Rhodopsalta microdora ( Hudson, (Hudson, 1936)

Bator, John, Marshall, David C, Hill, Kathy B R, Cooley, John R, Leston, Adam & Simon, Chris, 2022, Phylogeography of the endemic red-tailed cicadas of New Zealand (Hemiptera: Cicadidae: Rhodopsalta), and molecular, morphological and bioacoustical confirmation of the existence of Hudson’s Rhodopsalta microdora, Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 195 (4), pp. 1219-1244 : 1238

Rhodopsalta microdora ( Hudson,

1936)

(Supporting Information, Figs S4 , S 7 , S 8 )

Rhodopsalta microdora was described by G. V. Hudson as Melampsalta microdora from two female specimens collected at Cape Kidnappers on the NI (see Supporting Information, Supplementary Materials); the smaller of these two syntypes was designated as the lectotype by Fleming & Ordish (1966). No male specimens were discussed by Hudson, who referred to the species as a diminutive version of Kikihia scutellaris Walker, 1850 without mentioning R. cruentata . Dugdale (1972) omitted mention of R. microdora while listing R. cruentata and R. leptomera for his description of genus Rhodopsalta , and Larivière et al. (2010) discussed the uncertainty of the status of R. microdora . In many NZ cicadas, females are substantially different in appearance from males of the same species, and they are generally paler, often lacking well-defined aspects of species-specific coloration commonly observed in males. This has probably contributed to the neglect of Hudson’s taxon.

We examined a large series of Rhodopsalta specimens from Cape Kidnappers, the type location of R. microdora , collected after the description of R. microdora and kept at the National Museum of New Zealand Te Papa Tongariro (also discussed by Larivière et al., 2010). Rhodopsalta microdora and R. cruentata , as here defined, are broadly sympatric in that region (but not R. leptomera ). Our findings suggest that Hudson’s selection of a female syntype series might be attributable to clearer differentiation from R. cruentata in that sex. The male Rhodopsalta specimens from Cape Kidnappers range from larger ones tending to possess a prominent silvery midline stripe, as in R. cruentata , to smaller males with often subtler or nearly absent stripes, as described for Hudson’s female R. microdora specimens, but there is no large break in size to separate the males of the two species, and the silvery pubescence varies considerably throughout the series, perhaps owing to wear. In contrast, the nine female specimens group into two distinct clusters (see Supporting Information, Supplementary Materials), the smaller one with dimensions accommodating those of the R. microdora lectotype and paralectotype, which are also lodged at Te Papa. We provide photographs of the R. microdora lectotype (Supporting Information, Fig. S7 ), in addition to a comparison of R. cruentata and R. microdora females from the Cape Kidnappers series (Supporting Information, Fig. S8 ). Therefore, we are confident that the smaller-bodied Rhodopsalta species that we are calling R. microdora , which we have collected from Ocean Beach south of Cape Kidnappers, is indeed Hudson’s species.

We note that the path taken by the Endeavour on its first voyage also helps to show that the R. cruentata lectotype specimen is unlikely to belong to the species we have identified as R. microdora . According to Banks’s journal ( Banks, 1896), on the NI the Endeavour anchored at Poverty Bay, Anaura Bay, Tolaga Bay, Mercury Bay, the Thames River tidal portion and the Bay of Islands. Endeavour then sailed along the northernmost point of NI and down the west coast without stopping until arriving at the Marlborough Sounds (SI) and anchoring at Ship Cove in Queen Charlotte Sound. Although Endeavour circumnavigated the SI, it did so without stopping until it returned to the Marlborough Sounds and anchored in Low Neck Bay, D’Urville Island. Based on our records ( Fig. 2 ), none of these locations is within the range of the taxon we have identified as R. microdora . We have not surveyed D’Urville Island, but this location lies ~ 50 km north of the nearest known populations of R. microdora , and it was visited by Banks in late March, which is late in the season for that species, based on our records.

Rhodopsalta microdora inhabits drier scrub environments along the eastern sides of NI and SI. We have often found this species singing on matagouri shrubs ( Discaria toumatou Raoul ).

Figures

Figure 2. Maps of Simon-lab field records of the three Rhodopsalta species.

Figure 4. Bayesian phylogenetic tree based on 2284 bp of concatenated genes (5′ and 3′ cox1 and EF1α). Six partition subsets were used (by gene and codon position for each gene, respectively). Branch support values represent Bayesian posterior probabilities and RAXML bootstrap percentages from 1000 non-parametric pseudoreplicates. The number of parsimony-informative sites is 300. Grey boxes show mean divergence time estimates and 95% confidence intervals from the *BEAST analysis.

Figure 7. cox1 chronogram from the *BEAST multispecies coalescent analysis, showing divergence times for intraspecific haplotype clades as bars indicating the 95% highest posterior density intervals. Taxa with asterisks were missing cox1, and their positions within the species clades are determined by the EF1α gene tree.

Figure 8. Lectotype of Tettigonia cruentata Fabricius, 1775, type species of genus Rhodopsalta Dugdale, 1972, with attached labels shown. Scale bars: 1 cm. Photographs by B. Price.