TY - JOUR T1 - Jumping mechanisms in gum treehopper insects (Hemiptera, Eurymelinae) JF - The Journal of Experimental Biology JO - J. Exp. Biol. SP - 2682 LP - 2690 DO - 10.1242/jeb.085266 VL - 216 IS - 14 AU - Burrows, Malcolm Y1 - 2013/07/15 UR - http://jeb.biologists.org/content/216/14/2682.abstract N2 - Jumping in a species of Australian gum treehopper was analysed from high-speed images. Pauroeurymela amplicincta adults and nymphs lived together in groups that were tended by ants, but only adults jumped. The winged adults with a body mass of 23 mg and a body length of 7 mm had some morphological characteristics intermediate between those of their close relatives the leafhoppers (Cicadellidae) and the treehoppers (Membracidae). They, like leafhoppers, lacked the prominent prothoracic helmets of membracid treehoppers, and their large hind coxae were linked by press studs (poppers), that are present in leafhoppers but not treehoppers. The hindlegs were only 30–40% longer than the other legs and 67% of body length. They are thus of similar proportion to the hindlegs of treehoppers but much shorter than those of most leafhoppers. Jumping was propelled by the hindlegs, which moved in the same plane as each other beneath and almost parallel to the longitudinal axis of the body. A jump was preceded by full levation of the coxo-trochanteral joints of the hindlegs. In its best jumps, the rapid depression of these joints then accelerated the insect in 1.4 ms to a take-off velocity of 3.8 m s−1 so that it experienced a force of almost 280 g. In 22% of jumps, the wings opened before take-off but did not flap until the gum treehopper was airborne, when the body rotated little in any plane. The energy expended was 170 μJ, the power output was 122 mW and the force exerted was 64 mN. Such jumps are predicted to propel the insect forwards 1450 mm (200 times body length) and to a height of 430 mm if there is no effect of wind resistance. The power output per mass of jumping muscle far exceeded the maximum active contractile limit of muscle and indicates that a catapult-like action must be used. This eurymelid therefore out-performs both leafhoppers and treehoppers in i ts faster acceleration and in its higher take-off velocity. ER -