{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03335503580908499, 'fraction_numerical': 0.010216857815395402, 'mean_word_length': 5.51484502446982, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 7, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Tungurahualini, a new tribe of Neotropical leafhoppers, with notes on the subfamily Mileewinae (Hemiptera, Cicadellidae)

Abstract A new cicadellid tribe, Tungurahualini, is recognized to include Tungurahuala Kramer, and a related new genus, Ilyapa gen. n., based on six new species. The tribe is included in subfamily Mileewinae, the concept of which is further expanded to include tribes Makilingiini Baker, and Tinteromini Godoy and Webb, taxa previously treated as separate subfamilies. Keys to tribes of Mileewinae (sensu lato) and genera of Tungurahualini are provided. A new species of Tungurahuala, Tungurahuala acuminata sp. n., is also described and keys to species of Tungurahuala and Ilyapa are provided. The new tribe is presently recorded only from cloud forests in the northern Andes Mountains of South America.


Introduction
The leafhopper subfamily Mileewinae comprises small to medium-sized, slender, usually darkly pigmented species that inhabit wet tropical forests worldwide. Most species appear to inhabit montane cloud forests where they occur on herbaceous vegetation in the understory. The group was established by Evans (1947) as a tribe of Cicadellinae (as "Tettigellinae") based on the dorsal ocelli, narrow gena, and strongly convex frontoclypeus. Evans distinguished the tribe from other Cicadellinae based on the forewing "with a reduced clavus, a wide appendix and lacking vein M1+2 [= r-m1]." Young (1965) transferred the tribe from Cicadellinae to Typhlocybinae because he considered Mileewini to have "much more in common" with the latter subfamily, but did not mention particular characters that supported this new placement. In his subsequent comprehensive revision of world Cicadellinae, Young (1968) initially continued to treat Mileewini as a tribe of Typhlocybinae but later (Young 1986) followed Linnavuori and DeLong (1977) who elevated Mileewinae to status as a separate subfamily. This latter status was adopted by Dietrich (2005) in a key to cicadellid family-group taxa. Two other taxa most recently treated as separate subfamilies (Young 1986, Dietrich 2005, Makilingiinae Baker and Tinterominae Godoy & Webb, inhabit similar wet tropical montane forest habitats and resemble Mileewinae in having dorsal ocelli, reduced forewing venation, and also the hind wing submarginal vein very close to the wing margin distally (Dietrich 2005). Both are currently known only based on their type genera: Makilingia Baker, previously known only from the Philippines but recently recorded from Thailand (Dietrich, unpublished); and Tinteromus Godoy & Webb, previously known only from Costa Rica, but recently recorded from Colombia and Peru (D. M. Takiya, unpublished).
Phylogenetic analyses of both morphological and molecular data (Dietrich 1999, 2004, Dietrich et al. 2001, 2005, 2010 have consistently placed Mileewinae, Makilingiinae, and Tinterominae in a well-supported clade also comprising subfamilies Evacanthinae (sensu Dietrich 2004), Cicadellinae (sensu Young 1968), Signoretiinae (sensu Dietrich 2005), and Typhlocybinae but have not adequately resolved the relationships among major lineages within this clade. However, because the first three mentioned taxa share a unique combination of morphological traits (see below), they may represent a monophyletic group. Thus, they are here treated as tribes of a single subfamily, Mileewinae (sensu lato).
In a recent taxonomic review and morphology-based phylogenetic analysis of Evacanthinae sensu lato (including tribes Balbillini, Evacanthini, Nirvanini, and Pagaroniini), Dietrich (2004) excluded the enigmatic Andean genus Tungurahuala Kramer from that subfamily, placing it in Cicadellinae based on the structure of the ovipositor. Further morphological study of Tungurahuala and several South American species representing a new genus (described below), suggests that these two genera are most closely related to Mileewinae. The unique features uniting these two genera and their lack of apparent close relationship to other known leafhoppers support their placement in a new tribe, described below.

Methods
Morphological terminology follows Oman (1949) and Kramer (1950) except that groups of macrosetae on the legs are named using the system of Rakitov (1998) and terminology for nymphs follows Dmitriev (2002). Setal rows on the femur and tibia are referred to according to their position, assuming that the leg is fully extended perpendic-ular to the sagittal plane of the body, as follows: AD=anterodorsal; AM=anteromedial; AV=anteroventral, PD=posterodorsal; and PV=posteroventral. Individual setae are numbered sequentially, beginning with the most distal. Numerical formulae are used to indicate the numbers of setae on the pro-and mesothoracic tibiae and the metathoracic femur. For tibiae the formula given is AD+PD; for the femur, the formula follows standard practice in which, for example, 2+2+1 means that a distal pair, a penultimate pair, and a single antepenultimate seta are present. Measurements are given in millimeters for males and females, respectively; body length is measured from the apex of the head to the apex of the forewing in repose. Digital photographs were taken using a Q-Imaging Micropublisher digital camera mounted on a stereo or compound microscope.
Specimens examined are deposited in the following institutions: Humboldt Institute, Villa Leyva, Colombia (HIC); Illinois Natural History Survey (INHS); North Carolina State University, Raleigh (NCSU); and Universidad de San Marcos, Lima, Peru (USML).
A previous cladistic analysis (Dietrich 2004) consistently grouped the two genera included in Tungurahualini together in a clade also comprising the single included repre- sentative of Makilingiini. A more recent morphology-based analysis of the entire family Cicadellidae (Dietrich et al. 2010) placed Tungurahualini within a paraphyletic assemblage, comprising the other tribes here included in Mileewinae, that gave rise to Cicadellinae and Typhlocybinae. More detailed analysis of this entire lineage will be needed to further elucidate the phylogenetic status of Mileewinae and its included tribes.
Tungurahualini resemble Nirvanini (Evacanthinae, sensu Dietrich 2004) in having the body depressed with the head strongly produced and the face horizontal. The male genitalia also resemble those of Nirvanini, particularly the structure of the style (apex foot-shaped) and aedeagus (base with paired dorsal processes). However, unlike Nirvanini (and other Evacanthinae), the crown of the new tribe lacks a distinct marginal carina, the ocelli are distant from the margin, the face lacks a median longitudinal carina, crossvein r-m 1 is present in the forewing, and the front femur lacks enlarged basal setae in row AV. The presence of spiniform setae rather than platellae at the apex of the first hind tarsomere is an unusual trait shared with some Oriental Evacanthini, but evacanthines differ in having the crown distinctly elevated mesad of the eyes, with marginal and submarginal carinae, and ocelli near the crown margin.
Species of Tungurahualini are presently known only from cloud forests in the northern and central Andean regions of the New World tropics. Redescription. Elongate, strongly depressed, leafhoppers (Figs 1-3, 11). Coloration dark brown to black; face with dull yellow band extended from lora across base of clypellus and apex of clypeus. Crown unevenly convex, coarsely granulose and densely clothed with minute setae, pentagonal in dorsal view; marginal carina present apically, becoming obsolete posterolaterally; median longitudinal carina weakly delimited; ocelli on crown anterad of eyes, slightly closer to lateral margin than to midline; antennal ledge broad, depressed, coincident with lateral margin of crown; flagellum slightly shorter than crown width; mesal margin of eye entire; lateral frontal suture absent dorsad of antennal ledge; frontoclypeus (Fig. 31) rugulose medially with well developed muscle scars laterally, oblique anteroventral section separated from nearly horizontal posteroventral section by transverse ridge; transclypeal suture indistinct; anteclypeus tapered, weakly convex, apex wider than lorum; lorum well separated from ventral genal margin; gena angulately produced, largely concealing proepisternum. Pronotum depressed, rugulose and minutely setose, narrower than head, lateral margins strongly carinate, carina even with eye, margins subparallel in dorsal view; exposed part of mesonotum and scutellum together wider than long. Forewing (Fig. 27)  fer (Fig. 37) short with scattered macrosetae dorsolaterally, with long, slender process densely clothed with minute spicules arising from ventrolateral margin and extending mesad into genital capsule, then dorsad; anal tube well sclerotized, broader than long in dorsal view, venter flat; valve (Fig. 38) short, straplike, narrowly fused to pygofer; plates triangular, depressed, extended well beyond posterior margin of pygofer, with lateral band and irregular submedial row of macrosetae, dorsolateral margin weakly sinuate in lateral view, base weakly constricted in ventral view; aedeagus  in lateral view with shaft split into dorsal gonopore-bearing section and tapered ventral process; connective (Figs 47-51) trilobed basally; style with large preapical lobe and attenuated, hooked apex. Female sternite VII (Fig. 65) subtruncate, concealing base of ovipositor; first valvulae ( Fig. 69) slender, with dorsal and ventral preapical sculpturing irregularly strigate; second valvulae ( Fig. 71) with basal fused area short, distal blades large, dorsal margin ascending in straight line, then gradually descending toward apex, declivous portion with ~7 widely spaced conical teeth and intervening serrations, apical fourth serrate, without teeth; third valvulae without macrosetae. Nymph unknown. Notes. Kramer (1965) described Tungurahuala based on a single male specimen of T. basiliscus Kramer from Baños, Tungurahua, Ecuador, placing it in Nirvaninae but noting that it is "vastly different from any previously described" genus. Recent Malaise trap sampling in Colombia has yielded additional specimens of the type species and a new, closely related species, including the first known female specimen of the genus. The genus may be distinguished from its only known relative, Ilyapa, by the characters noted in the key. Notes. The specimens examined from Colombia are here considered conspecific with the holotype from Ecuador, although there is slight variation among specimens in size, coloration, and the shape of the aedeagus. Given the small number of specimens available, it seems prudent to consider these minor variations to be intra-specific, despite the considerable geographic disjunction among the known populations.

Key to species of Tungurahuala (males)
Although Kramer (1965) did not explicitly indicate the gender of the name Tungurahuala, it is here interpreted as feminine due to its ending (ICZN Art. 30.2.4). Thus, Kramer's original spelling of the species name, which has a masculine ending, is incorrect and the spelling here emended to agree in gender with the genus name.
Notes. This species resembles T. basilisca in overall structure, but the head is proportionately longer and the coloration of the forewing is lighter overall, although variable among specimens examined.
Description. Medium sized, depressed leafhoppers (Figs 4-10, 12). Coloration pale orange or green with red/orange markings dorsally; crown with pair of oblique red maculae mesad of ocelli, pronotum with semicircular orange macula anteriorly, face and thoracic sternites black, legs dark basally and pale distally, abdomen heavily marked with dark brown dorsally and with varying amounts of dark brown pigmentation ventrally. Crown depressed, finely granulose, without setae, weakly pentagonal in dorsal view, marginal and medial carinae absent; ocelli on crown anterad of eyes slightly closer to lateral margin than to midline; antennal ledge broadly depressed, coincident with crown margin; flagellum slightly shorter than crown width; mesal margin of eye emarginate; frontoclypeus granulose with oblique anterodorsal section separated from nearly horizontal posteroventral section by distinct transverse ridge; muscle scars distinct laterally; clypeal suture obsolete medially; anteclypeus convex, tapered, apex narrower than lorum; lorum well separated from ventral genal margin; gena weakly produced laterally, partially concealing proepisternum. Pronotum weakly convex with irregular transverse striations, lateral margins divergent posterad, slightly wider than head, strongly carinate, carina even with eye. Exposed part of mesonotum and scutellum wider than long. Forewing (Fig. 29) opaquely sclerotized except apical cells, veins distinct but without marginal setae; R three branched, crossvein s absent; two r-m and 3-4 m-cu crossveins present; apical cells 2 and 3 very short; inner apical cell relatively broad; appendix very narrow. Hind wing (Fig. 30) with cell distad of r-m crossvein parallel-sided or narrowed distally. Prothoracic femur (Fig. 34) slender, AM1 large, located on ventral margin, AV1 well developed, row AV without preapical setae; intercalary row with ~17 slender, close-set setae; tibia 1+1, PV absent. Mesothoracic femur equal in length but wider than prothoracic femur; AV and PV with few widely separated setae, tibial row PD with apical seta, other rows with few irregularly spaced setae. Metathoracic femur macrosetal formula 2+1+1, rarely 2+1+1+1, tibia and tarsus as in Tungurahuala. Male with apodemes of sternite III well developed; pygofer (Figs 39-45) short with scattered macrosetae dorsolaterally, with ventral process glabrous, slender, arising posteroventrally and curved posterodorsad; anal tube in dorsal view as long as broad, flat ventrally, with or without pair of ventrolateral processes distally; valve short, rectangular, narrowly fused to pygofer; plates depressed basally, expanded and slightly compressed distally with band of macrosetae extended from lateral margin of base posteriorly across middle of apex; aedeagal shaft (Figs 53-62) arcuate posteriorly, often asymmetrical, gonopore apical; connective trilobed anteriorly, stem broad and depressed; style sinuate with large, sparsely setose preapical lobe, apophysis acuminate with ventral preapical tooth. Female seventh sternite (Figs 65-68) longer than sixth and concealing basal half of ovipositor in repose, posterior margin produced; first valvulae ( Fig. 72-73) slender, dorsal sculpturing concatenate, second valvulae (Fig. 74) similar to those of Tungurahuala but with dorsal teeth more numerous, prominent and closely spaced, and dorsum at base of blade evenly rounded rather than angulate.
Fifth instar nymph (Fig. 10) with overall form and chaetotaxy similar to that of adult except coloration pale greenish yellow with median dorsal longitudinal white stripe; crown with acrometope well delimited, longer than wide; metope well delimited; ocellar precursors well delimited and positioned as in adult on coryphe anteromesad of eyes, well separated from margin; face with distinct transverse shelf corresponding to epistomal suture (as in adult), cibarial muscle scars distinct; dorsum glabrous with scattered sparse, minute setae; enlarged setae absent; hind tarsomere I with three apical platellae.
Etymology. The name Ilyapa is based on that of the Inca god of thunder, lightning, and rain, but the gender is here considered feminine due to its ending.
Notes. This genus is closely related to Tungurahuala, as indicated by the similarities in cephalic structure (ocelli distant from margin, frontoclypeus with transverse carina), forewing venation (crossvein s lacking), leg chaetotaxy (hind tarsomere I pecten with tapered macrosetae), and male genitalia (pygofer with recurved posteroventral process, style with strong preapical lobe). It differs from Tungurahuala in the characters noted in the key.
The genus is described based on six species from the Andean region of South America. The species inhabit cloud forests and have been collected by sweeping grasses and other herbaceous vegetation in the understory. They are readily distinguished by differences in coloration, head proportions, and the structure of the male genitalia. Aedeagus (Fig. 61) with single distal process strongly recurved ventrad, apex branched; anal tube with several small, irregular ventrolateral teeth (Fig. 44)   with two distal processes more or less aligned with shaft, asymmetrically curved, one process with angulate projection near base; anal tube with pair of short triangular projections near base (Fig. 39)  Description. Length male 6.6-6.9 mm, female 7.0 mm. Crown pale orange-yellow, orange-red maculae broad, overlapping ocelli, anterior margin forming acute angle; pronotum and opaque areas of forewing bright green (mottled with yellow in specimens removed from ethanol), pronotum with semicircular macula distinct. Male pygofer processes extended mesad and curved dorsad but not or only slightly crossing midline; anal tube process short, triangular. Aedeagus asymmetrical, shaft tubular, in lateral view V-shaped basally, arched and sinuate distally, terminating in two slender, bladelike processes continuing in line with shaft but asymmetrically curved, one process with angulate projection near base. Female seventh sternite with posterior margin slightly produced, rounded medially. Fifth instar nymph pale olive green dorsally with broad white median longitidinal stripe extended entire length of body; venter white. Description. Length male 6.1 mm. Coloration as described for I. bifida except crown margin white, orange-red maculae broader, and pronotum almost entirely orange; apical margin of crown forming obtuse angle. Male pygofer processes short, broad, and digitiform; anal tube without processes. Aedeagus highly asymmetrical; gonoporebearing shaft acuminate, extended to left posterodorsad and gradually curved mesad, apex without process; ventral process depressed, apex expanded, truncate, and even with style apices. Female unknown.
Etymology. The species name means "crazy" and refers to the bizarre, asymmetrical aedeagus.
Notes. This species may be distinguished by its relatively short crown and by the presence of a long, unpaired ventral process arising from the base of the aedeagal shaft.
Material examined. Etymology. The species name refers to the long distal spine of the aedeagus.
Notes. This species may be distinguished by its moderately long crown and by the elongate, laterally directed distal spine of the aedeagus.
One specimen from Yanachaga-Chemillén National Park, Peru, has the distal spine of the aedeagus extended to the right, mirroring the condition found in other examined specimens of this species. Specimens examined from Yanachaga-Chemillén National Park have the anal tube processes considerably shorter than those in the type series from Chanchamayo, but such variation is here considered to be intraspecific. Based on the material available for study, this is the most widespread and common species of the genus. Etymology. The species name refers to the mostly orange coloration of the dorsum.
Notes. This species may be distinguished by its relatively long crown, predominantly orange coloration, and broad, strongly compressed aedeagal shaft. Etymology. The species name refers to the strongly recurved apex of the aedeagus. Notes. This species may be distinguished by its relatively short crown and strongly recurved aedeagal apex.
Notes. This species closely resembles I. longispina in external morphology and in the male genitalia, but may be distinguished by the shorter, distinctly branched distal aedeagal process and by the distinctly smaller median lobe of female abdominal sternite VII.
In one examined male specimen, the configuration of the aedeagus is the mirror image of that of the other specimens.