoptera-Auchenorrhyncha. Sb. faun. Pracé ent. Odd. nár. Mus. Praze 11: 79–136.Google Scholar
Donovan, E. 1799. Homoptera. Nat. Hist. Br. Insects 8. 88 pp.Google Scholar
Duffield, C. A. W. 1963. The genus Aphrodes (Homoptera: Auchenorhyncha). Trans. Kent Field Club 1(4): 155–160.Google Scholar
Downes, W. 1924. New records of Hemiptera from British Columbia. Proc. B.C. ent. Soc. 21: 27–33.Google Scholar
Edwards, J. 1888. A synopsis of British Homoptera-Cicadina. Part II. Trans. ent. Soc. Lond.: 13–108.Google Scholar
Edwards, J. 1908. On some British Homoptera hitherto undescribed or recorded. Entomologist's mon. Mag. 44: 56–59.Google Scholar
Edwards, J. 1920. New or little known species of British Cicadina. Entomologist's mon. Mag. 56: 53–58.Google Scholar
Emel'yanov, A. F. 1964. Cicadellidae (trans. 1967). In Bei-Bienko, G. Ya. et al. , Keys to insects of the European USSR. 1. Apterygota, Palaeoptera, Hemimetabola, pp. 456–551.Google Scholar
Evans, J. W. 1966. The leafhoppers and froghoppers of Australia and New Zealand (Homoptera: Cicadelloidea and Cercopoidea). Mem. Aust. Mus. 12. 347 pp.Google Scholar
Fabricius, J. C. 1775. Ryngota. Systema Entomologiae. 816 pp.Google Scholar
Fabricius, J. C. 1787. Ryngota. Mantissa Insectorum. 382 pp.Google Scholar
Fabricius, J. C. 1794. Ryngota. Entomologia Systematica Emandata et Aucta 4. 472 pp.Google Scholar
Fabricius, J. C. 1798. Ryngota. Os Rostor: Vagina articulata. Entomologiae Systematicae Suppl.: 511–524.Google Scholar
Fallén, C. F. 1806. Fòrsòk till de Svenska Cicad-Arternas uppstàllning och beskrifning. K. svenska Vetensk-Akad. Handl. 27: 6–43.Google Scholar
Ferrari, P. M. 1882. Cicadaria Agri Ligustici. Annali Mus. civ. Stor. nat. Giacomo Doria 18: 75–165.Google Scholar
Fieber, F. X. 1872. Katalog der Europäischen Cicadinen, nach Originalen mit Benützung der neuesten Literatur: 1–19.Google Scholar
Flor, G. 1861. Die Rhynchoten Livlands in systematischer Folge beschrieben. Zweiter Theil: Rhynchota gulaerostria Zett. (Homoptera Auct). Cicadina und Psyllodea. Arch. Naturk. Liv-Est-u. Kurlands 4(2). 567 pp.Google Scholar
Germar, E. F. 1821. Bermerkungen über einige Gattungen der Cicadarien. Mag. Ent. 4: 1–106.Google Scholar
Germar, E. F. 1833. Conspectus generum Cicadariarum. Rev. Ent. Silbermann 1: 174–184.Google Scholar
Gistel, J. 1837. Systematische Uebersicht der Wanzen und Cicaden der Umgebung von München. Faunus 1(2): 98–111.Google Scholar
Gmelin, J. F. 1789. Insecta Hemiptera. Caroli a Linné Systema Naturae 1(4): 1517–2224.Google Scholar
Goeze, J. A. E. 1778. Hemiptera. Entomologische Beytrage zu des Ritter Linne Zwolften Ausgabe des Natursystems 2. 352 pp.Google Scholar
Hamilton, K. G. A. 1975. Review of the tribal classification of the leafhopper subfamily Aphrodinae (Deltocephalinae of authors) of the Holarctic region (Rhynchota: Homoptera: Cicadellidae). Can. Ent. 107: 477–498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hardy, J. 1850. Descriptions of some new British insects. Trans. Tyneside Nat. Club 1: 416–431.Google Scholar
Haupt, H. 1935. Unterordnung: Gleichflügler, Homoptera. Die Tierwelt Mittleuropas 4(3): 115–221.Google Scholar
Herrich-Schäffer, G. A. W. 1834. Typhlocyba rosae, Typhlocyba citrinella … Deutschlands Insecten 124: 1–15.Google Scholar
Herrich-Schäffer, G. A. W. 1835. Homoptera. Nomenclator entomologicus. Verzeichniss der europäischen Insecten; zur Erleichterung des Tauschverkehrs mit Preisen versehen. 1: 1–116.Google Scholar
Horváth, G. 1897. Homoptera nova ex Hungaria. Termés Zettud. Füz. 20: 620–643.Google Scholar
Horváth, G. 1909. Hemiptères recueillis par M. Th. Becker aux Iles Canaries. Annls. hist.-nat. Mus. natn. hung. 7: 289–301.Google Scholar
Hummel, A. D. 1825. I. Corrections et additions aux Essais Entomologiques, Nos. II et III. Essais Ent. 1(4): 1–5.Google Scholar
Kato, M. 1933. Homoptera. Three-colour illustrated insects of Japan, 4: 1–109.Google Scholar
Kirkaldy, G. W. 1901. On the nomenclature of the genera of the Rhynchota, Heteroptera, and Auchenorrhynchous Homoptera. Entomologist 34: 176–179.Google Scholar
Kirschbaum, C. L. 1858. Der Gegend von Wiesbaden gesammelten Arten der Gattung Jassus. Jb. nassau. Ver. Naturk. 13: 355–358.Google Scholar
Kirschbaum, C. L. 1868. Die Cicadinen der Gegend von Wiesbaden und Frankfurt … Jb. nassau. Ver. Naturk. 21–22: 1–202.Google Scholar
Kusnezov, V. 1929. Beitrag zur Kenntnis der transbaikalischen Homopteren Fauna. Wien. ent. Ztg 46: 157–185.Google Scholar
Latreille, P. A. 1807. Genera Crustaceorum et Insectorum secundum ordinem naturalem in familias disposita, iconibus exemplisque plurimis explicata, 3. 258 pp.Google Scholar
Lawson, P. B. 1920. The Cicadellidae of Kansas. Kans. Univ. Sci. Bull. 12. 306 pp.Google Scholar
LeQuesne, W. J. 1964. Some taxonomic changes and additions in the British Cicadellidae (Hemiptera) including a new species and subspecies. Proc. R. ent. Soc. Lond. (B) 33: 73–82.Google Scholar
LeQuesne, W. J. 1965. The establishment of the relative status of sympatric forms, with special reference to cases among the Hemiptera. Zool. Beitr. (N.F.) 2: 117–128.Google Scholar
Lethierry, L. F. 1876. Homopteres nouveaux d'Europe et des contrées voisines. Ann. Soc. ent. Belg. 19: 1–13.Google Scholar
Lindberg, H. 1924. Anteckningar om Östfennoskandiens Cicadina. Acta Soc. Fauna Flora fenn. 56: 3–49.Google Scholar
Lindberg, H. 1954. Hemiptera Insularum Canariensium. Systematik, Okologie und Verbreitung der Kanarischen Heteropteren Cicadinen. Commentat. biol. 14(1). 304 pp.Google Scholar
Linnaeus, C. 1758. II. Hemiptera. Systema Naturae 10: 434–439.Google Scholar
Linnaeus, C. 1761. II. Hemiptera. Cicada. Fauna Suecica sistens animalia Sueciae regni. 578 pp.Google Scholar
Logvinenko, V. N. 1965. New forms of leafhoppers from the Crimea [in russian]. Dopov. Akad. Nauk ukr. RSR 11: 1526–1530.Google Scholar
Logvinenko, V. N. 1966. New species of leafhoppers (Homoptera, Auchenorrhyncha) from the Caucasus and Moldavia [in russian]. Ént. Obozr. 45(2): 401–410.Google Scholar
Logvinenko, V. N. 1967. A new species of the genus Aphrodes Curtis (Auchenorrhyncha, Cicadellidae) of the Caucasus [in russian]. Věst. zool. 1(4): 69–71.Google Scholar
Logvinenko, V. N. 1971. New species of cicadina (Auchenorrhyncha, Cicadellidae) from the Caucasus [in russian]. Zool. Zh. 50(4): 589–592.Google Scholar
Marshall, T. A. 1866. An essay towards a knowledge of British Homoptera. Entomologist's mon. Mag. 2: 177–181, 197–199.Google Scholar
Matsumura, S. 1912. Die Acocephalinen und Bythoscopinen Japans. J. Sapporo agric. Coll. 4(7): 279–325.Google Scholar
Medler, J. T. 1942. The leafhoppers of Minnesota. Homoptera: Cicadellidae. Tech. Bull. Minn. agric. Exp. Stn, No. 155. 196 pp.Google Scholar
Melichar, L. 1902. Einige neue Homopteren. Wien. ent. Ztg 21: 75–80.Google Scholar
Metcalf, Z. P. 1963. General catalogue of the Homoptera. Fascicle VI: Cicadelloidea. Part 8: Aphrodidae. U.S.D.A. agr. Res. Serv., Washington, D.C.268 pp.Google Scholar
Mitjaev, I. D. 1967. New and little-known species of cicadina (Homoptera: Auchenorrhyncha) from East Kazakhstan [in russian]. Ént. Obozr. 46(3): 712–723.Google Scholar
Nast, J. 1972. Palaearctic Auchenorrhyncha (Homoptera), an annotated check list. Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw. 550 pp.Google Scholar
Nielson, M. W. 1968. The leafhopper vectors of phytopathogenic viruses (Homoptera, Cicadellidae) — taxonomy, biology and virus transmission. Tech. Bull. U.S. Dep. Agric. 1382. 386 pp.Google Scholar
Oshanin, V. T. 1912. Katalog der paläarktischen Hemipteren (Heteroptera, Homoptera-Auchenorhyncha und Psylloideae). 187 pp.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oman, P. W. 1949. The nearctic leafhoppers (Homoptera: Cicadellidae). A generic classification and check list. Mem. Wash. ent. Soc. 3. 253 pp.Google Scholar
Osborn, H. 1905. Jassidae of New York state. Bull. Ohio State Univ. 9(24): 498–545.Google Scholar
Panzer, G. W. F. 1799. Fulgora virescens, Fulgora obliqua … Faunae Insectorum Germanicae, 61: 12–19.Google Scholar
Prohaska, K. 1923. Hemiptera, Homoptera. Zikaden, Zirpen. Beitrag zur Kenntnis der Hemipteren Kärntens. Carinthia 112–113: 32–101.Google Scholar
Provancher, L. 1889. Petite Faune Entomologique du Canada, précédée d'un traité élémentaire d'entomologie. 3: 207–292.Google Scholar
Puton, A. 1875. Homoptera. Sect. I. Auchenorhyncha. Catalogue des Hémiptères (Hétéroptères, Cicadines et Psyllides) d'Europe et du Bassin de la Mediterranée, 2nd ed. 165 pp.Google Scholar
Puton, A. 1886. Homoptera. Sect. I. Auchenorhyncha. Catalogue des Hémiptères (Hétéroptères, Cicadines et Psyllides) d'Europe et du Bassin de la Mediterranée, 3rd ed. 100 pp.Google Scholar
Puton, A. 1899. Homoptera. Sect. I. Auchenorhyncha. Catalogue des Hémiptères (Hétéroptères, Cicadines et Psyllides) d'Europe et du Bassin de la Mediterranée, 4th ed. 121 pp.Google Scholar
Rambur, J. P. 1840. Les Homoptères Latreille. Faune Entomologique de l'Andalousie 5: 177–304.Google Scholar
Rey, C. 1891. Observations sur quelques Hémiptères-Homoptères et descriptions d'espèces nouvelles ou peu connues. Rev. Ent. 10: 240–256.Google Scholar
Rey, C. 1894. Remarques en passant. Échange 10: 29–30.Google Scholar
Ribaut, H. 1952. Homoptères Auchénorhynques. II (Jassidae). Faune Fr. 57. 474 pp.Google Scholar
Sahlberg, J. R. 1871. Ofversigt af Finlands och den Skandinaviska halfons Cicadariae. Notis. Sällsk. Faun. Fl. fenn. Förh. (n.s.) 9(12). 506 pp.Google Scholar
Sáringer, von G. 1959. Zwei neue Aphrodes-Arten aus dem Karpatenbecken (Homoptera, Auchenorrhyncha). Annls. hist.-nat. Mus. hung. (n.s.) 51: 425–428.Google Scholar
Say, T. 1825. Descriptions of new Hemipterous insects collected in the expedition to the Rocky Mountains … J. Acad. nat. Sci. Philad. 4: 307–345.Google Scholar
Scott, J. 1873. On certain British Hemiptera-Homoptera. Revision of the genus Acocephalus and descriptions of two species not hitherto recorded as British. Entomologist's mon. Mag. 9: 264–266.Google Scholar
Scott, J. 1874. On certain British Hemiptera-Homoptera. Revision of the genus Strongylocephalus, and description of a new species. Entomologist's mon. Mag. 11: 120–123.Google Scholar
Scott, J. 1875. On certain British Hemiptera-Homoptera. Revision of the genus Athysanus, and descriptions of species. Entomologist's mon. Mag. 12: 93–100.Google Scholar
Signoret, V. 1879. Essai sur les Jassides Stål, Fieb. et plus particulièrement sur les Acocéphalides Puton. Ire partie. Annl. Soc. ent. France 9(5): 47–92.Google Scholar
Signoret, V. 1880. Essai sur les Jassides Stål, Fieb. et plus particulièrement sur les Acocéphalides Puton. Ire partie. Annl. Soc. ent. France 10(5): 347–366.Google Scholar
Stål, C. 1864. Hemiptera nonnulla nova vel minus cognita. Annls Soc. ent. Fr. 4(4): 47–68.Google Scholar
Stål, C. 1869. Hemiptera Fabriciana. Fabricianska Hemipterarter, efter de i Köpenhamn och Kiel förvarade typexemplaren granskade och beskrifne. 2. K. svenska Vetenskakad. Handl. 8(1). 130 pp.Google Scholar
Turton, W. 1802. Order II, Hemiptera. Translated from Gmelin's last edition of Systema Naturae, by Sir Charles Linné. Amended and enlarged by the improvements and discoveries of later naturalists and societies, 2: 1–719.Google Scholar
Uhler, P. R. 1884. Order VI — Hemiptera. Standard Natural History 2: 204–296.Google Scholar
Van Duzee, E. P. 1894. A catalogue of the described Jassoidea of North America. Trans. Am. ent. Soc. 21: 245–317.Google Scholar
Van Duzee, E. P. 1912. Synonymy of the Provancher collection of Hemiptera. Can. Ent. 44: 317–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
von Schrank, F. von P. 1776. Cicada. Beytr. Naturgesch. 137 pp.Google Scholar
von Schrank, F. von P. 1781. Ordo II. Hemiptera. Enumeration Insectorum Austriae Indigenorum. 548 pp.Google Scholar
von Schrank, F. von P. 1801. Fauna Boica. Durchgedachte Geschichte der in Baiern einheimischen und zahmen Thiere, 2. 374 pp.Google Scholar
Wagner, W. 1937. Zur synonymie de deutschen Aphrodes-Arten (Hem., Hom.). Verh. Ver. naturw. Heimatforsch. 26: 65–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wagner, W. 1939. Die Zikaden des Mainzer Beckens. Zugleich eine revision der Kirschbaumschen Arten aus der umgebung von Wiesbaden. Jb. nassau. Ver. Naturk. 86: 77–212.Google Scholar
Wagner, W. 1955. Neue Mitteleuropäische Zikaden und Blattflöhe (Homoptera). Ent. Mitt. Hamburg 6: 163–194.Google Scholar
Walker, F. 1851. List of the specimens of Homopterous insects in the collection of the British Museum 3: 637–907.Google Scholar
Westwood, J. O. 1840. Synopsis of the genera of the British Insects. In An introduction to the Modern Classification of Insects 2: 1–158.Google Scholar
Zetterstedt, J. W. 1828. Ordo III, Hemiptera. Fauna Insectorum Lapponica 1. 563 pp.Google Scholar
Zetterstedt, J. W. 1840. Ordo III, Hemiptera. Insecta Lapponica 1. 314 pp.Google Scholar