Acanthoventris gastracanthophora ( Berg, 1879 )

Sanborn, Allen F., 2024, The cicadas (Hemiptera: Cicadidae) of Uruguay with a key to known species and comments on species of the genus Acanthoventris Ruschel including the resurrection of a previously synonymized species, Zootaxa 5399 (4), pp. 301-326 : 305-307

Acanthoventris gastracanthophora ( Berg, 1879) , revised status, n. comb., new record

Fidicina gastracanthophora Berg 1879: 138 (Between Buenos Aires and Entre Rios, Argentina).

F[idicina] drewseni Distant 1906: 92 , equals Fidicina gastracanthophora Berg (error).

F[idicina] drewseni Distant 1914: 19 (in part), equals Fidicina gastracanthophora Berg (error).

[Dorisia] drewseni Delétang 1919: 65 .

Fidicina drewseni Kato 1932: 158 (in part).

Dorisia drewseni Torres 1945: 4 , 9–10 (in part).

Dorisia drewseni Torres 1946: 8 , plate 2.

Dorisiana drewseni Ruffinelli 1970: 4 (in part).

Dorisiana drewseni Martinelli & Zucchi 1997: 135–141 (in part).

Dorisiana drewseni Martinelli 2004: 518–521 , 525–526, 529–531 (in part).

Dorisiana drewseni Bolcatto, Medrano, & De Santis 2006: 7–8 , 10.

Dorisiana drewseni De Santis, Urtega, & Bolcatto 2006: 1 .

Dorisiana drewseni De Santis, Medrano, Sanborn, & Bolcatto 2007: 4 , 11, 14, 17, 19.

Dorisia (sic) drewseni De Santis, Medrano, Sanborn, & Bolcatto 2007: 11–12 .

Dorisiana drewseni Krause, Brown, Bellosi, & Genise 2008: 412 , 414, 416.

Remarks. Ruschel et al. (2023) included Fidicina gastracanthophora as a junior synonym of Acanthoventris drewseni when the genus Acanthoventris was formed citing the synonymy of Distant (1906). However, the distribution of Fidicina gastracanthophora as listed in Berg (1879) (between Buenos Aires and Entre Rios), references to Acanthoventris drewseni in Argentina ( Torres 1945; Metcalf 1963a; De Santis et al. 2007; Sanborn 2013; Sanborn & Heath 2014) (Buenos Aires, Corrientes, and Santa Fe Provinces), and the verified distribution of Acanthoventris drewseni given in Ruschel et al. (2023) (Goiás and Minas Gerias, Brazil) suggest the taxa are geographically separated and do not represent the same species.

A single syntype specimen of Berg (1879) was located in the Museo Argentino de Ciencias Naturales “Bernardino Rivadavia”, Buenos Aires, Argentina (P.R. Mulieri, personal communication) but no additional information is available. No syntype was found in the Museo de La Plata Entomological Collection, Argentina ( Marino de Remes Lenicov et al. 2015), or the Museum f̧r Naturkunde, Berlin (personal observation) with some of the other Berg type specimens.Although the syntype specimen could not be studied directly, the author had access to several specimens from Argentina that encompasses the originally reported range of the species. These specimens were used to make comparisons to the detailed description and images of Acanthoventris drewseni in Ruschel et al. (2023) and to produce the comprehensive description of Fidicina gastracanthophora below.

Measurements of Fidicina gastracanthophora provided in Berg (1879) are body length 22 mm, fore wing length 28 mm, and pronotum width 9 mm. Torres (1945) listed body length of 19–25 mm and fore wing length of 25–30 mm for Argentine examples. Ruschel et al. (2023) give body length of 16.05–17.54 mm, length of fore wing 24.42–27.46 mm, and pronotum width of 7.29–7.92 mm for Acanthoventris drewseni (including measurements from a syntype male). These data suggest the Argentine population previously assigned to Fidicina gastracanthophora is larger than Acanthoventris drewseni .

Using the morphological data presented with the analyses of two proposed species provided below, there are statistically significant differences (P<0.0001–P<0.0210) in all eleven of the measurements determined for each of the proposed species with ten of the parameters differing with P<0.01. The proposed Fidicina gastracanthophora differ statistically from Acanthoventris drewseni in body length (combined males and females) (t =5.0499, d.f.=13, P<0.0002), male body length (t =3.8027, d.f.=6, P<0.0089), female body length (t =3.3182, d.f.=5, P<0.0210), fore wing length (t =4.8858, d.f.=12, P<0.0004), fore wing width (t =7.9609, d.f.=12, P<0.0001), head length (t =14.2393, d.f.=12, P<0.0001), head width (t =10.8173, d.f.=12, P<0.0001), pronotum length (t =10.6759, d.f.=12, P<0.0001), pronotum width (t =12.2724, d.f.=12, P<0.0001), mesonotum length (t =11.3427, d.f.=12, P<0.0064), and mesonotum width (t =12.6953, d.f.=12, P<0.0001). These statistical differences are highly significant even with the limited sample size available for the Acanthoventris drewseni measurements.

There are also differences in the morphology of the species that are confirmed with the available specimens. Ruschel et al. (2023) describe a dark castaneous band covering the longitudinal and transverse grooves of the postclypeus as one of the diagnostic features of Acanthoventris drewseni . Berg (1879) and Torres (1945) describe the postclypeus of Fidicina gastracanthophora as ochraceous (“flavidus”). Additional differences in the description of Fidicina gastracanthophora include testaceous-olivaceous coloration, green pronotum lacking piceous markings, the ochraceous-greenish cruciform elevation lacking piceous markings, the dorsal abdominal tergites piceous with reddish margins, and the greenish-ochraceous venter identified by Berg (1879) for his species. Torres (1945) also lists the rostrum reaching the posterior coxae rather than abdominal sternite III and the dorsal pronotum lacking a piceous fascia as reported for Acanthoventris drewseni by Ruschel et al. (2023).

Additional morphological and color differences in the Argentine specimens from Acanthoventris drewseni as described by Ruschel et al. (2023) include: body coloration greenish dorsal head and thorax marked with piceous, piceous and castaneous dorsal abdomen, and ochraceous venter marked with piceous rather than the castaneous ground color marked with piceous and tawny, the ground color proximal and piceous distal scape rather than the castaneous scape, piceous rather than castaneous pedicel and antennal flagella, ventral postclypeus almost rectangular, ochraceous without piceous markings rather than the ovoid with dark castaneous central sulcus and transverse grooves, anteclypeus ochraceous with piceous lateral margins rather than dark castaneous with tawny carina marked with castaneous, medial lorum castaneous and lateral lorum ochraceous rather than being completely piceous, pronotum lacking longitudinal piceous band on dorsal midline, pronotal collar the same color as disk rather than contrasting coloration, basisternum 3 protuberances not well developed with transverse rather than angled posterior margin, operculum triangular with rounded apex covering tympanal cavity with apex reaching the auditory capsule, gutter not present near apex, legs ochraceous, abdominal segments with parallel sides at base angling to terminus beginning at segment 4, abdomen length not as long as length between anterior postclypeus and posterior cruciform elevation, timbal cover with rounded apex, the dorsal crest of the uncus is erect rather than curving posteriorly, and the posterior margin of female abdominal segment 9 is S-shaped rather than primarily perpendicular to the long body axis.

Based on the statistically significant differences in body measurements and the differences in morphology and coloration between specimens considered to be Fidicina gastracanthophora and Acanthoventris drewseni , Fidicina gastracanthophora Berg, 1879 revised status is removed from junior synonymy with Acanthoventris drewseni ( Stål, 1854) and is transferred to the genus Acanthoventris to become Acanthoventris gastracanthophora ( Berg, 1879) revised status, n. comb.

Ruffinelli (1970) reported specimens of Acanthoventris drewseni from Soriano, San José, Montivideo, Artigas and Rivera. The first three localities are all found in the southwest of the country in close proximity to Argentina, Soriano is across the Uruguay River, and more than 350 km south of the collection site in Corrientes, Argentina, near the middle of the range of the examined specimens. Based on the proximity to specimens of what is consider to be Acanthoventris gastracanthophora ( Berg, 1879) revised status, n. comb., these specimens reported by Ruffinelli (1970) are considered to be Acanthoventris gastracanthophora ( Berg, 1879) revised status, n. comb. and the species is added to the fauna of Uruguay.

The specimens of Acanthoventris drewseni listed in Ruffinelli (1970) from Artigas and Rivera are found in what appears to be the same floristic habitat as the other records for Acanthoventris gastracanthophora ( Berg, 1879) revised status, n. comb. in Uruguay on the opposite side of the Quaraí River from Brazil. They are also about 160 km and 100 km, respectively from Tacuarembó where an examined specimen is confirmed to be Acanthoventris gastracanthophora ( Berg, 1879) revised status, n. comb. was collected and there is a similar riparian environment. Although there is the possibility these specimens represent a westward expansion of Acanthoventris charrua Ruschel (in Ruschel et al.), 2023, these specimens are also considered to be Acanthoventris gastracanthophora ( Berg, 1879) revised status, n. comb. until such time as specimens can be examined and the identification verified or corrected.

Acanthoventris gastracanthophora ( Berg, 1879) revised status, n. comb. is redescribed completely below to facilitate distinguishing and identifying the species in the future.

Distribution. The species was reported previously only from Argentina ( Metcalf 1963a). The range is expanded here to include Uruguay.

Material examined for new record for Uruguay. “Uruguay / Tacuarembó / Dorisia / bonaerensis / Berg // Dorisiana drewseni ( Stål, 1854) / A. Sanborn det. VIII/2001 ” one female ( AFSC) .