Flata coromandelica ( Spinola, 1839 )

Peng, Ling-Fei, Fletcher, Murray J. & Zhang, Ya-Lin, 2012, Review of the Oriental planthopper genus Flata Fabricius (Hemiptera: Fulgoroidea: Flatidae) with the description of five new species, Zootaxa 3399, pp. 1-22 : 3-4

1. Flata coromandelica ( Spinola, 1839)

( Fig. 1A , after Melichar)

Poeciloptera coromandelica Spinola, 1839: 440

Flata coromandelica (Spinola) , Atkinson, 1886: 74 Nephesa coromandelica (Spinola) , Melichar, 1902: 106 Flata coromandelica (Spinola) , Medler, 1999: 23

Type. Lectotype 3, (not examined), designated by Medler, 1999: 23, paralectotype Ƥ, (not examined), Coromandel Coast, Reiche, India, Spinola ( MRSN).

This species was not examined by the authors. The following description is translated from Spinola (1839).

Frons longer than wide, upper margin formed inside edge of head, median carina originating at the top and disappearing a little below middle of frons; cells of tegmina small, irregular and dissimilar polygon shaped at base, square or quadrangular shaped to apical portion.

Color. Head, dorsum of thorax and tegmina grass-green; legs and abdomen lighter green, veins deeper; second joint of antennae, outer border of external flap and entire discoidal space of tegmina orange; third joint of antennae and its filament black; spines of tibiae and tarsi black.

Distribution. India; Indonesia.

Remarks. The original description of Poeciloptera coromandelica is simple and uninformative ( Spinola, 1839). Melichar (1902) moved this species to the genus Nephesa , and designated Nephesa alternans Signoret (unpublished) which is Signoret’s collection at Vienna as the type of Nephesa coromandelica and illustrated the specimen. Distant (1906) described Nephesa coromandelica followed Spinola’s original description, but he copied the illustration from Melichar (1902). Additionally, Distant said “This is a rare species in collections and I have not as yet seen a specimen which I could absolutely identify with Spinola’s description. Melichar states that the type is in Signoret’s collection, now contained in the Vienna Museum, so that the figure he gives may be accepted as finally settling the question.” The original specimens of Poeciloptera coromandelica in MRSN were checked by Medler, who designated a male as the lectotype and a female as the paralectotype, and stated that “The male and female in Spinola’s collection at Torino are bona fide syntypes of P. c o ro m a n d e l i c a. In Signoret’s collection at Vienna, the holotype 3 of alternans Signoret (unpublished) was named by Melichar as the type of Nephesa coromandelica . This was a misidentification of Nephesa rosea (Spinola) . Among earlier authors, only Atkinson, 1886, used the correct generic combination of Flata coromandelica ” ( Medler, 1999). Unfortunately, he did not describe and illustrate the lectotype and paralectotype, but from Medler’s paper, we know that this species is existent. So in this paper, we still use Melichar’s illustration of F. coromandelica , however, the specimens in MRSN need to be reexamined and illustrated for further research.

Figures

FIGURE 1. A. Flata coromandelica (Spinola), adult, after Melichar (1902); B. Flata ferrugata Fabricius, male genitalia, left lateral view; C. Flata guttularis (Walker), male genitalia, left lateral view, after Medler (1990); D. Flata stellaris (Walker), male genitalia, left lateral view, after Medler (2006). (a: obtuse projection; b: cephalad process of phallobase; c: hook-like process of phallobase; d: toothed process of theca; e: straight process of theca)