JungleDragon is a nature and wildlife community for photographers, travellers and anyone who loves nature. We're genuine, free, ad-free and beautiful.

Join

Tapajosa sp. - Cigarrinha-Tapajosa (Melichar, 1924a: 241) Hemiptera: Auchenorrhyncha: Cicadomorpha: Membracoidea: Cicadellidae: Cicadellinae: Proconiini<br /> <br /> Date: 8th of May, 2018 at 11:03:16pm. 16th floor of a flat, urban habitat.<br /> <br /> Full post here of a different individual, belonging in the same species with intraspecific variations or another species in the same genus: <figure class="photo"><a href="https://www.jungledragon.com/image/60080/tapajosa_sp._-_cigarrinha-tapajosa_melichar_1924a_241.html" title="Tapajosa sp. - Cigarrinha-Tapajosa (Melichar, 1924a: 241)"><img src="https://s3.amazonaws.com/media.jungledragon.com/images/3305/60080_thumb.jpg?AWSAccessKeyId=05GMT0V3GWVNE7GGM1R2&Expires=1759968010&Signature=HjmDGn36tAXT5EviGaFZkWT7hmY%3D" width="118" height="152" alt="Tapajosa sp. - Cigarrinha-Tapajosa (Melichar, 1924a: 241) Hemiptera: Auchenorrhyncha: Cicadomorpha: Membracoidea: Cicadellidae: Cicadellinae: Proconiini<br /> <br /> Date: 13th of April, 2018 at 08:22:02pm.<br /> <br /> Lateral view of this same individual: https://www.jungledragon.com/image/60079/dsc_5201.html<br /> Dorsal view of a different individual that I also think is a female but with different intraspecific variations, belonging in the same species or another species in the same genus: <br /> <br /> https://www.jungledragon.com/image/60082/dsc_8007.html<br /> <br /> Dorsal view of what I think is a male belonging in the same species with minor intraspecific variations or another species in the same genus:<br /> <br /> https://www.jungledragon.com/image/60083/tapajosa_sp._-_cigarrinha-tapajosa_melichar_1924a_241.html<br /> <br /> Lateral view of the (supposedly) male above, same individual:<br /> <br /> https://www.jungledragon.com/image/60081/tapajosa_sp._-_cigarrinha-tapajosa_melichar_1924a_241.html<br /> <br /> Tapajosa is a genus of the order Hemiptera, suborder Auchenorrhyncha, infraorder Cicadomorpha, superfamily Membracoidea, family Cicadellidae, subfamily Cicadellinae and tribe Proconiini. They are of Neotropical distribution, and the minimum information available to me is that they can be found in Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador and Venezuela according to Insectoid (http://insectoid.info/insecta/hemiptera/cicadellidae/tapajosa_genus/), but I&#039;m not sure if this information is correct, lacking or wrong. I believe my specimen is either a Tapajosa fulvopunctata, a Tapajosa spinata or one of the species with no pictures in the Internet.<br /> <br /> In T. fulvopunctata, synonyms include:<br /> <br /> Tettigonia fulvopunctata (Signoret, 1854c: 484)<br /> Proconia fulvopunctata (Walker, 1858b: 229)<br /> Tapajosa fulvopunctata (Melichar, 1924a: 242)<br /> Tapajosa fulvopunctata var. concolor (Melichar, 1924a: 242)<br /> Oncometopia marginula (Osborn, 1926b:170)<br /> <br /> Apparently, there are other variations to this species as can be seen here: https://naturalhistory.museumwales.ac.uk/sharpshooters/browserecord.php?-recid=1053<br /> <br /> Now, I do not know if the &quot;var. concolor&quot; is being referred as a variation (like said) or a subspecies as the informations are scarce. The yellow spots depicted on my specimen seemed to differ a little from fulvopunctata but didn&#039;t match any other members of the genus with pictures available besides spinata with little modifications as well. This made me believe it is either a Tapajosa fulvopunctata or Tapajosa spinata with minor intraspecific variations (or different subspecies) or one of the species with no pictures, noted further down. Also, according to the links below, the members of this genus possess darker colors in males and lighter colors (including the yellow spots) in females, except for T. rubromarginata (which is not my specimen), so I&#039;m inclined to believe my specimen is possibly a female, so long as the specimens in the links below portray the reality of a living specimen and not of a worn specimen.<br /> <br /> The host plants of T. fulvopunctata (which may reflect on the rest of the genus, at the very least partially) include Anacardium occidentale (Anacardiaceae) (&quot;cashew&quot;), Cordia goeldiana (Boraginaceae) (&quot;freijo&quot;), Enterolobium contortisiliguum (Fabaceae) (&quot;earpod tree&quot;), Pseudopiptadenia contorta (Fabaceae) (&quot;angico&quot;), Crocus sativus (Iridaceae) (&quot;saffron&quot;), Gossypium hirsutum (Malvaceae) (&quot;cotton&quot;), Psidium guajava (Myrtaceae) (&quot;guava&quot;), Zea mays (Poaceae) (&quot;corn&quot;), Lantana camara (Verbenaceae) (&quot;lantana&quot;), Vernonia condensata (Asteraceae) (&quot;figatil&quot; or &quot;necroton&quot;) and possibly many more.<br /> <br /> They seem to show particular interest in Vernonia condensata (Asteraceae).<br /> <br /> The following species are supposedly present in this genus:<br /> <br /> Tapajosa doeringii (Berg, 1879d: 248)<br /> (https://naturalhistory.museumwales.ac.uk/sharpshooters/browserecord.php?-recid=1052)<br /> <br /> Tapajosa fulvopunctata (Signoret, 1854c: 484)<br /> (https://naturalhistory.museumwales.ac.uk/sharpshooters/browserecord.php?-recid=1053) - reminds me of my individual besides minor differences<br /> <br /> Tapajosa obscurior (Fowler, 1899)<br /> (couldn&#039;t find any pictures and I&#039;m not sure if this is a valid species)<br /> <br /> Tapajosa ocellata (Osborn, 1926b: 169)<br /> (https://naturalhistory.museumwales.ac.uk/sharpshooters/browserecord.php?-recid=1054) - note that there are notable intraspecific variations here<br /> <br /> Tapajosa rubromarginata (Signoret, 1855d: 793)<br /> (https://naturalhistory.museumwales.ac.uk/sharpshooters/browserecord.php?-recid=1055) - females are darker here<br /> <br /> Tapajosa similis (Melichar, 1925)<br /> (couldn&#039;t find any pictures)<br /> <br /> Tapajosa spinata (Young, 1968)<br /> (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4d/Tapajosa_spinata.jpg) - reminds me of my individual besides minor differences<br /> <br /> Tapajosa ulcerata (Signoret, 1854)<br /> (couldn&#039;t find any pictures, nor do I know if this is a valid species)<br /> <br /> Informations are scarce and I&#039;m unaware if there are others.<br /> <br /> Genus details can be found here: http://takiya.speciesfile.org/taxahelp.a...<br /> <br /> I know this is confusing, but informations on this Hemipteran are confusing. In sum, my specimen might be a T. fulvopunctata, a T. spinata or one of the species with no pictures on the Internet.<br /> <br /> According to a study I will provide at the end of this paragraph, Tapajosa rubromarginata are vectors to Xylella fastidiosa, the Citrus Variegated Chlorosis (CVC) that affects plants. I could find absolutely nothing that could affirm other species of Tapajosa are vectors.<br /> <br /> https://www.researchgate.net/publication...<br /> <br /> About the Xylella fastidiosa: Diseases are often associated with evolution, and the CVC might potentially bring benefits to the species of plants affected in the future. I will quote a text from two sources I will provide below:<br /> <br /> &quot;X. fastidiosa is primarily considered a plant pathogen, despite the fact that it successfully colonizes two very distinct hosts: plants and insect vectors. In fact, colonization of both hosts is required for dissemination of the bacterium in the landscape; it is unfortunate that most research has so far focused on plants as hosts, as insects are equally important. The economic importance of X. fastidiosa diseases also obscures the fact that it most likely evolved to be a harmless endophyte; the bacterium is capable of multiplying and moving within a wide host range but causes disease in very few hosts in a specific manner. Furthermore, work on its pathogenicity mechanisms led to the conclusion that X. fastidiosa regulates its gene expression in a cell density-dependent manner, essentially turning off its plant colonization machinery when in high density. This counterintuitive scenario is explained by the fact that traits necessary for insect colonization, and consequently plant-to-plant transmission, are only expressed at high cell densities. Because insect vectors discriminate against symptomatic plants, symptom expression is expected to decrease transmission rates, effectively reducing pathogen fitness and disease spread.&quot;<br /> <br /> https://nature.berkeley.edu/xylella/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/CVC_2014.pdf<br /> <br /> Second source:<br /> <br /> &quot;Hosts can also evolve in response to infection in ways that influence virulence. The best observed examples of the host evolution in response to disease include studies of Australian rabbits and Myxoma virus, crickets and parasitoid flies, and bacteria and phages. Host strategies for combating infection can be grouped into two categories: host tolerance and host resistance (Boots et al. 2009). Host tolerance describes the ability of a host to tolerate infection with a pathogen by minimizing the damage done but without impeding replication or transmission of the pathogen. In contrast, host resistance strategies reduce the probability that a host is infected, reduce pathogen replication within the host, and/or increase the speed of pathogen clearance (recovery). Given that hosts would benefit from resisting infection, an outstanding question is, &quot;Why aren&#039;t hosts more resistant to pathogens?&quot; Potential explanations include: a trade-off between resistance traits and other fitness-related traits, pathogen evolution to evade or counter host resistance traits, and trade-offs among defenses aimed at different parasite types or strains (Schmid-Hempel, 2005). In contrast, traits that confer tolerance are frequently expected to evolve to fixation, assuming the benefits of these traits outweigh the costs.<br /> <br /> Host-parasite interactions, thus, can lead to co-evolutionary dynamics that can increase the genetic diversity of both hosts and pathogens through co-speciation events and genetic arms races. One process that can lead to co-evolutionary change is negative frequency-dependent selection, whereby multiple host and parasite genotypes exist and only some host-parasite combinations result in infection. Over time, the frequency of resistant genotypes in a population can be affected by, and feed back to, local parasite genotype dynamics. This has been illustrated by long-term studies of trematode parasites infecting freshwater snails in New Zealand (Lively &amp; Dybdahl, 2000). This work also showed that high infection rates can ultimately favor host sexual reproduction as a strategy for generating novel host genotypes that may resist infection by common parasite clones.&quot;<br /> <br /> https://www.nature.com/scitable/knowledge/library/disease-ecology-15947677<br /> <br /> Natural habitats include crop fields and forests. All subjects found on the 16th floor of a flat in in an urban habitat. Animal Kingdom,Animalia,Arthropoda,Arthropods,Auchenorrhyncha,Brazil,Brazilian leafhopper,Bugs,CVC,Cicadellidae,Cicadellinae,Cicadomorpha,Insecta,Insects,Leafhopper,Oncometopia marginula,Proconia fulvopunctata,Proconiini,Sharpshooter,Sharpshooter Leafhopper" /></a></figure> Animal Kingdom,Animalia,Arthropoda,Arthropods,Auchenorrhyncha,Brazil,Brazilian leafhopper,Bugs,CVC,Cicadellidae,Cicadellinae,Cicadomorpha,Geotagged,Insecta,Insects,Leafhopper,Oncometopia marginula,Proconia fulvopunctata,Proconiini,Sharpshooter Click/tap to enlarge

Tapajosa sp. - Cigarrinha-Tapajosa (Melichar, 1924a: 241)

Hemiptera: Auchenorrhyncha: Cicadomorpha: Membracoidea: Cicadellidae: Cicadellinae: Proconiini

Date: 8th of May, 2018 at 11:03:16pm. 16th floor of a flat, urban habitat.

Full post here of a different individual, belonging in the same species with intraspecific variations or another species in the same genus:

Tapajosa sp. - Cigarrinha-Tapajosa (Melichar, 1924a: 241) Hemiptera: Auchenorrhyncha: Cicadomorpha: Membracoidea: Cicadellidae: Cicadellinae: Proconiini<br /> <br /> Date: 13th of April, 2018 at 08:22:02pm.<br /> <br /> Lateral view of this same individual: https://www.jungledragon.com/image/60079/dsc_5201.html<br /> Dorsal view of a different individual that I also think is a female but with different intraspecific variations, belonging in the same species or another species in the same genus: <br /> <br /> https://www.jungledragon.com/image/60082/dsc_8007.html<br /> <br /> Dorsal view of what I think is a male belonging in the same species with minor intraspecific variations or another species in the same genus:<br /> <br /> https://www.jungledragon.com/image/60083/tapajosa_sp._-_cigarrinha-tapajosa_melichar_1924a_241.html<br /> <br /> Lateral view of the (supposedly) male above, same individual:<br /> <br /> https://www.jungledragon.com/image/60081/tapajosa_sp._-_cigarrinha-tapajosa_melichar_1924a_241.html<br /> <br /> Tapajosa is a genus of the order Hemiptera, suborder Auchenorrhyncha, infraorder Cicadomorpha, superfamily Membracoidea, family Cicadellidae, subfamily Cicadellinae and tribe Proconiini. They are of Neotropical distribution, and the minimum information available to me is that they can be found in Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador and Venezuela according to Insectoid (http://insectoid.info/insecta/hemiptera/cicadellidae/tapajosa_genus/), but I'm not sure if this information is correct, lacking or wrong. I believe my specimen is either a Tapajosa fulvopunctata, a Tapajosa spinata or one of the species with no pictures in the Internet.<br /> <br /> In T. fulvopunctata, synonyms include:<br /> <br /> Tettigonia fulvopunctata (Signoret, 1854c: 484)<br /> Proconia fulvopunctata (Walker, 1858b: 229)<br /> Tapajosa fulvopunctata (Melichar, 1924a: 242)<br /> Tapajosa fulvopunctata var. concolor (Melichar, 1924a: 242)<br /> Oncometopia marginula (Osborn, 1926b:170)<br /> <br /> Apparently, there are other variations to this species as can be seen here: https://naturalhistory.museumwales.ac.uk/sharpshooters/browserecord.php?-recid=1053<br /> <br /> Now, I do not know if the "var. concolor" is being referred as a variation (like said) or a subspecies as the informations are scarce. The yellow spots depicted on my specimen seemed to differ a little from fulvopunctata but didn't match any other members of the genus with pictures available besides spinata with little modifications as well. This made me believe it is either a Tapajosa fulvopunctata or Tapajosa spinata with minor intraspecific variations (or different subspecies) or one of the species with no pictures, noted further down. Also, according to the links below, the members of this genus possess darker colors in males and lighter colors (including the yellow spots) in females, except for T. rubromarginata (which is not my specimen), so I'm inclined to believe my specimen is possibly a female, so long as the specimens in the links below portray the reality of a living specimen and not of a worn specimen.<br /> <br /> The host plants of T. fulvopunctata (which may reflect on the rest of the genus, at the very least partially) include Anacardium occidentale (Anacardiaceae) ("cashew"), Cordia goeldiana (Boraginaceae) ("freijo"), Enterolobium contortisiliguum (Fabaceae) ("earpod tree"), Pseudopiptadenia contorta (Fabaceae) ("angico"), Crocus sativus (Iridaceae) ("saffron"), Gossypium hirsutum (Malvaceae) ("cotton"), Psidium guajava (Myrtaceae) ("guava"), Zea mays (Poaceae) ("corn"), Lantana camara (Verbenaceae) ("lantana"), Vernonia condensata (Asteraceae) ("figatil" or "necroton") and possibly many more.<br /> <br /> They seem to show particular interest in Vernonia condensata (Asteraceae).<br /> <br /> The following species are supposedly present in this genus:<br /> <br /> Tapajosa doeringii (Berg, 1879d: 248)<br /> (https://naturalhistory.museumwales.ac.uk/sharpshooters/browserecord.php?-recid=1052)<br /> <br /> Tapajosa fulvopunctata (Signoret, 1854c: 484)<br /> (https://naturalhistory.museumwales.ac.uk/sharpshooters/browserecord.php?-recid=1053) - reminds me of my individual besides minor differences<br /> <br /> Tapajosa obscurior (Fowler, 1899)<br /> (couldn't find any pictures and I'm not sure if this is a valid species)<br /> <br /> Tapajosa ocellata (Osborn, 1926b: 169)<br /> (https://naturalhistory.museumwales.ac.uk/sharpshooters/browserecord.php?-recid=1054) - note that there are notable intraspecific variations here<br /> <br /> Tapajosa rubromarginata (Signoret, 1855d: 793)<br /> (https://naturalhistory.museumwales.ac.uk/sharpshooters/browserecord.php?-recid=1055) - females are darker here<br /> <br /> Tapajosa similis (Melichar, 1925)<br /> (couldn't find any pictures)<br /> <br /> Tapajosa spinata (Young, 1968)<br /> (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4d/Tapajosa_spinata.jpg) - reminds me of my individual besides minor differences<br /> <br /> Tapajosa ulcerata (Signoret, 1854)<br /> (couldn't find any pictures, nor do I know if this is a valid species)<br /> <br /> Informations are scarce and I'm unaware if there are others.<br /> <br /> Genus details can be found here: http://takiya.speciesfile.org/taxahelp.a...<br /> <br /> I know this is confusing, but informations on this Hemipteran are confusing. In sum, my specimen might be a T. fulvopunctata, a T. spinata or one of the species with no pictures on the Internet.<br /> <br /> According to a study I will provide at the end of this paragraph, Tapajosa rubromarginata are vectors to Xylella fastidiosa, the Citrus Variegated Chlorosis (CVC) that affects plants. I could find absolutely nothing that could affirm other species of Tapajosa are vectors.<br /> <br /> https://www.researchgate.net/publication...<br /> <br /> About the Xylella fastidiosa: Diseases are often associated with evolution, and the CVC might potentially bring benefits to the species of plants affected in the future. I will quote a text from two sources I will provide below:<br /> <br /> "X. fastidiosa is primarily considered a plant pathogen, despite the fact that it successfully colonizes two very distinct hosts: plants and insect vectors. In fact, colonization of both hosts is required for dissemination of the bacterium in the landscape; it is unfortunate that most research has so far focused on plants as hosts, as insects are equally important. The economic importance of X. fastidiosa diseases also obscures the fact that it most likely evolved to be a harmless endophyte; the bacterium is capable of multiplying and moving within a wide host range but causes disease in very few hosts in a specific manner. Furthermore, work on its pathogenicity mechanisms led to the conclusion that X. fastidiosa regulates its gene expression in a cell density-dependent manner, essentially turning off its plant colonization machinery when in high density. This counterintuitive scenario is explained by the fact that traits necessary for insect colonization, and consequently plant-to-plant transmission, are only expressed at high cell densities. Because insect vectors discriminate against symptomatic plants, symptom expression is expected to decrease transmission rates, effectively reducing pathogen fitness and disease spread."<br /> <br /> https://nature.berkeley.edu/xylella/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/CVC_2014.pdf<br /> <br /> Second source:<br /> <br /> "Hosts can also evolve in response to infection in ways that influence virulence. The best observed examples of the host evolution in response to disease include studies of Australian rabbits and Myxoma virus, crickets and parasitoid flies, and bacteria and phages. Host strategies for combating infection can be grouped into two categories: host tolerance and host resistance (Boots et al. 2009). Host tolerance describes the ability of a host to tolerate infection with a pathogen by minimizing the damage done but without impeding replication or transmission of the pathogen. In contrast, host resistance strategies reduce the probability that a host is infected, reduce pathogen replication within the host, and/or increase the speed of pathogen clearance (recovery). Given that hosts would benefit from resisting infection, an outstanding question is, "Why aren't hosts more resistant to pathogens?" Potential explanations include: a trade-off between resistance traits and other fitness-related traits, pathogen evolution to evade or counter host resistance traits, and trade-offs among defenses aimed at different parasite types or strains (Schmid-Hempel, 2005). In contrast, traits that confer tolerance are frequently expected to evolve to fixation, assuming the benefits of these traits outweigh the costs.<br /> <br /> Host-parasite interactions, thus, can lead to co-evolutionary dynamics that can increase the genetic diversity of both hosts and pathogens through co-speciation events and genetic arms races. One process that can lead to co-evolutionary change is negative frequency-dependent selection, whereby multiple host and parasite genotypes exist and only some host-parasite combinations result in infection. Over time, the frequency of resistant genotypes in a population can be affected by, and feed back to, local parasite genotype dynamics. This has been illustrated by long-term studies of trematode parasites infecting freshwater snails in New Zealand (Lively & Dybdahl, 2000). This work also showed that high infection rates can ultimately favor host sexual reproduction as a strategy for generating novel host genotypes that may resist infection by common parasite clones."<br /> <br /> https://www.nature.com/scitable/knowledge/library/disease-ecology-15947677<br /> <br /> Natural habitats include crop fields and forests. All subjects found on the 16th floor of a flat in in an urban habitat. Animal Kingdom,Animalia,Arthropoda,Arthropods,Auchenorrhyncha,Brazil,Brazilian leafhopper,Bugs,CVC,Cicadellidae,Cicadellinae,Cicadomorpha,Insecta,Insects,Leafhopper,Oncometopia marginula,Proconia fulvopunctata,Proconiini,Sharpshooter,Sharpshooter Leafhopper

Sign in or Join in order to comment.

No species identified

The species on this photo is not identified yet. When signed in, you can identify species on photos that you uploaded. If you have earned the social image editing capability, you can also identify species on photos uploaded by others.

View Oscar Neto's profile

By Oscar Neto

All rights reserved
Uploaded May 16, 2018. Captured May 8, 2018 23:03 in Rua Tomás Acioli, 1185 - Joaquim Távora, Fortaleza - CE, 60135-180, Brazil.
country flag of Brazil Explore Brazil 1,464 712 0
  • NIKON D7000
  • f/18.0
  • 1/250s
  • ISO100
  • 60mm
Captured in the fall. More fall photos.