| Popis: |
Hecalus shanayai Nikoshe & Meshram, sp. nov. (Figs. 3, 8, 13, 34–40) Male (Figs. 3, 8) Color yellowish green to green. Anterior margin of head with transverse submarginal fuscous line, face (Fig. 13) brown, gena black, frontoclypeus transverse black striae invisible in middle. Compound eyes black, ocelli yellow. Forewings subhyaline, with diffuse fuscous transverse band across costal margin. Bases of tibial macrosetae and tarsi light brown. Head including eyes as long as width of pronotum. Head produced in front, crown length 0.7x shorter than width between eyes. Face as long as wide; anterior margin of pronotum not extending beyond eyes, more or less parallel with eyes. Frontoclypeus longer than wide; frontal suture, terminating laterad of ocelli. Ocelli near anterior margin, very closely oppressed to eyes. Pronotum length 0.2x as long as wide and 0.9x length of scutellum. Male genitalia. Pygofer (Fig. 34) longer than wide, posterior margin triangular, with posterior ½ densely setose. Style (Fig. 36) with preapical lobe obtusely angulate, with few microsetae, apophysis short, 0.25 of the total length. Connective (Fig. 40) with stem 2x shorter than arms. Aedeagal shaft narrowed apically, broad medially in lateral view, foliate in apical 0.2 with sparsely serrated margin, dorsal margin with short subapical tooth, with pair of slender apical processes half as long as shaft extended anterolaterad, gonopore subapical on ventral margin (Figs. 37–39). Measurements (mm). Male 4.63 long, 1.3 wide across eyes, 1.01 wide across hind margin of pronotum. Type material. Holotype ³, INDIA: Maharashtra: Chikhaldara (21.4030° N, 77.3268° E), 22.ix.2015, Sweep net Coll. Akash Nikoshe (NPC). Paratypes, 6 ³ with same data as holotype. Etymology. This species is named in honour of “Miss Shanaya” (daughter of the corresponding author) for her support to the author to pursue his passion in leafhopper taxonomy. Remarks. Hecalus shanayai sp. nov. externally resembles H. lutescens (Distant) (Figs. 2, 7, 12, 27–33) but differs in having the aedeagal shaft foliate in the apical 0.2 with a sparsely serrated margin, the dorsal margin with a short subapical tooth, and lacking mid-dorsal lateral expansions which are more distinct in the latter. From H. ghauri Rao and Ramakrishnan, (Figs. 19, 20 & 21) it can be distinguished by the aedeagal shaft foliate in the apical 0.2 with a sparsely serrated margin, the dorsal margin with a short subapical tooth, and lacking mid-dorsal lateral expansions more distinct in the former. |
