Pegapsaltria, Moulds & Marshall, 2022
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.5174.5.1 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:BDB90B5C-C3DD-464D-AA7F-1635009297A6 |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6987055 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/F496969A-3AE5-4C53-A4C9-406721E7EA0B |
taxon LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:act:F496969A-3AE5-4C53-A4C9-406721E7EA0B |
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
scientific name |
Pegapsaltria |
status |
gen. nov. |
Pegapsaltria View in CoL gen. n.
urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act:F496969A-3AE5-4C53-A4C9-406721E7EA0B
( Figs 6 View FIGURES 1–7 , 33–35 View FIGURES 33–34 View FIGURE 35 )
Type species. Pegapsaltria lutea View in CoL sp. n., here designated.
Included species. Monotypic, Pegapsaltria lutea View in CoL sp. n.
Etymology. Derived from Pegasus , the mythical winged horse of the Muses, those Greek goddesses of poetic inspiration, and referring to the horse-head shape of the theca of the type species. Feminine.
Distribution ( Fig. 33 View FIGURES 33–34 ). West Kimberleys, Western Australia.
Diagnosis ( Figs 6 View FIGURES 1–7 , 34 View FIGURES 33–34 ). Head including eyes about as wide as mesonotum; supra-antennal plate meeting or nearly meeting eye; postclypeus broadly rounded transversely across ventral midline, in lateral profile angulate between ‘top’ and ‘sides’. Thorax: pronotum in dorsal view parallel-sided or widening towards posterior; pronotal collar width at dorsal midline much less than diameter of eyes; paranota weakly ampliate, lacking a mid lateral tooth; cruciform elevation wider than long; epimeral lobe not reaching operculum. Forewings hyaline; with 8 apical cells; subapical cells absent; ulnar cell 3 angled to radial cell; basal cell long and narrow; costal vein (C) clearly higher than R+Sc; costa parallel-sided to node, costa of male gently and evenly curved; pterostigma present; vein CuA only weakly bowed so that cubital cell no larger than medial cell; veins M and CuA meeting basal cell with their stems completely fused as one; vein CuA 1 divided by crossvein m-cu so that proximal portion shortest; distance between cross veins r and r-m about equal to distance between r-m and m; wing outer margin developed for its total length, never reduced to be contiguous with ambient vein. Hindwings with 6 apical cells; no infuscation on ambient vein; width of 1st cubital cell at distal end more than twice that of 2nd cubital cell; anal lobe broad with vein 3A curved distally, separated from wing margin. Foreleg femoral primary spine erect. Male opercula in part reaching margin of tympanal cavity, directed towards distomedial margin of tympanal cavity, apically rounded, clearly not meeting, not encompassing base of meracanthus, clearly raised above level of tympanal cavity on its outer half or so; base (remnant of epimeron 3) not swollen or bubble-like. Male abdomen very long, about one third longer than head and thorax combined; basally as wide as thorax, thereafter tapering to apex; tergites in cross-section with sides straight or weakly convex, epipleurites reflexed ventrally from junction with tergites; tergite 1 narrow along dorsal midline; tergite 2–7 all similar in width along dorsal midline; sternite I convex and considerable protruding in lateral view; sternites IV–VII in cross-section flat. Timbals with six long ribs all similar and spanning the full height of the timbal membrane; basal spur very small; anterior part of timbal devoid of ribs; posterior margin of timbal cavity ridged on lower half or so.
Male genitalia ( Figs 34a–d View FIGURES 33–34 ). Pygofer in ventral view widest on lower half; distal shoulders not developed; upper lobes flat but with slightly thickened margin, well developed, dominating pygofer between basal lobes and dorsal beak; basal lobes undivided, small, tending to be broadly rounded in lateral view; dorsal beak present and a part of chitinized pygofer, well developed. Uncus small, short, flattened, broadly rounded, more or less duck-bill shaped. Claspers well developed, large, dominant, claw-like, broad dorsally, restraining aedeagus. Aedeagus with basal plate in lateral view gently arched; in dorsal view distally abruptly widened to a broadly rounded apex; basal portion of basal plate directed forwards away from thecal shaft; ventral rib completely fused with basal plate; junction between theca and basal plate rigid, without a ‘hinge’, without an obvious junction between the two; thecal shaft curved in a gentle arc, the apical quarter or so turned through 120°; pseudoparameres absent; distal theca substantially fleshy with vesica partially extruded, retractable, gonopore at apex; flabellum absent; conjunctival claws absent.
Female with sternite VIII deeply incised in a broad V shape; abdominal segment 9 about as long as wide (excluding dorsal beak); dorsal beak with a developed apical spine (visible in dorsal view).
Distinguishing features and relationships. Small cicadas. Distinguished from all other genera in having, in combination, forewing veins M and CuA meeting the basal cell with their stems completely fused as one; the forewings lacking infuscations, the paranota lacking a small mid lateral tooth, the male abdomen very long, about half as long again than head and thorax combined, and the male genitalia lacking pseudoparameres.
A molecular phylogeny by Marshall et al. (2016, fig. 2) places Pegapsaltria gen. n. (as “flying yellow fairy”) in a weakly supported clade with Birrima , Yoyetta , Plerapsalta and Kalarko gen. n., which in turn is sister to Marteena plus Auscala .
The male aedeagus bears close similarities with that of Yoyetta and Birrima , particularly in the structure of the theca and the partially extruded vesica along its upper margin. But it differs significantly from both those genera in lacking pseudoparameres. The only other Cicadettini known to lack pseudoparameres are the distantly related Australian endemic genus Samaecicada and the Palaearctic species Melampsalta musiva ( Germar, 1830) and its congeners ( Popple & Emery 2010, Dugdale 1972, Stéphane Puissant pers. comm.). It is remarkable that Pegapsaltria gen. n. lacks pseudoparameres when other features of the aedeagus are so similar to its close relatives Yoyetta and Birrima , both of which have long, well developed pseudoparameres. Pseudoparameres in Yoyetta and Birrima originate basally on the theca as long filiform structures and their position should be indicative of the placement of pseudoparameres in Pegapsaltria , but no indication of them could be found. The loss of pseudoparameres in Pegapsaltria , Samaecicada and Melampsalta , three genera distantly related (see Marshall et al. 2016), implies independent loss of these structures in genera that are otherwise not unusually different from their closest relatives.
Pegapsaltria gen. n. differs from Kalarko gen. n., Plerapsalta , Marteena , and Auscala in having no mid lateral tooth on the paranota, a long basal plate and, more significantly, an aedeagus that is not trifid.
No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.