Skip to main content Skip to main navigation menu Skip to site footer
Responsive image
Issue: Vol. 5631 No. 2: 2 May 2025
Type: Article
Published: 2025-05-02
DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5631.2.3
Page range: 269-307
Abstract views: 78
PDF downloaded: 4

Three new grasshopper species in the Florida Melanoplus Puer group (Orthoptera: Acrididae: Melanoplinae)

Nicholasville; KY 40356; U.S.A.
Orthoptera Genitalia Aedeagus Scrub

Abstract

Three new grasshopper species in the Melanoplus Puer Group sensu lato (Orthoptera: Acrididae: Melanoplinae) are described from Florida, United States, bringing the total number of described species in the group to 27 while the number of species in the Puer Group sensu stricto is increased to nine. 1) M. amphora sp. nov. Woller, Kelly, and Orfinger is described from a relatively small region of southeastern Florida across four counties: Okeechobee, Brevard, Indian, and St. Lucie, with the latter three being along the east coast; 2) M. spiracor sp. nov. Woller and Kelly is described from a small region of southwestern Florida across three counties: Hillsborough, Manatee, and Sarasota, all of which are along the west coast; and 3), M. ferrarius sp. nov. Woller, Kelly, and Orfinger is described from a single location in southeastern Florida within Martin County: Jonathan Dickinson State Park, which is along the east coast. Taxonomic placement of these species is justified based on distinct morphology, primarily of the internal genitalia (especially the shape of the aedeagus), which are sufficiently divergent from conspecifics and consistently unique enough across their known geographic ranges to be considered new species. Comparisons with some geographically close congeneric species in the Puer Group are also provided.

 

References

  1. Cigliano, M.M., Braun, H., Eades, D.C. & Otte, D. (2025) Orthoptera Species File. Available from: http://orthoptera.speciesfile.org/ (accessed 17 January 2025)
  2. Clark, B. (2025) Earth Point, Tools for Google Earth. Available from: http://www.earthpoint.us/ (accessed 17 January 2025)
  3. Darwin, C. (1872) On the Origin of Species, 6th Ed. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 568 pp.
  4. Deyrup, M. (1989) Arthropods endemic to Florida scrub. Florida Scientist, 52, 254–270.
  5. Deyrup, M. (1990) Arthropod footprints in the sands of time. Florida Entomologist, 73, 529–538. https://doi.org/10.2307/3495269
  6. Deyrup, M. (1996) Two new grasshoppers from relict uplands of Florida (Orthoptera: Acrididae). Transactions of the American Entomological Society, 122, 199–211.
  7. Deyrup, M. & Carrel, J. (2012) Lake Wales Ridge Scrub Arthropods. Archbold Biological Station, Florida, 107 pp.
  8. Eberhard, W.G. (1985) Sexual Selection and Animal Genitalia. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 256 pp. https://doi.org/10.4159/harvard.9780674330702
  9. Eberhard, W.G. (1996) Female Control: Sexual Selection by Cryptic Female Choice. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, 472 pp. https://doi.org/10.1515/9780691207209
  10. Eberhard, W.G. (2009) Postcopulatory sexual selection: Darwin’s omission and its consequences. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106, 10025–10032. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0901217106
  11. Eberhard, W.G. (2010a) Evolution of genitalia: theories, evidence, and new directions. Genetica, 138, 5–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10709-009-9358-y
  12. Eberhard, W.G. (2010b) Rapid divergent evolution of genitalia: Theory and data updated. In: Leonard, J. & Cordoba-Aguilar, A. (Eds.), The evolution of primary sexual characters in animals. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 40–78.
  13. Hosken, D.J. & Stockley, P. (2004) Sexual selection and genitalia evolution. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 19, 87–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2003.11.012
  14. Hubbell, T.H. (1932) A revision of the Puer group of the North American genus Melanoplus, with remarks on the taxonomic value of the concealed male genitalia in the Cyrtacanthacridinae (Orthoptera, Acrididae). Miscellaneous Publications of the Museum of Zoology, University of Michigan, 23, 1–64.
  15. Lamb, T. & Justice, T.C. (2005) Comparative phylogeography of Florida scrub insects: implications for systematics, biogeography, and conservation. Final Report for Project NG01-002. Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, Tallahassee, Florida. [unknown pagination]
  16. Lamichhaney, S., Berglund, J., Almen, M.S., Maqbool, K., Grabherr, M., Martinez-Barrio, A., Promerova, M., Rubin, C.J., Wang, C., Zamani, N., Grant, B.R., Grant, P.R., Webster, M.T. & Andersson, L. (2015) Evolution of Darwin’s finches and their beaks revealed by genome sequencing. Nature, 518, 371–377. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature14181
  17. Mushinsky, H.R. & McCoy, E.D. (1995) Vertebrate species composition of selected scrub islands on the Lake Wales Ridge of central Florida. Nongame Wildlife Program Project report no. GFC-87-149. Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission, Tallahassee, Florida. [unknown pagination]
  18. Myers, R.L. (1990) Scrub and high pine. In: Myers, R.L. & Ewel, J.J. (Eds.), Ecosystems of Florida. University of Central Florida Press, Orlando, Florida, pp. 150–193.
  19. Otte, D. (2012 ("2011")) Eighty New Melanoplus Species from the United States (Acrididae: Melanoplinae). Transactions of the American Entomological Society, 138 (1 & 2), 73–167. https://doi.org/10.3157/061.138.0103
  20. Rehn, J.A.G. & Hebard, M. (1916) Studies in the Dermaptera and Orthoptera of the Coastal Plain and Piedmont Region of the Southeastern United States. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, 68, 87–314.
  21. Rowe, L. & Arnqvist, G. (2011) Sexual selection and the evolution of genital shape and complexity in water striders. Evolution, 66 (1), 40–54. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1558-5646.2011.01411.x
  22. Simmons, L.W. (2014) Sexual selection and genitalia evolution. Australian Journal of Entomology, 53 (1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1111/aen.12053
  23. Song, H. & Bucheli, S.R. (2010) Comparison of phylogenetic signal between male genitalia and nongenital characters in insect systematics. Cladistics, 26, 23–35. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1096-0031.2009.00273.x
  24. Squitier, J.M., Deyrup, M. & Capinera, J.L. (1998) A new species of Melanoplus (Orthoptera: Acrididae) from an isolated upland in Peninsular Florida. Florida Entomologist, 81 (3), 451–460. https://doi.org/10.2307/3495936
  25. Strohecker, H.F. (1960) Several new species of North American Orthoptera. Pan-Pacific Entomologist, 36, 31–35.
  26. Turner, W.R., Wilcove, D.S. & Swain, H.M. (2006) Assessing the effectiveness of reserve acquisition programs in protecting rare and threatened species. Conservation Biology, 20, 1657–1669. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2006.00536.x
  27. Webb, S.D. (1990) Historical biogeography. In: Myers, R.L. & Ewel, J.J. (Eds.), Ecosystems of Florida. University of Central Florida Press, Orlando, Florida, pp. 70–102.
  28. Weekley, C.W., Menges, E.S. & Pickert, R.L. (2008) An ecological map of Florida’s Lake Wales Ridge: a new boundary delineation and an assessment of post-Columbian habitat loss. Florida Scientist, 71 (1), 45–64.
  29. White, W.A. (1970) The geomorphology of the Florida peninsula. Geological Bulletin, 51, 1–198.
  30. Woller, D.A. & Song, H. (2017) Investigating the functional morphology of genitalia during copulation in the grasshopper Melanoplus rotundipennis (Scudder, 1878) via correlative microscopy. Journal of Morphology, 278 (3), 334–359. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmor.20642

How to Cite

Woller, D.A. (2025) Three new grasshopper species in the Florida Melanoplus Puer group (Orthoptera: Acrididae: Melanoplinae). Zootaxa, 5631 (2), 269–307. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5631.2.3