Lacusa yunnanensis Chou & Huang, 1985

Wang, Menglin, Soulier-Perkins, Adeline, Wang, Yinglun & Bourgoin, Thierry, 2016, Taxonomic updates and descriptions of four new Lophopini planthopper species (Hemiptera, Fulgoroidea, Lophopidae) from Yunnan province, South China, European Journal of Taxonomy 185, pp. 1-25 : 16-21

Lacusa yunnanensis Chou & Huang, 1985 stat. rev.

Lacusa yunnanensis Chou & Huang in Chou et al., 1985: 128 .

Lacusa fuscofasciata – Liang 1996: 146. [syn. error]

Note

In 1854, Stål described a new species Elasmoscelis fuscofasciata from “ India orientalis” ( Stål 1854). In 1862, he transferred it to Lacusa Stål, 1862 and just mentioned that the specimen was a male, without providing any description concerning the terminalia. Distant (1906) and Melichar (1915) identified some specimens as being L. fuscofasciata and illustrated their descriptions with drawing of the habitus and a frontal view of the head. In 1985, Chou and Huang (in Chou et al. 1985) described a new species, Lacusa yunnanensis Chou & Huang, 1985 . The authors mentioned that L. yunnanensis closely resembles L. fuscofasciata and differs only by two characters: a branched fuscous transverse band near the outer margin on the tegmina and a meso- and metathorax fuscous versus an unbranched band on the tegmina and a meso- and metathorax slightly brown for L. fuscofasciata . Chou and Huang indicated that the holotype was a female and provided a drawing of the habitus and a frontal view of the head.

In 1996, Liang placed L. yunnanensis as a synonym of L. fuscofasciata . He wrote that after having examined material from different provinces in China and the female holotype of L. yunnanensis , the latter represents part of the colour variability within L. fuscofasciata . In the PhD thesis of Soulier- Perkins (unpublished 1997), some illustrations for the genus Lacusa were provided. As such, drawings of male terminalia were provided for the first time for what she believed to be L. fuscofasciata according to the available description in the literature at this time – the corresponding habitus is here provided in Fig. 86 . In 2000, Liang provided an illustration of male terminalia of L. fuscofasciata , in accordance with Soulier-Perkins (unpublished 1997). In 2014, Xing and Chen described two new species, Lacusa producta Xing & Chen, 2014 and Lacusa digitata Xing & Chen, 2014 . The descriptions were followed by some illustrations: pictures of the specimens and drawings of the male terminalia. They allow an easy recognition of the species when males are available. The authors also provided pictures and drawings of a specimen they believed to be L. fuscofasciata , and the male terminalia in their paper are in accordance with the drawings of Soulier-Perkins (unpublished 1997) and Liang (2000).

We checked the holotype of L. yunnanensis . Our surprise was big when 1) we noticed it was not a female but a male and 2) the drawing provided by Chou et al. (1985) was not the one of the holotype, which could explain the discrepancy between the description of the shape of the band at the tip of the tegmina and its illustration. We provide here the pictures of the holotype and the drawings of the male terminalia that we prepared ( Figs 58–70 ). In Fig. 63 , we can clearly see what the authors described as a branched band near the outer margin of the forewing. This character and the male terminalia are clearly different from what is usually recognised as being L. fuscofasciata , which would lead us to invalidate Liang’s synonymy.

Since all the illustrations provided in the literature for L. fuscofasciata were done from specimens identified as such but not from the holotype, we also borrowed and examined the holotype in order to prepare the male terminalia and illustrate them. A second surprise was waiting for us as the holotype of L. fuscofasciata is not a male but a female ( Figs 74–78 ). However, the pattern at the tip of the tegmina is unbranched and distinct from the branched band observed in L. yunnanensis .

Lacusa species identification is therefore reanalysed here after realising all these facts and data. In the material examined, all the males with an unbranched pattern on the tegmina ( Figs 85–86 ) always showed the same male terminalia as in Soulier-Perkins (unpublished 1997) (genitalia of male with habitus as in Fig. 86 ), Liang (2000) and Xing & Chen (2014). We also examined 4 females (including the holotype of L. fuscofasciata ), presenting an unbranched pattern at the tip of the tegmina. The abdomen in all four specimens presents ventrally a segment VII of a “simple shape”. The posterior margin is slightly produced posteriorly in its median part. Depending on the specimen, this margin is more or less rounded ( Figs 83 , 87–88 ). We now conclude that all the specimens presenting the unbranched pattern on the tegmina belong to the same species: L. fuscofasciata .

From the pictures provided by Xing and Chen for L. producta and L. digitata ( Xing & Chen 2014) , we noticed that the pattern at the tip of their tegmina is comparable to the branched pattern of L. yunnanensis but the three species can be clearly identified from each other by their male terminalia. In the material examined, six females presented a segment VII highly modified as in Figs 80 , 89 and 90 . Moreover, five of them presented a branched pattern at the tip of the tegmina, the sixth female had both tegmina damaged with the tips missing. However, this female was collected in the same place and date as a male identified as L. yunnanensis because of its terminalia. The VII segment illustrated in Fig. 89 belongs to this female and could be considered as illustrating what a female of the species L. yunnanensis looks like. This highly modified segment VII is associated with a branched pattern on the tegmina and as such not identified as L. fuscofasciata .

For all these reasons, L. yunnanensis is reinstated as a valid species and the already known illustrations of the terminalia of L. fuscofasciatia should be considered as valid.

From the examined material we noticed that L. fuscofasciata and L. yunnanensis are not found in the same areas. L. yunnanensis seems to be located in the South-West part of the Yunnan Province with its distribution extending to the north of Thailand. L. fuscofasciata appears to be more broadly distributed from South to North Vietnam and into the Chinese provinces of Guangxi and Guizhou. The holotype of L. fuscofasciata was collected in “ India Orientalis” which is very vague since, at that time, this area corresponded to what actually is known as India, Bangladesh, a part of China and all of Southeast Asia.

Material examined

Elasmoscelis fuscofasciata

Holotype ♀, Ind[ia] or[ientalis], NHRS-GULI 000027588 ( SMNH).

VIETNAM: L. fuscofasciata : 1 ♂, museum Paris, Tonkin, env. immédiats de Lao-Kay, CAPne SAUVEZ, 1908 ( MNHN); 1 ♂, Cochinchine, Tayninh, 15 Nov. 1924, R. Vitalis de Salvaza ( IRScNB); 2 ♂♂, Cat Tien N.P., 11°26’ N 107°26’ E, 6– 16 Jul. 2012, Leg. J. Constant & J. Bresseel, I.G. 32.161 ( IRScNB); 1 ♂, 20 km, N. of Pleiku, 650 m, 9 May 1960, S. Quate collector ( BPBM); 1 ♂, Mt Lang Bian, 1500– 2000 m, 19 May– 8 Jun. 1961, N.R. Spencer collector Bishop ( BPBM); 1 ♂, Lò Gò-Xa Mát, 7 Nov. 2003 ( VNMN).

CHINA: 2 ♀♀, China, Guangxi Province, Lingtian gongshe, 3 Jun. 1984 ( NWAFU); 1 ♀, Guizhou Province, Luodian, 15 Jul. 1982 ( NWAFU).

L. yunnanensis

CHINA: holotype, ♂, Menglun, Xishuangbanna, Yunnan Province, 640 m, 21– 30 Apr. 1974, coll. Io Chou, Feng Yuan & Yinyue Hu ( NWAFU); 1 ♂, Xishuangbanna, Yunnan Province, 17 Apr. 1982, coll. Sumei Wang & Jingruo Zhou ( NWAFU).

THAILAND: 1 ♂, Loei, Na Haeo, 9 Feb. 1999, gallery forest, river, Leg. P. Grootaert ( IRScNB); 1 ♂, 1 ♀, Chiangmai prov.: Fang (Agr. Exp. Station), 600 m, 14 Jun. 1965, P.D. Ashlock collector, Bishop Mus., U.S. -Japan Sci. coop. program ( BPBM); 1 ♂, Chiangdao, 3- 11 Apr. 1958, T. C. Maa ( BPBM).

Unidenfied materials

THAILAND: 1 ♀, Na Haeo, 15- 22 Aug. 2003, Leg. P. Grootaert ( IRScNB).

CHINA: 1 ♀, Jinghong, Xishuangbanna, Yunnan Province, 545 m, 14–16 May 1974, coll. Io Chou & Feng Yuan ( NWAFU); 2 ♀♀, Menglun, Xishuangbanna, Yunnan Province, 24 Apr. 1982, coll. Sumei Wang & Jiangruo Zhou ( NWAFU); 1 ♀, Xiaomengyang, Yunnan Province, 23 Apr. 1982, coll. Jiangruo Chou & Sumei Wang ( NWAFU).

Figures

Figs 79–86. Lacusa Stål, 1862 specimens.79–81. ♀ from China,Yunnan Province. 79. Habitus, dorsal view. 80. Female terminalia, ventral view. 81. Labels. 82–84. ♀ from China, Guangxi Province: L. fuscofasciata (Stål, 1854). 82. Habitus, dorsal view. 83. Female terminalia, ventral view. 84. Labels. 85. ♂ from Tonkin, Lao-Kay; habitus, dorsal view. 86. ♂ from Vietnam, Mt Lang Bian; habitus, dorsal view.

Figs 58–70. Lacusa yunnanensis Chou & Huang, 1985 stat. rev., holotype, ♂. 58. Habitus, dorsal view. 59. Habitus, lateral view. 60. Head, lateral view. 61. Head and thorax, dorsal view. 62. Frontal view. 63. Tegmina. 64. Labels. 65. Male terminalia, lateral view. 66. Male terminalia, ventral view. 67. Phallic complex, ventral view. 68. Anal tube, dorsal view. 69. Gonostylus, lateral view. 70. Phallic complex and tectiform structure, lateral view. Scale bars: 58–63 = 1 mm; 65–70 = 0.2 mm.

Figs 74–78. Lacusa fuscofasciata (Stål, 1854), holotype, ♀. 74. Habitus, dorsal view. 75. Head and thorax, dorsal view. 76. Frons and clypeus, frontal view. 77. Female terminalia, ¾ ventral view. 78. Labels. Scale bars = 1 mm.

Figs 87–90. Female sternites VI and VII. 87. Elasmoscelis fuscofasciata Stål, 1854, holotype, ♀, drawing from dry specimen. 88. ♀ from China, Guangxi Province, drawing from dry specimen. 89. ♀ from Thailand, Chiangmai Province prepared in glycerin. 90. ♀ from Thailand, Na Haeo, drawing from dry specimen.