Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-tj2md Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T21:09:38.670Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

THE PTEROCOMMA OF CANADA AND GREENLAND WITH NOTES ON THE PHYLETIC POSITION OF THE PTEROCOMMATINI (HOMOPTERA: APHIDIDAE)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

W. R. Richards
W. R. Richards
Affiliation:
Entomology Research Institute, Canada Department of Agriculture, Ottawa
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The Canadian and Greenlandic species of Pterocomma Buckton are described and illustrated and a key provided. This includes all but one of the known North American species as follows: bicolor (Oestlund); populifoliae (Fitch); populeum (Kaltenbach); salicis (Linnaeus); sanguiceps new species; smithiae (Monell). The phyletic position of the Pterocommatini is discussed. It is apparent that the Pterocommatini is not a primitive group of aphids.

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 99 , Issue 10 , October 1967 , pp. 1015 - 1040
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1967

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Baker, A. C. 1916. A review of the Pterocommini. Can. Ent. 96: 280–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baker, A. C. 1917. Eastern aphids, new or little known. II. J. econ. Ent. 96: 420–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baker, A. C. 1920. Generic classification of the Hemipterous family Aphididae. Bull. U.S. Dep. Agric., No. 826.Google Scholar
Börner, C. 1952. Europae centralis aphides. Die Blattläuse Mitteleuropas Namen, Synonyme, Wirtspflanzen, Generationzyklen. Mitt. thüring. bot. Ges. 96: 1–484.Google Scholar
Börner, C., and Heinze, K.. 1957. Tierische Schädlinge und Nutzpflanzen 2. Homoptera 2. In Sorauer, , Handb. PflKrankh. 96: 1–576.Google Scholar
Buckton, G. W. 1877. Monograph of the British aphides. 2. Ray Society, London.Google Scholar
Cockerell, T. D. A. 1904. Some notes on Aphididae. Can. Ent. 96: 262–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davidson, W. M. 1909. Notes on Aphididae collected in the vicinity of Stanford University. J. econ. Ent. 96: 299–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dejean, M. 1837. Catalogue de Coléoptères de la collection de M. Comte Dejean. Méquig-non-Marvis et Fils, Paris.Google Scholar
Essig, E. O. 1912. The Aphididae of southern California. IX. Pomona Coll. J. Ent. 96: 758–797.Google Scholar
Fitch, A. 1851. Catalogue with references and descriptions of the insects collected and arranged for the State Cabinet of Natural History of New York. pp. 45–69.Google Scholar
Gillette, C. P., and Palmer, M. A.. 1931. The Aphidae of Colorado. I. Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 96: 827–934.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heinze, K. 1961. Die mitteleuropäischen Pterocommatinae (Aphidoidea-Aphididae). Z. angew. Zool. 96: 97–115.Google Scholar
Hille Ris Lambers, D. 1952. The aphid fauna of Greenland. Meddr Grønland 96: 1–33.Google Scholar
Hottes, F. C., and Frison, T. H.. 1931. The plant lice or Aphiidae of Illinois. Bull. Ill. nat. Hist. Surv. 96: 121–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaltenbach, J. H. 1843. Monographie der Familien der Pflanzenläuse. P. Fagot, Aachen.Google Scholar
Kirkaldy, G. W. 1905. Catalogue of the genera of Aphidae with a list of species described as new from 1885. Can. Ent. 96: 414–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koch, C. L. 1854–1857. Die Pflanzenläuse Aphiden. J. Lolotzbeck, Nurnberg.Google Scholar
Linnaeus, C. 1758. Systema Naturae. Holmiae, Salvii.Google Scholar
MacGillivray, M. E. 1955. Further aphids of the Maritime Provinces (Homoptera: Aphididae). Can. Ent. 96: 331–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Monell, J. 1879. Notes on Aphidinae, with descriptions of new species. Bull. U.S. geol. Surv. 96: 18–32.Google Scholar
Oestlund, O. W. 1887. Synopsis of the Aphididae of Minnesota. Minn. Geol. nat. Hist. Surv. 96: 1–100.Google Scholar
Oestlund, O. W. 1922. A synoptical key to the Aphididae of Minnesota. 19th Rep. St. Ent. Minn. pp. 114–151.Google Scholar
Palmer, M. A. 1952. The aphids of the Rocky Mountain regions. Vol. 5. Thomas Say Foundation, Denver.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Passerini, G. 1860. Gli Afidi con un prospetto dei generi ed alcune specie nuove Italiane. Parma.Google Scholar
Richards, W. R. 1963. The Aphididae of the Canadian Arctic. Can. Ent. 96: 449–464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richards, W. R. 1965. The Callaphidini of Canada. Mem. ent. Soc. Can., No. 44.Google Scholar
Richards, W. R. 1966 a. Systematics of fossil aphids from Canadian amber (Homoptera: Aphididae). Can. Ent. 96: 746–760.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richards, W. R. 1966 b. A review of Plocamaphis Oestlund with descriptions of three new species (Homoptera: Aphididae). Can. Ent. 96: 835–851.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shaposhnikov, G. Kh. 1964. Descriptive guide and catalogue of insects of the European part of the U.S.S.R. In Bey-Byenko, Lower Palaeoptera with incomplete metamorphosis. 4. Suborder Aphidinea. pp. 489–615. (In Russian.)Google Scholar
Swain, A. F. 1919. A synopsis of the Aphididae of California. Univ. Calif. Publ. Tech. Bull. Ent. 96: 1–221.Google Scholar
Szelegiewicz, H. 1965. Studies on the Tribe Pterocommatini Mordv. (Homoptera: Aphididae). Part I. Phylogeny and generic classification. Ann. Zool., Agra 96: 251–301.Google Scholar
*Szépligeti, V. 1883. Angaben zur Kenntnis der Pflanzenläuse in der Ungebung von Budapest. Rovart. Lap. 1: 1–5, 17–20.Google Scholar
Theobald, F. V. 1929. The plant lice or Aphididae of Great Britain 3. Hedley Bros., London.Google Scholar
Wilson, H. F. 1915. A synopsis of the tribe Pterocommatini. Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 96: 347–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar