Search for: All records

A recent paper by Ruschel & Campos (2019) on “leaf-winged” cicadas proposed a significant reorganization of the cicada tribe Hemidictyini Distant, 1905g, including synonymization of the monogeneric tribe Lacetasini Moulds & Marshall, 2018 following the results of a cladistic parsimony analysis of morphological characters. In this study, we reconsider and revise the morphological analysis of Ruschel & Campos and obtain new genetic data for Hemidictya. We find that their study suffers from a limited taxon sample, inappropriate outgroup selection, and misinterpretation of genitalic characters (uncus vs. claspers). We show that Hemidictyini sensu Ruschel & Campos includes members of multiple tribes and subfamilies, and we conclude that some of the taxonomic transfers by Ruschel & Campos are not supported. The two most similar and leaf-like cicadas, Hemidictya Burmeister, 1835 (South America) and Hovana Distant, 1905g (Madagascar), are probably not closely related but rather an excellent example of convergent evolution. Lacetasini is not a junior synonym of the Hemidictyini but a distinct part of the Tettigomyiinae Distant, 1905g as originally classified. We return or transfer the genera Lacetas Karsch, 1890, Iruana Distant, 1905g, Bafutalna Boulard, 1993, and Murphyalna Boulard, 2012 to the Lacetasini. With the transfer of all genera of Iruanina Boulard, 1993 and Bafutalnina Boulard, 1993 to Lacetasini and with Lacetas transferred to the Iruanina, Lacetasini n. syn. becomes a subjective junior synonym of Iruanini rev. stat. in the Tettigomyiinae. We assign Hovana to Hovanini n. tribe in the Tettigomyiinae and Sapantanga Distant, 1905g to Sapantangini n. tribe in the Tibicininae Distant, 1905b. We propose that Hemidictyini sensu novo contains only the genus Hemidictya and we assign the tribe to Tibicininae with a revised diagnosis. 

The cicadas (Hemiptera: Cicadidae) related to tribe Cicadini exhibit some of the most remarkable phenotypes in the family, with many genera possessing striking colour patterns and unusual morphological features. This largely Asian group of 13 tribes has proven challenging for cicada taxonomists, in part because of likely convergent evolution or losses of these phenotypes. We present the first focused molecular phylogeny of this clade, including ~60 described genera. The genetic dataset contains 839 ingroup-informative sites (out of 2575) from mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase subunit I, nuclear elongation factor-1 α, and nuclear acetyltransferase. We use Bayesian and maximum likelihood trees to test recent changes in tribe- and subtribe-level classification, and we reconstruct ancestral character states for potentially convergent traits influencing tribe descriptions. We use fossil and molecular clock calibrations to estimate the temporal and geographic context of the radiation. The tribes Gaeanini, Leptopsaltriini, Platypleurini, Psithyristriini, and Tosenini appear polyphyletic and in need of revision, in part because of convergent evolution of opaque wings and multiple convergent gains or losses of abdominal tubercles. Kalabita Moulton, 1923 is transferred from Platypleurini to Leptopsaltriini. Vittagaeana gen. nov. is established for Vittagaeana paviei comb. nov. and Vittagaeana dives comb. nov., formerly in Tosena. Sinosenini syn. nov. is synonymised with Dundubiina. Ayuthiini trib. nov. is established with two new subtribes for Ayuthia Distant, 1919 and Distantalna Boulard, 2009, formerly in Tosenini. For the earliest split in the tree, one common ancestor appears to have been Indian + Asian in geographic distribution and the other Asian. We estimate that the radiation began in the middle Cenozoic Era, possibly as recently as the early Miocene. The recent and steady pattern of diversification suggests that refinement of tribe diagnoses will prove challenging.