R. L. Usinger.
Protepiptera, a New Genus of Achilidæ from Baltic Amber (Hemiptera, Fulgoroidea).
Psyche 46:65-67, 1939.

Full text (searchable PDF, 268K)
Durable link: http://psyche.entclub.org/46/46-065.html

The following unprocessed text is extracted from the PDF file, and is likely to be both incomplete and full of errors. Please consult the PDF file for the complete article.

19391 Protepiptera from Baltic Amber 65
PROTEPIPTERA, A NEW GENUS OF ACHILIDX
FROM BALTIC AMBER (HEMIPTERA,
FULGOROIDEA)
California Academy of Sciences
Through the kindness of Mr. Walter W. Kawecki, a former resident of the free city of Danzig but now in San Francisco, I have been able to examine a collection of in- sects preserved in Baltic Amber. The material was col- lected along the shores of the Baltic Sea between Danzig and Konigsberg and the pieces of amber were polished by an amber worker in Danzig.
The collection contains a single specimen of a moderate- sized Fulgorid immediately suggestive of our familiar forest-dwelling genus Epiptera Metcalf (1922) (= Eli- diptera Auct. part., nec Spinola, = Helicopters Am. & Serv.).
The specimen is beautifully preserved with the wings of the left side conveniently spread. Every detail of the under surface can be seen as readily as on a living speci- men. The upper surface, however, is completely covered by a white cloud, as in many amber specimens. The apex of the front wing has been sharply broken off as if cut with a knife.
Evidently the family Achilidae has not previously been recorded from Baltic Amber. Scudder (1890) has doubt- fully referred a single specimen (Elidiptera regularis Scudder)
to this group from his Florissant material of Miocene age. However, the nine species of Cixius described from Baltic Amber by Germar and Berendt (1856) need to be reexamined with a view to their possible inclusion in the Achilidse. This family, or subfamily as it was then called, was not proposed until ten years later when Still (1866) monographed the group in his usual masterly way. StAl's classification has been confirmed and expanded by Muir's detailed genitalic studies which indicate that the extension of the claval vein to the apex of the clavus is a really signifi- Pu&e 46:65-67 (1939). hup Ytpsychu einclub orgH(i/46-065 html



================================================================================

66 Psyche [ June-Sept.
cant character in separating the Achilids from their nearest allies (Muir, 1930). The specimen before me may be placed with certainty in the Achilidse as distinguished from the Cixiidse in which the claval vein enters the commissure be- fore the apex. Unfortunately details of claval venation are not sufficiently clear in the figures of Germar and Berendt although it would appear that C. vitreus is a Cixiid while testudinarius is an Achilid. In size the present specimen is closest to C. sieboldii but, as the under side is invisible in that species, while the upper surface of the specimen before me is obscured, a direct comparison is impossible. Under the circumstances it seems best to propose a new specific name in order to avoid any possible confusion as to the identity of the genotype.
Protepiptera n. gen.
Similar to Epiptera Metcalf but with the vertex located distinctly in front of the eyes, its margins carinate and a longitudinal carina at middle ; posterior margin of vertex concavely arcuate, subangulately so at middle, strongly, acutely produced postero-laterally and thus reaching or slightly surpassing level of anterior margins of eyes. Frons with its sides evenly arcuate, not abruptly narrowed be- tween the eyes. Pronotum roundly projecting anteriorly between the compound eyes, the raised, carinate portion scarcely more than twice as broad as long. Genotype: Protepiptera kaweckii, n. sp.
Protepiptera kaweckii n. sp.
A large, unicolorous species with very broad head, long pronotum, unicolorous frons, and very long rostrum. Head three-fourths as wide, eyes included, as pronotum; vertex just twice as broad behind as long on median line; frons and clypeus together subelliptical, broadest a little before middle and attenuated posteriorly, about two and one-half times as long as greatest width, with a distinct longitudinal carina at middle. Rostrum reaching almost to tip of abdomen or, more precisely, to middle of subgenital plate. Antennae rather prominent, over half as long as greatest width of frons; second segment over twice as long as first, the flagellum quite short, scarcely longer than main



================================================================================

19391 Protepiptera from Baltic Amber 67
portion of antennae. Ocelli conspicuous as in Epiptera. Posterior margin of pronotum moderately, subangulately emarginate, the anterior and posterior margins laterally subparallel. Mesonotum one-fifth longer than width of head including eyes; disk obscured but with suggestions of three longitudinal carinse. Legs more or less as in typical Epiptera, the front tibiae one-sixth longer than femora. Pos- terior tibiae two and one-half times as long as femora, each with a strong lateral tooth just beyond middle. Apices of hind tibiae and first two tarsal segments beneath, each with a row of stout spines which are longest at the sides. First tarsal segment distinctly longer than second and third to- gether. Venation on basal two-thirds of front wings pre- cisely as in Epiptera, the wing broken off obliquely from be- yond the apex of clavus to last of accessory subcostal branches.
Color rather uniformly dark brown, at least on the under side, with the under sides of the wings lighter and the ven- tral surface of the abdomen almost black. Length 9.5 mm., greatest width approximately 3.5 mm. This species will not fit in any of Kirkaldy's Australian genera (1906). It might fit the old definition of Elidiptera but certainly does not belong with the genotype, callosa
Spinola, of that genus (see Muir, 1922). As noted else- where, it approaches Metcalf's recent genus Epiptera (1922) but differs in its anteriorly located vertex with a median longitudinal carina, non-constricted basal portion of frons between the eyes, very long pronotum, and some- what longer tibiae.
LITERATURE CITED
Germar, E. F. and G. C. Berendt. 1856. Die irn Bernstein befindlichen Organischen Reste der Vorwelt by G. C. Berendt, 1845-1856. Zweiter Band, I Abtheilung, Hemipteren und Orthopteren, pp. 12-16, Tab. I, figs. 18-25.
Kirkaldy, G. W. 1906. Leaf-hoppers and their natural enemies (Pt. IX. Leaf-hoppers. Herniptera). Rep. H. S. P. A. Exp. Sta., Div. Ent., 1 :417-418.
Metcalf, Z. P. 1922. On the genus Elidiptera. Can. Ent., 54: 263-264. Muir, F. 1922.
On the genus Elidiptera Spin. Can Ent., 54: 61. 1930. On the classification of the Fulgoroidea. Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., (10) 6: 461-478.
Scudder, S. H. 1890. The tertiary insects of North America. Rept. U. S. Geological Survey, 13: 297.
Stgl, C. 1866. Herniptera Africana. Holmiae. 4: 181-186.



================================================================================