Open Access
Translator Disclaimer
1 September 2013 Notes on the Leafhopper Genus Pediopsis (Hemiptera: Cicadellidae: Macropsinae) with Description of One New Species from China
Ren-Huai Dai, Hu Li
Author Affiliations +

A new leafhopper species Pediopsis ningxiaensis Dai & Li sp. nov. from Ningxia Province of China is described and illustrated, an updated checklist of the genus Pediopsis from the world is provided, along with a key for identification to distinguish males of species of the genus in different geographic regions.

The leafhopper genus Pediopsis, which belongs to the subfamily Macropsinae, was established by Burmeister (1838), as a subgenus of Bythoscopus. Subsequently Kirkaldy (1903) raised it to genus level and designated Jassus tiliae Germar, 1831 as the type species. Later, Anufriev (1971) described 1 new species from Russia. Hamilton (1980) in his world revision of the Macropsinae recorded 13 species of this genus, including 10 new combinations of species from the Australian region and 1 new species from China (Taiwan island). Tishechkin (1997) described 1 new species from Malaysia and later, Cai et al. (2005) described 1 new species from China (Shandong). So far, a total of 15 species of the genus Pediopsis are recorded from the world.

In the present paper, Pediopsis ningxiaensis Dai & Li sp. nov. is described and illustrated, and an updated checklist and distribution of the genus Pediopsis from the world is provided, along with a key to distinguish different geographic regions species of the genus.


Our classification system and morphological terminology follow Hamilton (1980). The type specimen of the new species is deposited in the Institute of Entomology, Guizhou University, Guiyang, China (GUGC). Color photos of the adult habitus of the Pediopsis species are shown in the supplementary material online in Florida Entomologist 96(3) (2013) at entomologist/browse).


  • Type species: Jassus tiliae Germar, 1831, designated by Kirkaldy subsequently, 1903: 214.

  • Bythoscopus (Pediopsis) Burmeister, 1838: 11. Pediopsis, promoted to status of generic level by Kirkaldy, 1903: 214.

  • Diagnosis

  • Body stout. Head narrower than pronotum. Crown short. Face flat or slightly inflated in profile, wider than long, lora relatively large. Pronotum broad, declivous, striations on surface dense, distinct, and oblique. Scutellum broad, triangular. Hind tibia with 7–8 macrosetae on AD row, occasionally 9. Forewings with 3 anteapical cells.

  • Male pygofer broad, apex acute or blunt, without spines or processes. Subgenital plates slender, usually with marginal setae. Dorsal connectives strongly developed, slender, varying in different species. Aedeagus tubular, shaft slender, bent dorsally, gonopore usually apical. Styles narrower, slender, tips upturned, stem generally with a triangular protrusion on ventral margin.

  • Distribution

  • Europe, Russia, China, Malaysia, New Guinea and Australia.


    Four species of the genus Pediopsis were recorded in New Guinea and 6 in Australia, but P. filicis (Evans, 1936) is excluded from the present key because currently it is known only by the female sex.

    1. Dorsal portion of dorsal connective bifurcated to 2 slender branches (New Guinea) 2

    —. Dorsal portion of dorsal connective not bifurcated to 2 slender branches, branches stout if present (Australia) 5

    2. Dorsal connective with 2 branches closer with each other 3

    —. Dorsal connective with 2 branches distant with each other 4

    3. Dorsal connective with dorsal branch pointed dorsally (Fig. 1) P. eliptaminensis (Evans)

    —. Dorsal connective with dorsal branch pointed ventrally (Fig. 4) P. kassamensis (Evans)

    4. Dorsal connective with dorsal branch longer than ventral one (Fig. 3) P. completa (Evans)

    —. Dorsal connective with dorsal branch shorter than ventral one (Fig. 2) P. flavobrunnea (Evans)

    5. Aedeagal shaft with pair of processes 6

    —. Aedeagal shaft without any process 7

    6. Aedeagal processes subapical (Fig. 9) P. nikitini (Evans)

    —. Aedeagal processes apical (Fig. 5) P. lutea (Evans)

    7. Dorsal connective with slender dorsal portion, tip tapered to pointed 8

    —. Dorsal connective with stout dorsal portion, tip dorsoventrally elongate (Fig. 6) P. emmae (Evans)

    8. Dorsal connective with additional small process at middle, dorsal end twisted ventrocaudally (Fig. 8) P. mandurae (Evans)

    —. Dorsal connective without additional small process at middle, dorsal end twisted dorsally (Fig. 7). P. thymele (Kirkaldy)

    Figs. 1–12.

    Aedeagus and dorsal connective of Pediopsis species, lateral view and partly ventral view. 1. P. eliptaminensis (Evans); 2. P. flavobrunnea (Evans); 3. P. completa (Evans); 4. P. kassamensis (Evans); 5. P. lutea (Evans); 6. P. emmae (Evans); 7. P. thymele (Kirkaldy); 8. P. mandurae (Evans); 9. P. nikitini (Evans); 10. P. tiliae (Germar); 11. P. cudraniae Cai & Wang; 12. P. malayana Tishechkin. (1–4, 6. After Evans 1971; 5, 7–10. After Hamilton 1980; 11. After Cai et al. 2005; 12. After Tishechkin 1997)



    Currently 3 species of the genus Pediopsis are known in China including the new species described here, 2 in Europe (including 1 in Russia) and 1 in Malaysia. Pediopsis femorata Hamilton, 1980, which occurs in Taiwan, is also known only by the female sex, and therefore is not included in the present key.

    1. Dorsal connective with dorsal portion pointed ventrally 2

    —. Dorsal connective with dorsal portion pointed dorsally 4

    2. Dorsal part of dorsal connective tapered to apex, indistinctly bifurcated (Fig. 11) P. cudraniae Cai & Wang

    —. Dorsal part of dorsal connective slightly tumid subapically, not bifurcated 3

    3. Aedeagal shaft slender, dorsal connective inconspicuously inflated near dorsal end (Figs. 32 and 34) P. kurentsovi Anufriev

    —. Aedeagal shaft stout, dorsal connective inconspicuously inflated near dorsal end (Figs. 29 and 31) Pediopsis ningxiaensis Dai & Li sp. nov.

    4. In lateral view, aedeagal shaft strongly sinuated, apical 1/3 of shaft angled as right angle, then directed caudally (Fig. 8) (Fig. 12) P. malayana Tishechkin

    —. In lateral view, aedeagal shaft slightly sinuated, not angled (Fig. 10) P. tiliae (Germar)

    Figs. 13–21.

    Adults habitus of Pediopsis species, dorsal, lateral and facial view. 13–15. P. femorata Hamilton, female, (photos provided by R. L. Blinn, NCSU); 16–18. P. ningxiaensis sp. nov., male; 19–21. P. kurentsovi Anufriev. Note: This plate is shown in color in Suppl. Figs. 13–22 online in Florida Entomologist 96(3) (2013) at


    Checklist and Distributions of Species of the Genus Pediopsis

  • P. completa (Evans) Distribution. New Guinea (Wau).

  • P. cudraniae Cai & Wang Distribution: China (Shandong Province).

  • P. eliptaminensis (Evans) Distribution: New Guinea (Eliptamin Valley).

  • P. emmae (Evans) Distribution: Australia (New South Wales).

  • P. flavobrunnea (Evans) Distribution: New Guinea (Daulo Pass, Simbai, Chimbu Valley).

  • P. kassamensis (Evans) Distribution: New Guinea (Kassam, Wau).

  • P. kurentsovi Anufriev Distribution: Russia (Maritime Province).

  • P. lutea (Evans) Distribution: Western Australia (Bruce Rock).

  • P. malayana Tishechkin Distribution: Malaysia (Fahang).

  • P. mandurae (Evans) Distribution: Western Australia (Mandurah).

  • P. ningxiaensis Dai & Li Distribution: China (Ningxia).

  • P. nikitini (Evans) Distribution: Australia (New South Wales).

  • P. thymele (Kirkaldy) Distribution: Australia (Queensland).

  • P. tiliae (Germar) Distribution: Widespread in Europe, European part of Russia, North America (records from Tishechkin 1997).

  • P. filicis Evans. Distribution: Australia (Victoria).

  • P. femorata Hamilton. Distribution: China (Taiwan).

  • Pediopsis ningxiaensis Dai & Li sp. nov. (Figs. 16–18, 22–31)

  • Measurement

  • Length including tegmen :♂, 5.1 mm.

  • Description

  • Body (Figs. 16–18) yellowish. Head and face yellowish brown, ocelli and clypellus dark brown, eyes dark red. Pronotum yellowish, striations on surface dark brown. Scutellum orange, with dark brown maculae except in bilateral corners and around coalescent suture between mesonotum and scutellum. Forewings brown, spotted with brown maculae. Legs yellowish with brown mottles.

    Head (Fig. 16) including eyes clearly narrower than pronotum, produced forward. Face (Fig. 18) across eyes wider than long, relatively smooth; frons with longitudinal carina; distance between ocelli nearly 5 times as wide as that between ocellus and adjacent eye; clypellus small, tapered. Pronotum (Fig. 16) broad, 2.2 times as long as wide, with median longitudinal carina medially, posterior margin slightly concave, striations on surface dense, oblique. Scutellum (Fig. 16) triangular, coalescent suture between mesonotum and scutellum distinct, bisegmented. Forewings (Fig. 17) transparent, with 3 anteapical cells. Hind tibia with 9 macroseta on AD row. 2nd tergal apodemes (Fig. 22) wider, parallel margined, tips truncate, relatively closer; 2nd sternal apodemes (Fig. 23) broader basally, tapering, tips sharpened or slightly blunt.

    Male Genitalia. Pygofer (Fig. 24) broader, nearly square, surface with few small setae, unarmed. Subgenital plates (Fig. 25) slender with marginal setae, of equidistance to ventral margin of pygofer. Styles (Fig. 26) slender, lateral margins with few fine setae, ventral margin with triangular protrusion near middle, tips narrowed and truncate. Connective (Figs. 27 and 28) stout, with finger-like protrusion in middle, both lateral arms short, bent to dorsum. Aedeagus (Figs. 29 and 30) tubular, dorsally twisted, aedeagal shaft nearly of same width from base to rounded apex; gonopore apical. Dorsal connectives (Fig. 31) narrow, apex slightly inflated, then sharpened.

    Female. Unknown.

  • Type Material

  • HOLOTYPE: ♂, CHINA: Ningxia Province, Liupanshan, 2050 m, 29-VII-2008, collected by Song Qiong-Zhang (GUGC).

  • Distribution

  • China (Ningxia Province).

  • Etymology

  • The new species name refers to the type locality, Ningxia.

  • Discussion

  • Pediopsis ningxiaensis Dai & Li sp. nov. is similar to P. femorata in having the same number of hind tibial macrosetae, but differs in body form and coloration. It also resembles P. tiliae (Germar, 1831) and P. kurentsovi Anufriev, 1971, but can be distinguished from P. tiliae by the aedeagal shaft being much stouter than in the latter, dorsal connectives not projecting beyond caudal margin of pygofer and directed ventrally (directed dorsally in P. tiliae) with subapex definitely inflated and tip sharpened; and lacks sinuated aedeagal shaft. Pediopsis ningxiaensis can be distinguished from P. kurentsovi in that P. ningxiaensis has a stouter aedeagal shaft, conspicuously inflated dorsal connective near dorsal end, and less brown marked forewings and body coloration.

  • Pediopsis femorata was described based on the female by Hamilton (1980), later it was transferred to subgenus Pediopsoides (Pediopsoides) Matsumura, 1912 and the male individual was described and illustrated by Huang & Viraktamath (1993). The external morphological characters and original description of femorata distal lateral lobes of frontoclypeus not expanded; striations on pronotum are distinct and oblique; forewings with 3 anteapical cells are consistent with those of the genus Pediopsis.

  • Figs. 22–34.

    Male genitalia of Pediopsis species. 22–31. P. ningxiaensis sp. nov. 32–34. P. kurentsovi Anufriev. 22. Apodemes of male 2nd abdominal tergite; 23. Apodemes of male 2nd abdominal sternite; 24. Male pygofer side, lateral view; 25. Subgenital plate, lateral view; 26. Style, dorsal view; 27. Connective, dorsal view; 28. Connective, lateral view; 29, 32. Aedeagus, lateral view; 30, 33. Aedeagus, ventral view; 31, 34. Dorsal connective, lateral view.



    We are very grateful to Prof. K. G. A. Hamilton (Eastern Cereal and Oilseed Research Centre, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada) for kind guidance and suggestions, R. L. Blinn (NCSU Insect Museum, Department of Entomology, Raleigh, North Carolina, America) and Dr. K. W. Huang (Department of Zoology, National Museum of Natural Science, Taichung, Taiwan) for providing photographs of the holotype of Pediopsis femorata Hamilton, 1980, Dr. Stuart McKamey (Systematic Entomology Laboratory, National Museum of Natural History, Washington, DC, America), Prof. Murray J. Fletcher (Orange Agricultural Institute, Industry & Investment, New South Wales, Australia), Ms. Linda Semeraro (Department of Primary Industries, Victoria, Australia) and Dr. Dmitri Yu. Tishechkin (Department of Entomology, Faculty of Biology, M. V. Lomonosov Moscow State University, Vorobyevy Gory, Moscow, Rus- sia) for their help, Prof. G. A. Anufriev for offering valuable literature, and Ms. Qiongzhang Song (GUGC) for providing specimens. The project was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (31000952).



    G. A. Anufriev 1971. New and little-known leafhoppers (Homoptera, Auchenorrhyncha) from the Far East of the U.S.S.R. and neighboring countries. Entomol. Obozr. 50(1): 95–116. [in Russian with English summary] Google Scholar


    G. A. Anufriev 1976. Notes on the genus Psammotettix HPT. With descriptions of two new species from Siberia and the Far East (Homoptera, Cicadellidae). Reichenbachia 16(9): 129–134. Google Scholar


    H. C. C. Burmeister 1838. Genera Insectorum Iconibus Illustravit et Descripsit, Rhynchota. 48 pp. Google Scholar


    P. Cai , Z. Q. Wang , C. H. Liu , and J. H. Yan 2005. A new species of leafhopper injurious to Tricuspid Cudrania (Homoptera: Cicadellidae: Macropsinae). Canye Kexue, 31(2): 206–207. [in Chinese with English summary] Google Scholar


    J. W. Evans 1936. The Bythoscopidae of Australia (Homoptera, Jassoidea). Papers and Proc. R. Soc. Tasmania, 1935, 61–83. Google Scholar


    J. W. Evans 1966. The leafhoppers and froghoppers of Australia and New Zealand (Homoptera: Cicadelloidea and Cercopoidea). Australian Mus. Mem. 12: 1–347. Google Scholar


    J. W. Evans 1971. Leafhoppers from New Guinea and Australia belonging to the subfamilies Macropsinae and Agalliinae with notes on the position of Nionia Ball and Magnentius Pruthi (Homoptera: Cicadelloidea). Pacific Insects 13(2): 343–360. Google Scholar


    E. F. Germar 1831. Cercopis mactata Germ. Tettigonia concinna Germ. Augsti Ahrensii Fauna Insectorum Europae. 14: 11–15. Google Scholar


    K. G. A. Hamilton 1980. Contributions to the study of the world Macropsini (Rhynchota: Homoptera: Cicadellidae). Canadian Entomol. 112: 875–932. Google Scholar


    K. W. Huang , and C. A. Viraktamath 1993. The Macropsinae leafhoppers (Homoptera: Cicadellidae) of Taiwan. Chinese J. Entomol. 13: 361–373. Google Scholar


    G. W. Kirkaldy 1903. On the nomenclature of the genera of the Rhynchota; Heteroptera, and Auchenorrhynchous Homoptera - Part V. The Entomologist 36: 213–216. Google Scholar


    G. W. Kirkaldy 1907. Leafhoppers supplement (Hemiptera). Bull. Hawaiian Sugar Planters Assoc. Div. Entomol. 3: 1–20. Google Scholar


    S. Matsumura 1912. Die Acocephalinen und Bythoscopinen Japans. J. College Agric., Tohoku Imperial University, Sapporo, Japan 4(7): 279–325. Google Scholar


    D. Yu. Tishechkin 1997. A new species of the genus Pediopsis (Homoptera: Cicadinea: Cicadellidae: Macropsinae) from Malaysia. Russian Entomol. J. 6(3–4): 29–30. Google Scholar
    Ren-Huai Dai and Hu Li "Notes on the Leafhopper Genus Pediopsis (Hemiptera: Cicadellidae: Macropsinae) with Description of One New Species from China," Florida Entomologist 96(3), 957-963, (1 September 2013).
    Published: 1 September 2013
    7 PAGES

    Get copyright permission
    Back to Top