Hyalesthes madeires Remane & Hoch 1986
Creators: name: Freitas, Énio
name: Aguín-Pombo, Dora
Publisher: name: Zenodo
Year: 2021
Subjects: Biodiversity
Taxonomy
Animalia
Arthropoda
Insecta
Hemiptera
Cixiidae
Hyalesthes
Hyalesthes madeires

description: Hyalesthes madeires Remane & Hoch, 1986
Figs 3F, 5D, 11A–M
Hyalesthes madeires Remane & Hoch, 1986: 131–133, 148–149, figs 13–16 (records, description, illustration of male genital structures).
Hyalesthes angustulus – Lindberg 1941: 31 (records, misidentification).
Hyalesthes flavipennis – Lindberg 1961: 54–55, fig. 4 (misidentification).
Hyalesthes madeires – Hoch & Remane 1985: 141–142, 425, figs 65d–76d.
Diagnosis
The aedeagus of the H. angustulus species group to which H. madeires belongs (Hoch & Remane 1985) have a somewhat simpler configuration than other species of the genus. The base of the aedeagus is long, rectangular, obliquely crossed by two long spines caudally directed on the left side. H. madeires differs from other species in this group in the following characters: (1) the two long oblique dorsocaudal thorns converge and sometimes cross distally; (2) on the left lateral side, the upper spine is longer than the ventral spine and extends distally over the ventral margin of the aedeagus, while the ventral thorn is more slender than the dorsal. Externally, H. madeires is very similar to H. portonoves but the vertex in males is shorter and the lateral margins are usually divergent, not parallel. The male genitalia of H. madeires differ also from those in H. portonoves in the thickness and curvature of the thorns; the dorsal thorn is wider than the ventral thorn and both converge, the opposite of H. portonoves.
Material examined
MADEIRA ISLANDS – Câmara de Lobos • 1 ♂; Curral das Freiras; 613 m a.s.l.; 28 May 2001; Fábio Reis leg.; on Bituminaria bituminosa; UMACI • 30 ♂♂, 4 ♀♀; same collection data as for preceding; Énio Freitas leg.; on Globularia salicina; UMACI • 1 ♂; same collection data as for preceding; Fábio Reis leg.; on Hyparrhenia hirta; UMACI • 1 ♂; same collection data as for preceding; 20 Aug. 2001; Énio Freitas leg.; on G. salicina; UMACI • 2 ♂♂; same collection data as for preceding; Fábio Reis leg.; UMACI. – Ponta do Sol • 2 ♂♂, 4 ♀♀; Levada Nova; 250 m a.s.l.; 13 Jul. 2001; Énio Freitas leg.; on G. salicina; UMACI • 3 ♂♂, 7 ♀♀; same collection data as for preceding; Fábio Reis leg.; on G. salicina; UMACI • 2 ♂♂; same collection data as for preceding; Énio Freitas leg.; on Deschampsia argentea; UMACI. – Ribeira Brava • 8 ♂♂, 10 ♀♀; Serra de Água; 700 m a.s.l.; 9 Jul. 2001; on G. salicina; UMACI.
Redescription
BODY MEASUREMENTS (mm). VW: males: 0.23–0.30, 0.27 ± 0.02 (n = 21); females 0.28–0.35, 0.31 ± 0.02 (n = 13). See also Table 1.
COLOURATION. Vertex glowing black; areolar carina pale yellow (Fig. 3F). Triangular shallow pits above frons, genae, lora and clypeus black glowing; marginal carinae of the frons pale yellow; in the widest area, two light yellow to golden brown oval spots at each side of the epistomal suture. Second antennal segment yellow ochre. Carinae of the pronotum pale yellow; posterolateral angles and medial-lateral pits behind vertex dark grey. Mesonotum is glowing black, narrowly brown yellow in the lateral angles behind the tegula and apex. Eyes fulvous; lateral ocelli light yellow to fulvous. Tegula pale yellow. Tegmina hyaline (Fig. 5D); veins yellow ochre with some longitudinal and transverse apical veins, pale brown; the expression of colouration varies. Stigma entirely pale brown and outer margins pale ochre; legs faded brown, lighter on the femorotibial joints, hind tibia yellow, in some specimens with fine brown stripes along the lateral grooves. Tarsi of forelegs, middle legs, and apical tarsus of the hindlegs brown. In males, abdominal segments black and genital segments brown ventrally. Pygofer pale to red orange ventrally. In females, abdominal segments black, red orange medially and narrowly pale on the margins.
HEAD. Vertex between eyes shorter than in H. portonoves; at the posterior margin approximately 1.7 times as long as than wide (Fig. 11B); lateral margins often divergent posteriorly and apex parabola-shaped; the ridge of the carinae tapering towards the apex. Subtriangular lateral pits between the vertex and forehead shallow. Forehead convex. Length of the frons 1.5 times longer than wide medially (Fig. 11A); lateral carinae ridged, tapering along the distal half of postclypeus; medial carina distinct, of variable length, tapering towards the widest part of the forehead. Frontoclypeus conspicuous. Epistomal suture parabola-shaped but not well delimited. Medial ocellus is vestigial or obsolete.
THORAX. Pronotum with three distinct carinae; medial carina short, delimiting anteriorly two small pits laterally; posterior carinae divergent, forming two shallow depressions in the posterolateral margins (Fig. 11B). Mesonotum with five carinae; the intercostal carinae parenthesis-shaped, from faded to obsolete, do not touch the medial and costal carinae but sometimes reach the anterior margins of mesonotum; costal carinae slightly arched caudally, reaching the anterior margin of pronotum and the posterior margin of mesonotum; medial carina of variable length, almost as long as the costal carinae. Tegula developed. Tegmina extend well beyond abdomen apex, nearly 3 times as long as wide and with sporadic bristles along veins (Fig. 3F). Hind tibia with 1 or 2 small lateral spines, the largest medial and the other, often faded or obsolescent, near the femorotibial joints. The distal end of the first metatarsus with 7 spines.
MALE GENITALIA (see also Hoch & Remane 1985). Pygofer lobes subtrapezoidal, about 3/2 wider ventrally than in the widest median half (Fig. 11C, H). The distal part of the anal tube, in lateral view, almost 3 times as wide as the proximal; ventrolateral margin divergent, slightly curved caudally towards the apex and rounded distally. Anal style digitiform, apically slightly globular (Fig. 11F–G). Parameres scythe-like distally, of variable curvature (Fig. 11D); the length of the scythe-like part is half of the paramere length. Aedeagus tubular expanded dorsocaudally in a slightly chitinized projection. Far basally, on the left lateroventral side of the aedeagus base, there is a short, curved thorn of variable size that is caudally directed (Fig. 11I–M). Dorsocaudally from the left side of the aedeagus rise two long oblique thorns directed caudally; these bend strongly to the left side and extend across ¼ of the aedeagus length; they converge and are sometimes crossed distally (Fig. 11K); the dorsal thorn is straight and tapers to the apex; this is longer, wider and thicker than the ventral horn and exceeds it distally as well as the ventral margin of the aedeagus. The ventral thorn is of variable size, being weakly arched medially and distally oblique; the basal half is parallel to the aedeagus base. But there are intraspecific differences, particularly in the length and curvature of the aedeagus thorns. These can overlap or not at the terminal end (Fig.11I–K).
FEMALE GENITALIA. As in H. portonoves (Fig. 8G–H).
Distribution and ecology
Endemic to Madeira Island. Widespread on the northern and southern slopes, from low altitudes up to 700 m. Occurs in thermophilic coastal areas and ravines where Globularia salicina Lam. grows, but also in areas with continuous water supply. Adult specimens were collected from May to August on two endemic plants, G. salicina and Deschampsia argentea Lowe, and on the widespread Bituminaria bituminosa (L.) C.H.Stirt. It was also found on Echium L., Rubus L. and Euphorbia L. (Hoch & Remane 1985; Remane & Hoch 1986).
Remarks
The Hyalesthes angustulus species group comprises five species (see Hoch & Remane 1985). Two of them are endemic to the Canary Islands, H. flavipennis and H. teno Remane & Hoch, 1986, and two others are endemic to the island of Madeira, H. madeires and H. portonoves. The last species, H. angustulus, occurs in the Canary Islands and North Africa.
Horváth (1909) described H. angustulus and H. flavipennis from the Canary Islands but did not provide pictures of the male genitalia. This incomplete description led Lindberg to misidentifications of Madeira specimens. Initially, in 1941 Lindberg reported H. angustulus for Madeira without pictures (Lindberg 1941). Later, in his work on the fauna of Cyprus (Lindberg 1948), he illustrated and compared both species morphologically. He also stated that these two species occurred in the Canary Islands and referred to his previous work (“see Lindberg, 1936”), but did not mention on what material his drawings were based or whether Horváth’s material was available to him. In 1961, based on the same material of 1941 and new specimens collected by him, he mentioned that the specimens of H. angustulus from Madeira identified by him in 1941 were H. flavipennis (Lindberg 1961). Again, he drew what he believed to be the first illustrations of the genitalia of both species (no indication of the origin of the illustrated specimens) (Lindberg 1961: 54, fig. 4a–f). Although the drawings of 1948 and 1961 are both attributed to the same species, they show substantial differences. Only the one that Lindberg (1961) erroneously attributed to H. flavipennis resembles H. madeires in the shape of the aedeagus. Hoch & Remane (1985) studied most of Lindberg’s material from Madeira and identified all specimens as H. madeires, a new species. Together with this species they described H. portonoves, absent in Lindberg’s material.
Hyalesthes madeires is very similar to H. portonoves, but the width of the anterior margin of the vertex is significantly different in the males of both species (F 1,40 = 25.6, p <0.05) but not in females (F 1,24 = 1.81, p = 0.19). On the contrary, the opposite is true for the other characters of the body. The males are similar in all the features, BL (F 1,43 = 0.172, p = 0.68), PW (F 1,42 = 2.11, p = 0.15), WL (F 1,40 = 0.165, p = 0.68), MW (F 1,45 = 0.00, p = 0.93) and ML (F 1,45 = 0.018, p = 0.89) (see Table 1), while the females diverge in all, BL (F 1,24 = 12.02, p <0.01), PW (F 1,30 = 7.27, p <0.05), WL, (F 1,24 = 8.30, p <0.01), MW (F 1,30 = 9.09, p <0.01), except in the length of the mesonotum (F 1,30 = 2.33, p = 0.13). In addition, there is intraspecific variation in the shape and width of the vertex; even within the same population, in some cases, the variation in body size can be large.
description: Published as part of Freitas, Énio & Aguín-Pombo, Dora, 2021, Taxonomy of the Cixiidae (Hemiptera, Fulgoromorpha) from the Madeira archipelago, pp. 1-37 in European Journal of Taxonomy 744 on pages 23-27, DOI: 10.5852/ejt.2021.744.1295, http://zenodo.org/record/4663771