Kirbyana Distant, 1906

Löcker, Birgit, Fletcher, Murray J. & Gurr, Geoff M., 2010, Taxonomic revision of the Australian Eucarpiini (Hemiptera: Fulgoromorpha: Cixiidae) with the description of nine new species, Zootaxa 2425, pp. 1-31 : 14

Genus Kirbyana Distant, 1906

Kirbya Melichar, 1903: 37 . preoccupied by Kirbya Robineau-Desvoidy, 1830 (Diptera) . Kirbyana Distant, 1906: 262 , nom. nov. for Kirbya Melichar 1903 .

Kirbyella Kirkaldy, 1906: 248 , unnecessary nom. nov. for Kirbya Melichar , synonymised by Distant, 1916: 37. Saccharias Kirkaldy, 1907: 125 , synonymised by Fennah, 1980: 239.

Commolenda Distant, 1911: 741 , synonymised by Fennah, 1978: 211.

Morphology. Head: Head including eyes slightly narrower than pronotum. Vertex in profile horizontal, in same line as thorax, meeting frons abruptly rectangulately; subapical carina absent. Frons somewhat longer than broad; median carina present; anterior margin angularly emarginate or transverse; position of maximum width of frons more or less around centre of frontoclypeal suture. Median ocellus absent. Subapical segment of rostrum 2.8 times longer than apical segment.

Thorax: Pronotum very narrow, scarcely half as long as vertex. Mesonotum nearly twice as long as pronotum and vertex together. Hindwing with simple Radius. Hind leg: tibia without lateral spines. Hind leg: tibia with 6 apical teeth (innermost tooth smallest and least sclerotised).

Female genitalia: Ovipositor elongate, orthopteroid, slightly curved upwards, just reaching anal style; 8th sternite medially very long, slightly bent dorsad, posterior margin u-shaped; anal segment rectangular (wider than long) in dorsal view; anal style much longer than wide; 9th tergite without wax plates.

Remarks. The information provided by Tsaur & Hsu (2003) about a median ocellus in Kirbyana is conflicting. In the identification key, the character state “median ocellus present" is used to differentiate Kirbyana from Neocarpia and Eucarpia (the latter two listed under “median ocellus absent”). However, in the generic description of Kirbyana it says “Median ocellus absent”. The same state is also provided in the generic descriptions of Neocarpia and Eucarpia . Other descriptions of Kirbyana or species currently recognised in Kirbyana do not explicitly mention the presence or absence of a median ocellus but it is assumed it would have been mentioned had there been one present, i.e. since some of the descriptions note that the ocelli are located near the eyes and others give detailed descriptions of the shape and colour of the face. The use of this feature by Tsaur and Hsu (2003) in their key to genera is in error since all three genera appear to lack a median ocellus.