Journal of Paleontology, 91(5), 2017, p. 994–1000 Copyright © 2017, The Paleontological Society 0022-3360/17/0088-0906 doi: 10.1017/jpa.2017.27


New data on Jurassic Sinoalidae from northeastern China (Insecta, Hemiptera)


Jun Chen,1,2 Yan Zheng,1 Guangjin Wei,1 and Xiaoli Wang1


1Institute of Geology and Paleontology, Linyi University, Shuangling Road, Linyi 276000, China ⟨rubiscada@sina.com⟩, ⟨zhengyan536@lyu.edu.cn⟩, ⟨weiguangjin@lyu.edu.cn⟩, ⟨wangxiaoli@lyu.edu.cn⟩ 2State Key Laboratory of Palaeobiology and Stratigraphy, Nanjing Institute of Geology and Palaeontology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, 39 East Beijing Road, Nanjing 210008, China


Abstract.—The Sinoalidae, as one of the three Mesozoic froghopper families, was recently recognized from the latest Middle–earliest Late Jurassic Daohugou Biota of northeastern China. We herein report some new materials from the same horizon and locality, providing some new insights on morphological diversity and evolution of this family. Shufania hani new genus new species indicates that the relative branching position of veins M and CuA of the forewing is highly variable within the Sinoalidae and not appropriate for family-level diagnosis. The venations of three reported sinoalid hind wings are conservative, likely due to its simplified topology and reduced terminal branches. Color patterns of hind wings are likely variable for different sinoalid froghoppers. However, considering that color pattern is easily weakened or even erased by diagenetic processes for imprint fossils, the morphological character is not reliable for distinguishing different sinoalid taxa. Additionally, our new material suggests that the number of lateral spines of the hind tibia can vary intra-individually for sinoalids, just as in some recent froghoppers.


Introduction


The hemipteran superfamily Cercopoidea Leach, 1815, known as froghoppers or spittlebugs, comprises nearly 3000 described species. The high-level classification of living Cercopoidea is still controversial: five modern cercopoid families (Cercopidae Leach, 1815, Aphrophoridae Amyot and Serville, 1843, Clastopteridae Dohrn, 1859, Machaerotidae Stål, 1866, and Epipygidae Hamilton, 2001) have been described to date, but various taxonomists recognize three to five (Hamilton, 2001, 2012; Dietrich, 2002, 2005; Holzinger et al., 2003). Moreover, three extinct families from the Mesozoic have been attributed to this superfamily (Wang et al., 2012; Chen et al., 2015a). The family Procercopidae Handlirsch, 1906, recorded from


the Early Jurassic to Early Cretaceous in Germany, Russia, Central Asia, Southeast Asia, and China, is widely accepted as the stem group of cercopoids (Shcherbakov and Popov, 2002; Chen et al., 2015a). Representatives of the extinct froghopper families SinoalidaeWang and Szwedo in Wang et al., 2012 and Cercopionidae Hamilton, 1990 were exclusively known from the Jurassic deposits in northeastern China and the Early Cretaceous of Brazil, respectively (Hamilton, 1990; Wang et al., 2012). By the mid-Cretaceous, primitive cercopoids became extinct and ancestors of modern groups appeared and became diversified (Shcherbakov and Popov, 2002; Chen et al., 2015a). The family Sinoalidae was erected as part of the latest


Middle–earliest Late Jurassic Daohugou Biota, Inner Mongolia of China. Sinoalidae, which is closely related to early Procercopidae and shares some plesiomorphic characters with


ancient Hylicelloidea, represents one of the distinct diversi- fications of ancestral Cercopoidea. Up to now, five genera


(Luanpingia Hong, 1983, ?Hebeicercopis Hong, 1983, Huabeicercopis Hong, 1983, Sinoala Wang and Szwedo in Wang et al., 2012, and Jiania Wang and Szwedo in Wang et al., 2012) from the Jurassic deposits of northeastern China have been attributed to this distinct froghopper family (Fig. 1; Wang et al., 2012). We herein report some fossil sinoalids from the Daohugou


Biota. A new genus and species with some significant morphological traits different from known con-familial taxa is established, and the family is revised further based on the new fossil specimens.


Materials and methods


The new Mesozoic sinoalids described herein were collected from the well-known Daohugou fossil-bearing strata of north- eastern China (Fig. 1; Wang, 2009). Daohugou is now con- sidered to be one of the most important insect Lagerstätten (Rasnitsyn et al., 2006) and has yielded abundant and diverse insects (e.g., Wang and Zhang, 2011; B. Wang et al., 2013; Chen et al., 2014; Yan et al., 2014). Generally, the fossil-bearing beds at Daohugou were placed within the Jiulongshan Forma- tion of Bathonian–Callovian (late Middle Jurassic). However, recent isotopic dating results indicated that the Daohugou beds were deposited in the geological age of 164–158 Ma (Liu et al., 2006, 2012; L. Wang et al., 2013), which is Callovian– Oxfordian (latest Middle–earliest Late Jurassic) according to the


994


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116  |  Page 117  |  Page 118  |  Page 119  |  Page 120  |  Page 121  |  Page 122  |  Page 123  |  Page 124  |  Page 125  |  Page 126  |  Page 127  |  Page 128  |  Page 129  |  Page 130  |  Page 131  |  Page 132  |  Page 133  |  Page 134  |  Page 135  |  Page 136  |  Page 137  |  Page 138  |  Page 139  |  Page 140  |  Page 141  |  Page 142  |  Page 143  |  Page 144  |  Page 145  |  Page 146  |  Page 147  |  Page 148  |  Page 149  |  Page 150  |  Page 151  |  Page 152  |  Page 153  |  Page 154  |  Page 155  |  Page 156  |  Page 157  |  Page 158  |  Page 159  |  Page 160  |  Page 161  |  Page 162  |  Page 163  |  Page 164  |  Page 165  |  Page 166  |  Page 167  |  Page 168  |  Page 169  |  Page 170  |  Page 171  |  Page 172  |  Page 173  |  Page 174  |  Page 175  |  Page 176  |  Page 177  |  Page 178  |  Page 179  |  Page 180  |  Page 181  |  Page 182  |  Page 183  |  Page 184  |  Page 185  |  Page 186  |  Page 187  |  Page 188  |  Page 189  |  Page 190  |  Page 191  |  Page 192  |  Page 193  |  Page 194  |  Page 195  |  Page 196  |  Page 197  |  Page 198  |  Page 199  |  Page 200  |  Page 201  |  Page 202  |  Page 203  |  Page 204  |  Page 205  |  Page 206  |  Page 207  |  Page 208  |  Page 209  |  Page 210  |  Page 211  |  Page 212  |  Page 213  |  Page 214  |  Page 215  |  Page 216  |  Page 217  |  Page 218  |  Page 219  |  Page 220  |  Page 221  |  Page 222  |  Page 223  |  Page 224  |  Page 225  |  Page 226  |  Page 227  |  Page 228  |  Page 229  |  Page 230  |  Page 231  |  Page 232  |  Page 233  |  Page 234  |  Page 235  |  Page 236  |  Page 237  |  Page 238