Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T06:11:32.047Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Aphids, true hoppers, jumping plant-lice, scale insects, true bugs and whiteflies (Insecta: Hemiptera) from the Insect Limestone (latest Eocene) of the Isle of Wight, UK

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 August 2019

Jacek SZWEDO ,
Jowita DROHOJOWSKA ,
Yuri A. POPOV ,
Ewa SIMON  and
Piotr WEGIEREK
Jacek SZWEDO*
Affiliation:
Laboratory of Evolutionary Entomology and Museum of Amber Inclusions, Department of Invertebrate Zoology and Parasitology, University of Gdańsk, 59, Wita Stwosza Street, PL80-308 Gdańsk, Poland. Email: [email protected]
Jowita DROHOJOWSKA*
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology, University of Silesia, Bankowa 9, PL40-007 Katowice, Poland. Email: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]
Yuri A. POPOV
Affiliation:
Arthropod Lab, Paleontological Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences, 123 Profsoyuznaya Street, Moscow 117997, Russia.
Ewa SIMON
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology, University of Silesia, Bankowa 9, PL40-007 Katowice, Poland. Email: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]
Piotr WEGIEREK
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology, University of Silesia, Bankowa 9, PL40-007 Katowice, Poland. Email: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]
*
*Corresponding author
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Representatives of the Hemiptera: Sternorrhyncha, Fulgoromorpha, Cicadomorpha and Heteroptera from the Late Eocene of the Isle of Wight, UK, are analysed and discussed. Psylloidea were reviewed and a key to the described taxa is given. Aphidoidea were studied, previously described taxa revised and new taxa described. New taxa of Aphidoidea are Hormaphididae: Hormaphis? longistigma Wegierek sp. nov.; Eriosomatidae: Eriosoma gratshevi Wegierek sp. nov. and Colopha? incognita Wegierek sp. nov.; Drepanosiphidae: Panfossilis anglicus Wegierek gen. et sp. nov. and Betulaphis kozlovi Wegierek sp. nov. Previously described Fulgoromorpha were revised and new taxa are described. The homonym Hastites Cockerell, 1922 (Cixiidae) preoccupied by Hastites Mayer-Eymar, 1883 is replaced by Catulliastites Szwedo nom. nov. for Catulliastites muiri (Cockerell) comb. nov. New taxa described are Cixiidae: Klugga gnawa Szwedo gen. et sp. nov., Klugga regoa Szwedo sp. nov., Liwakka gelloa Szwedo gen et sp. nov., Delwa morikwa Szwedo gen. et sp. nov., Kommanosyne wrikkua Szwedo gen. et sp. nov., Kernastiridius nephlajeus Szwedo gen. et sp. nov., Margaxius angosus Szwedo gen. et sp. nov., Dweivera reikea Szwedo gen. et sp. nov., Samaliverus bikkanus Szwedo gen. et sp. nov., Komsitija tuberculata Szwedo gen. et sp. nov., Langsmaniko marous Szwedo gen. et sp. nov., Komnixta jarzembowskii Szwedo gen. et sp. nov. and Worodbera nimakka gen. et sp. nov.; Tropiduchidae: Reteotissus hooleyi Szwedo gen. et sp. nov., Phatanako gen. nov. for Phatanako wilmattae (Cockerell) comb. nov., Senogaetulia kwalea Szwedo gen. et sp. nov., Dakrutulia mikhailkozlovi Szwedo gen. et sp. nov., Keriophettus atibenus Szwedo gen. et sp. nov. and Sognotela emeljanovi Szwedo gen. et sp. nov.; Issidae: Krundia korba Szwedo gen. et sp. nov., Breukoscelis vadimgratshevi Szwedo gen. et sp. nov., Breukoscelis phrikkosus Szwedo sp. nov. and Uphodato garwoterus Szwedo gen. et sp. nov.; Nogodinidae: Ambitaktoinae Szwedo subfam. nov., Ambitaktoa stoumma Szwedo gen. et sp. nov., Phariberea gurdonika Szwedo gen. et sp. nov., Wixskimoa torxsea Szwedo gen. et sp. nov., and Nadrimini trib. nov. with Niadrima yulei Szwedo gen. et sp. nov.; Lophopidae: Ankomwarius brodiei Szwedo gen. et sp. nov.; Ricaniidae: Ankwlanno bluga Szwedo gen. et sp. nov. Previously described Cicadomorpha were revised and new taxa are described: Cicadidae: Kintusamo boulardi Szwedo gen. et sp. nov; Aphrophoridae: Blenniphora Szwedo gen. nov. for Blenniphora woodwardi (Cockerell) comb. nov., Blenniphora skaka Szwedo sp. nov. and Blenniphora bikkanoa Szwedo sp. nov.; Luisphantyelus briwus Szwedo gen. et sp. nov., Natajephora lijanka Szwedo gen. et sp. nov.; Cercopidae: Berro enissuextaensis Szwedo gen. et sp. nov.; Cicadellidae: Mileewinae: Teniwitta andrewrossi Szwedo gen. et sp. nov. Formerly described true bugs (Heteroptera) are revised and several new taxa are described – Nepomorpha: Corixidae: Diacorixites szwedoi Popov gen. et sp. nov.; Cimicomorpha: Tingidae: Parasinalda wappleri Popov sp. nov., Viktorgolubia Popov gen. nov. for Viktorgolubia seposita (Cockerell) comb. nov.; Miridae: Gurnardinia herczeki Popov gen. et sp. nov.; Pentatomomorpha: Lygaeidae: Gurnardobayini Popov trib. nov., Gurnardobaya rossi Popov gen. et sp. nov.; Cydnidae: Eocenocydnus lisi Popov gen. et sp. nov.; Pentatomidae: Podopinites coloratus Popov gen. et sp. nov. and Podopinites acourti (Cockerell) comb. nov. An overview of the Late Eocene fauna of the Hemiptera is presented. Ecological and biogeographical patterns of the Hemiptera from the Isle of Wight deposits are discussed.

Keywords

fossil bugshomonymynew combinationsnew generanew namesnew speciesnew subfamilynew tribes
Type
Articles
Information
Earth and Environmental Science Transactions of The Royal Society of Edinburgh , Volume 110 , Issue 3-4: The Fauna and Flora of the Insect Limestone (late Eocene), Isle of Wight, UK, Volume 2 , September 2019 , pp. 331 - 396
Copyright
Copyright © The Royal Society of Edinburgh 2019 

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

3. References

Amyot, C.-J.-B. & Audinet-Serville, J. G. 1843. Deuxième partie. Homoptères. Homoptera Latr. Histoire naturelle des insects, i–lxxvi+1–676. Hemiptères. Paris: Libraire Encyclopédique de Roret.Google Scholar
Andersen, N. M. 1973. Seasonal polymorphism and developmental changes in organs of flight and reproduction in bivoltine pondskaters (Hem. Gerridae). Entomographica Scandinavica 4, 1–20.Google Scholar
Azar, D. 2007. Preservation and accumulation of biological inclusions in Lebanese amber and their significance. Comptes Rendus Palevol 6, 151–156.Google Scholar
Becker-Migdisova, E. E. 1946. Ocherki po sravnitelnoy morfologii sovremennykh i permskikh Homoptera, chast 1. [Contributions to the knowledge of the comparative morphology of the recent and Permian Homoptera. Part 1]. Seriya Biologicheskaya. Izvestiya Akademii Nauk SSSR 1946, 741–766.Google Scholar
Becker-Migdisova, E. E. 1964. Tretichnye ravnokrylye Stavropol'ya. [Tertiary Homoptera of Stavropol]. Trudy Paleontologicheskogo Instituta AN SSSR 54, 1–104.Google Scholar
Becker-Migdisova, E. E. 1985. Iskopaemye nasekomye Psyllomorpha. [Fossil psyllomorphous insects.]. Trudy Paleontologicheskogo Instituta AN SSSR 206, 1–93.Google Scholar
Becker-Migdisova, E. E. & Aizenberg, E. E. 1962. Inraotryad Aphidomorpha. In Rohdendorf, B. B. (ed.) Osnovy paleontologii, Chlenistonogie trakheïnye i khelicerovye 9, 194–1999. Moskva: Akademia Nauk SSSR.Google Scholar
Becker-Migdisova, E. E. & Aizenberg, E. E. 1991. Infraorder Aphidomorpha. Principles of palaeontology. Arthropoda Tracheata and Chelicerata. 9, 267–274. Moscow: Academy of Sciences USSR. [English translation.]Google Scholar
Bera, S., Mitra, S., Banerjee, M. & Szwedo, J. 2006. First discovery of the Coccoidea (Hemiptera: Sternorrhyncha) from the Siwalik sediments (Middle Miocene) of Darjeeling foothills, Eastern Himalaya, India. Polskie Pismo Entomologiczne 75, 199–206.Google Scholar
Billberg, G. J. 1820. Enumeratio insectorum in Museo Gust. Joh. Billberg, 1–138. Stockholm: Gadelianis.Google Scholar
Bink-Moenen, R. M. & Mound, L. A. 1990. Whiteflies: diversity, biosystematics and evolutionary patterns. In Gerling, D. (ed.) Whiteflies: their bionomics, pest status and management, 1–11. Andover: Intercept Ltd.Google Scholar
Boulard, M. & Nel, A. 1990. Sur deux cigales fossiles des terrains tertiaires de la France (Homoptera, Cicadoidea). Revue Francaise d'Entomologie 12, 37–45.Google Scholar
Boulard, M. & Riou, B. 1988. Tibicina gigantea n. sp. Cigale fossile de la Montagne d'Andance (Homoptera, Tibicinidae). Nouvelle Revue d'Entomologie 5, 349–351.Google Scholar
Boulard, M. & Riou, B. 1999. Miocenoprasia grasseti n.g. n. sp. grande cigale fossile du Miocene de al Montagne d'Audanc (Cicadomorpha: Cicadidae: Tibicininae). Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes, Biologie et Evolution des Insects 11–12, 135–140.Google Scholar
Bourgoin, T. 2017. FLOW (Fulgoromorpha Lists on The Web): a world knowledge base dedicated to Fulgoromorpha. Version 8, updated 22 November 2017. http://hemiptera-databases.org/flow/Google Scholar
Bourgoin, T., Wang, R.-R., Asche, M., Hoch, H., Soulier-Perkins, A., Stroiński, A., Yap, S. & Szwedo, J. 2015. From micropterism to hyperpterism: recognition strategy and standardized homology-driven terminology of the forewing venation patterns of planthoppers (Hemiptera: Fulgoromorpha). Zoomorphology 134, 63–77.Google Scholar
Bourgoin, T. & Campbell, B. C. 2002. Inferring a phylogeny for Hemiptera: falling into the ‘autapomorphic trap'. Denisia 4, 67–82.Google Scholar
Buckton, G. B. 1890. Monograph of the British Cicadae, or Tettigiidae, illustrated by more than four hundred coloured drawings. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Burmeister, H. 1835. Schnabelkerfe. Rhynchota. Handbuch der Entomologie. Band 2. Besondere Entomologie. Abtheilung 1. 1–396. Berlin: T. C. F. Enslin.Google Scholar
Caldwell, J. S. 1950. New genera and species from Mexico (Homoptera: Fulgoroidea). Proceedings of the Entomological Society of Washington 52, 287–290.Google Scholar
Carpenter, F. M. 1992. Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology. Part R. Arthropoda 4. Volume 3: Superclass Hexapoda. Boulder, CO: Geological Society of America; and Lawrence, KS: University of Kansas, Kansas.Google Scholar
Carvalho, G. S. & Webb, M. W. 2005. Cercopid spittle bugs of the New World (Hemiptera, Auchenorrhyncha, Cercopidae). Sofia–Moscow: Pensoft.Google Scholar
Chiang, C.-C. & Knight, W. J. 1991. Mileewanini of Taiwan. Journal of the Taiwan Museum 44, 117–124.Google Scholar
Chou, I. 1963. Some viewpoints about insect taxonomy. Acta entomologica sinica 12, 586-596 (in Chinese with English abstract). Cockerell, T. D. A. 1906. A fossil Cicada from Florissant, Colorado. Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History 22, 457–458.Google Scholar
Cockerell, T. D. A. 1906. A fossil cicada from Florissant, Colorado. Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History 22, 457–458.Google Scholar
Cockerell, T. D. A. 1908a. Descriptions of Tertiary insects. American Journal of Science, Series 4, 25, 51–52.Google Scholar
Cockerell, T. D. A. 1908b. Fossil Aphididae from Florissant, Colorado. Nature 78, 318–319.Google Scholar
Cockerell, T. D. A. 1909. Fossil insects from Florissant, Colorado. Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History 26, 67–76.Google Scholar
Cockerell, T. D. A. 1913. Some fossil insects from Florissant, Colorado. Canadian Entomologist 45, 229–233.Google Scholar
Cockerell, T. D. A. 1915. British fossil insects. Proceedings of the United States National Museum 49, 469–499.Google Scholar
Cockerell, T. D. A. 1920. Fossil Arthropods in the British Museum. – I. Annals and Magazine of Natural History, (Series 9) 5, 273–279.Google Scholar
Cockerell, T. D. A. 1921a. Fossil Arthopods in the British Museum. – V. Oligocene Hymenoptera from the Isle of Wight. Annals and Magazine of Natural History, Series 9, 7,1–25.Google Scholar
Cockerell, T. D. A. 1921b. Fossil arthropods in the British Museum. – VI. Oligocene insects from Gurnet Bay, Isle of Wight. Annals and Magazine of Natural History, Series 9, 7, 453–480.Google Scholar
Cockerell, T. D. A. 1921c. Fossil Arthropoda in the British Museum. VII. Annals and Magazine of Natural History, Series 9, 8, 541–545.Google Scholar
Cockerell, T. D. A. 1922. Fossil Arthropods in the British Museum. – VIII. Homoptera from Gurnet Bay, Isle of Wight. Annals and Magazine of Natural History, Series 9, 10, 157–161.Google Scholar
Cockerell, T. D. A. 1926. Some Tertiary fossil insects. Annals and Magazine of Natural History, Series 9, 18, 313–324, text–fig. 1–14.Google Scholar
Cockerell, T. D. A. 1927. Fossil Insects in the British Museum. Annals and Magazine of Natural History, Series 9, 20, 585–594.Google Scholar
Collinson, M. E. 1992. Vegetational and floristic changes around the Eocene/Oligocene boundary in Western and Central Europe. In Prothero, D. R. & Berggren, W. A. (eds) Eocene–Oligocene climatic and biotic evolution, 437–450. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Cook, L. G., Gullan, P. J. & Trueman, H. E. 2002. A preliminary phylogeny of the scale insects (Hemiptera: Sternorrhyncha: Coccoidea) based on nuclear small-subunit ribosomal DNA. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 25, 43–52.Google Scholar
Cooper, K. W. 1941. Davispia bearcreekensis Cooper, a new cicada from the Paleocene, with a brief review of the fossil Cicadidae. American Journal of Science 239, 286–304.Google Scholar
Davidová-Vilímová, J. 1993. Jeffocoris gen. n. – a new podopine genus from Australia (Heteroptera: Pentatomidae). Records of the South Australian Museum 26, 105–109.Google Scholar
Dietrich, C. H. 2005. Keys to the families of Cicadomorpha and subfamilies and tribes of Cicadellidae (Hemiptera: Auchenorrhyncha). Florida Entomologist 88, 502–517.Google Scholar
Dietrich, C. H. 2006. Guide to the subfamilies of Cicadellidae. http://www.inhs.uiuc.edu/∼dietrich/subfam/guide.html. Revised February 13, 2006.Google Scholar
Dietrich, C. H. 2011. Tungurahualini, a new tribe of Neotropical leafhoppers, with notes on the subfamily Mileewinae (Hemiptera, Cicadellidae). ZooKeys 124, 19–39.Google Scholar
Dietrich, C. H. & Gonçalves, A. C. 2014. New Baltic amber leafhoppers representing the oldest Aphrodinae and Megophthalminae (Hemiptera, Cicadellidae). European Journal of Taxonomy 74, 1–13.Google Scholar
Dietrich, C. H. & Vega, F. E. 1995. Leafhoppers (Homoptera: Cicadellidae) from Dominican amber. Annals of the Entomological Society of America 88, 236–270.Google Scholar
Distant, W. L. 1903. The fauna of British India, including Ceylon and Burma. Rhynchota, 2(1), Heteroptera. Family 4 to 16. (Lygaeidae–Capsidae). London: Taylor and Francis.Google Scholar
Distant, W. L. 1904. On South African Tingitidae and other Heteropterous Rhynchota. Transactions of the South African Philosophical Society 14, 425–436.Google Scholar
Distant, W. L. 1906. The Fauna of British India, including Ceylon and Burma. Rhynchota, Vol. III (Heteroptera–Homoptera). London: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
Distant, W. L. 1908. The fauna of British India, including Ceylon and Burma. Rhynchota, Vol. IV. Homoptera and appendix (Pt.). London: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
Distant, W. L. 1909. Rhynchota Malayana. Part II. Records of the Indian Museum 3, 163–181.Google Scholar
Douglas, J. W. & Scott, J. 1865. The British Hemiptera. 1. Hemiptera-Heteroptera. London: Ray Society.Google Scholar
Drake, C. J. 1950. Concerning the Cantacaderinae of the World. Arthropoda 1, 153–166.Google Scholar
Drake, C. J. & Davis, N. T. 1960. The morphology, phylogeny, and higher classification of the family Tingidae, including the description of a new genus and species of the subfamily Vianaidinae (Hemiptera: Heteroptera). Entomologica Americana (N.S.) 39, 1–100.Google Scholar
Drake, C. J. & Hambleton, E. J. 1946. New species and new genera of American Tingidae. Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington 59, 9–16.Google Scholar
Drake, C. J. & Ruhoff, F. A. 1960. Lace-bug genera of the World (Hemiptera: Tingidae). Proceedings of the United States National Museum 112, 1–105.Google Scholar
Drake, C. J. & Ruhoff, F. A. 1965. Lace-bugs of the world: a catalog (Hemiptera: Tingidae). Bulletin United States National Museum 242, 1–634.Google Scholar
Drohojowska, J. 2011. Eogyropsylla sedzimiri sp. nov. from Eocene Baltic amber with a key to the species of the fossil genus Eogyropsylla Klimaszewski, 1993 (Hemiptera: Sternorrhyncha: Psylloidea). Zootaxa 2803, 41–48.Google Scholar
Drohojowska, J., Perkovsky, E. E. & Szwedo, J. 2015. New genus and species of Aleyrodidae from the Eocene Baltic amber (Hemiptera: Sternorrhyncha: Aleyrodomorpha). Polish Journal of Entomology 84, 259–269.Google Scholar
Drohojowska, J., Wegierek, P. & Solorzano-Kraemer, M. M. 2016. First Psylloidea (Hemiptera: Sternorrhyncha) in Miocene Mexican amber. Palaontologische Zeitschrift 90, 185–188.Google Scholar
Drohojowska, J. & Szwedo, J. 2011a. A new whitefly from Lower Cretaceous Lebanese amber (Hemiptera: Sternorrhyncha: Aleyrodidae). Insect Systematics and Evolution 42, 179–196.Google Scholar
Drohojowska, J. & Szwedo, J. 2011b. New Aleyrodidae (Hemiptera: Sternorrhyncha: Aleyrodomorpha) from Eocene Baltic amber. Polish Journal of Entomology/Polskie Pismo Entomologiczne 80, 659–677.Google Scholar
Drohojowska, J. & Szwedo, J. 2013a. Whiteflies (Hemiptera: Sternorrhyncha: Aleyrodidae) from the Lowermost Eocene Oise amber. Zootaxa 3636, 319–347.Google Scholar
Drohojowska, J. & Szwedo, J. 2013b. Gapenus rhinariatus gen. sp. n. from the Lower Cretaceous amber of Lebanon (Hemiptera: Sternorrhyncha: Aleyrodidae). In Azar, D., Engel, M. S., Jarzembowski, E., Krogmann, L., Nel, A. & Santiago-Blay, J. (eds) Insect evolution in an amberiferous and stone alphabet, 99–110. Proceedings of the 6th International Congress on Fossil Insects, Arthropods and Amber. Leiden-Boston: Brill.Google Scholar
Drohojowska, J. & Szwedo, J. 2015. Early Cretaceous Aleyrodidae (Hemiptera: Sternorrhyncha) from the Lebanese amber. Cretaceous Research 52, 36–389.Google Scholar
Dubey, A. K. & Ko, C.-C. 2006. Toward an understanding of host plant associations of whiteflies (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae): an evolutionary approach. Formosa Entomologist 26, 197–201.Google Scholar
EDNA. 2018. The EDNA Fossil Insect Database. https://fossilinsectdatabase.co.uk/search.php Last update: 10th January 2018.Google Scholar
Emeljanov, A. F. 1971. Novye rody tsikadovykh fauny SSSR iz semeïstv Cixiidae i Issidae (Homoptera, Auchenorrhyncha). Entomologicheskoe obozrenie 50, 619–627. [In Russian.]. Published in English as: Yemel'yanov (Emeljanov), A. F. 1971. New genera of leafhoppers of the families Cixiidae and Issidae (Homoptera, Auchenorrhyncha) in the USSR. Entomological Review 50, 350–354.Google Scholar
Emeljanov, A. F. 1987. Filogenia tsikadovykh (Homoptera, Cicadina) po sravnitel'no-morfologicheskim dannym. [The phylogeny of cicadoids (Homoptera, Cicadina) based on comparative morphological data]. Trudy Vsesoyuznogo Entomologicheskogo Obshchestva 69, 19–109. [In Russian.]Google Scholar
Emeljanov, A. F. 1991. K voprosu ob ob''eme i podrazdeleniyakh sem. Achlidae (Homoptera, Cicadina). Entomologicheskoe Obozrenie 70, 373–393. [In Russian.] Published in English as: Yemel'yanov, A. F. 1992. Toward the problem of the limits and subdivisions of Achilidae (Homoptera, Cicadina). Entomological Review 71, 53–73.Google Scholar
Emeljanov, A. F. 1992. Planthoppers of the family Cixiidae from the vicinity of Ambo, Ethiopia (Homoptera, Cicadina). Zoosystematica Rossica 1, 20–36.Google Scholar
Emeljanov, A. F. 1994. Pervaya iskopayemaya nakhodka semeïstva Derbidae i pereopisanie paleogenovovo roda Hooleya Cockerell (Achilidae) (Insecta: Homoptera, Fulgoroidea). Paleontologicheskiï Zhurnal 3, 76–82. [In Russian.] Published in English as: Emeljanov, A. F. 1995. The First Find of Fossil Derbidae, And A Redescription of Paleogene Achilid Hooleya Cockerell (Insecta: Homoptera, Fulgoroidea). Paleontological Journal 28, 92–101.Google Scholar
Emeljanov, A. F. 1999. Notes on the delimination of families of the Issidae group with description of a new species of Caliscelidae belonging to a new genus and tribe (Homoptera, Fulgoroidea). Zoosystematica Rossica 8, 61–72.Google Scholar
Emeljanov, A. F. 2005. Novye rody i vidy sem. Achilidae (Homoptera). [New genera and species of the family Achilidae (Homoptera).] Entomologicheskoe Obozrenie 84, 10–45. [In Russian.]Google Scholar
Emeljanov, A. F. & Shcherbakov, D. E. 2009. New planthoppers of the tribe Achilini (Homoptera, Fulgoroidea, Achilidae) from Baltic amber. Paleontological Journal 43, 1008–1018.Google Scholar
Enderlein, G. 1915. Psyllidologica. III. Strophingia oligocaenica nov. spec, eine fossile Psyllide. Zoologischer Anzeiger, Leipzig, 45, 246–248.Google Scholar
Evans, G. A. 2008. The whiteflies (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) of the world and their host plants and natural enemies. USDA/Animal Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS). Last Revised: September 23, 2008. 703 pp. Available at: http://www.sel.barc.usda.gov:591/1WF/World-Whitefly-Catalog.pdfGoogle Scholar
Evans, J. W. 1946. A natural classification of the leaf-hoppers (Jassoidea, Homoptera). Part 1. External morphology and systematic position. Transactions of the Royal Entomological Society of London 96, 47–60.Google Scholar
Evans, J. W. 1947. A natural classification of the leaf-hoppers (Jassoidea, Homoptera). Part 3: Jassidae. Transactions of the Royal Entomological Society, London, 98, 105–271.Google Scholar
Evans, J. W. 1956. Palaeozoic and Mesozoic Hemiptera (Insecta). Australian Journal of Zoology 4, 165–258.Google Scholar
Evans, J. W. 1957. Los insectos de las Islas Juan Fernandez (Cicadellidae Homoptera). Revista Chilena de Entomologia 5, 365–374.Google Scholar
Fabricius, J. C. 1794. Entomologia systematica emendata et aucta, secundum classes, ordines, genera, species adjectis synonymis, locis, observationibus, descriptionibus 4. Hafniae: C. G. Proft Fil. et Soc.Google Scholar
Fabricius, J. C. 1803. Systema Rhyngotorum secundum ordines, genera, species adjectis synonymis, locis, observationibus, descriptionibus. Brunsvigae: Reichard.Google Scholar
Fennah, R. G. 1949. A new genus of Fulgoroidea (Homoptera) from South Africa. Annals and Magazine of Natural History, (Series 12) 2, 111–120.Google Scholar
Fennah, R. G. 1950. A generic revision of the Achilidae. Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History), Entomology 1, 1–170.Google Scholar
Fennah, R. G. 1963. New fossil fulgorid Homoptera from the amber of Chiapas, Mexico. University of California Publications In Entomology 31, 43–48.Google Scholar
Fennah, R. G. 1967. New and little known Fulgoroidea from South Africa (Homoptera). Annals of the Natal Museum 18, 655–714.Google Scholar
Fennah, R. G. 1968. A new genus and species of Ricaniidae from Palaeocene deposits in North Dakota. Journal of Natural History 2, 143–146.Google Scholar
Fennah, R. G. 1978. The higher classification of the Nogodinidae (Homoptera, Fulgoroidea) with the description of a new genus and species. Entomologist's Monthly Magazine 113, 113–119.Google Scholar
Fennah, R. G. 1982. A tribal classification of the Tropiduchidae (Homoptera: Fulgoroidea), with the description of a new species on tea in Malaysia. Bulletin of Entomological Research 72, 631–643.Google Scholar
Fennah, R. G. 1984. Revisionary notes on the classification of the Nogodinidae (Homoptera, Fulgoroidea), with descriptions of a new genus and a new species. Entomologist's Monthly Magazine 120, 81–86.Google Scholar
Fennah, R. G. 1987. A new subfamily of Nogodinidae (Homoptera: Fulgoroidea) with the description of a new species of Gastrini. Proceedings of the Entomological Society of Washington 89, 363–366.Google Scholar
Fieber, F. X. 1875. Les Cicadines d'Europe d'après les originaux et les publications les plus récentes. Première partie. Revue et Magasin de Zoologie pure et appliquée, Series 3, 3, 288–416.Google Scholar
Fitch, A. 1859. Fifth report on the noxious and other insects of the state of New York. Transactions of the New York State Agricultural Society 18, 781–854.Google Scholar
Flor, G. 1861. Zur Kenntniss der Rhynchoten. Bulletin de la Société impériale des Naturalistes de Moscou 34, 331–422.Google Scholar
Froeschner, R. C. 1968. Notes on the systematics and morphology of the lacebugs subfamily Cantacaderinae (Hemiptera: Tingidae). Proceedings of the Entomological Society of Washington 97, 245–254.Google Scholar
Froeschner, R. C. 1996. Lace Bug Genera of the World, I: Introduction, Subfamily Cantacaderinae (Heteroptera: Tingidae). Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology 574, 1–43.Google Scholar
Fujiyama, I. 1969. A Miocene Cicada from Nasu, with an Additional Record of a Pleistocene Cicada from Shiobara, Japan. Bulletin of the National Science Museum Tokyo 12, 863–874.Google Scholar
Fujiyama, I. 1979. Some Late Cenozoic Ciadas from Japan. Bulletin of the National Science Museum, Series C, Geology and Paleontology 5, 139–152.Google Scholar
Fujiyama, I. 1982. Some Fossil Cicadas from the Neogene of Japan. Bulletin of the National Science Museum, Series C, Geology and Paleontology 8, 181–187.Google Scholar
Gale, A. S., Huggett, J. M., Pälike, H., Laurie, E., Hailwood, E. A. & Hardenbol, J. 2006. Correlation of Eocene–Oligocene marine and continental records: orbital cyclicity, magnetostratigraphy and sequence stratigraphy of the Solent Group, Isle of Wight, UK. Journal of the Geological Society 163, 401–415.Google Scholar
Gale, A. S., Huggett, J. & Laurie, E. 2007. Discussion on the Eocene–Oligocene boundary in the UK. Journal of the Geological Society, London 164, 686–688.Google Scholar
Gębicki, C. & Szwedo, J. 2001. The first record of fossil Mileewinae from Eocene Baltic amber (Hemiptera: Membracoidea: Cicadellidae). Annales Zoologici 51, 417–422.Google Scholar
Gębicki, C. & Szwedo, J. 2006. Protodikraneurini trib. nov. from the Eocene Baltic amber (Hemiptera: Cicadellidae: Typhlocybinae). Annales Zoologici 56, 763–783.Google Scholar
Germar, E. F. 1821. Bemerkungen über einige Gatungen der Cicadarien. Magazin der Entomologie Halle 4, 1–106.Google Scholar
Germar, E. F. & Berendt, G. C. 1856. Die im Bernstein befindlichen Hemipteren und Orthopteren der Vorwelt. In Berendt, G. C. (ed.) Die im Bernstein befindlichen organischen Reste der Vorwelt gesammelt in Verbindung mit Mehrenen, bearbeitet und herausgegeben 2, 1–40. Berlin: G. C. Berendt.Google Scholar
Gill, R. J. 1990. The morphology of whiteflies. In Gerling, D. (ed.) Whiteflies, their bionomics, pest status and management, 13–46. Andover: Intercept Ltd.Google Scholar
Glendenning, R. 1926. Some new aphids from British Columbia. Canadian Entomologist 58, 95–98.Google Scholar
Gnezdilov, V. M. 2003. A new tribe of the family Issidae with comments on the family as a whole (Homoptera: Cicadina). Zoosystematica Rossica 11, 305–309.Google Scholar
Gnezdilov, V. M. 2007. On the systematic positions of the Bladinini Kirkaldy, Tonginae Kirkaldy, and Trienopinae Fennah (Homoptera, Fulgoroidea). Zoosystematica Rossica 15, 293–297.Google Scholar
Gnezdilov, V. M. 2012a. On the composition and distribution of the family Acanaloniidae Amyot et Serville (Homoptera, Fulgoroidea). Entomologicheskoe Obozrenie 91, 643–647.Google Scholar
Gnezdilov, V. M. 2012b. Revision of the tribe Colpopterini Gnezdilov, 2003 (Homoptera, Fulgoroidea: Nogodinidae). Entomologicheskoe Obozrenie 91, 757–774. [Published in English as: Gnezdilov, V. M. 2013. Revision of the Tribe Colpopterini Gnezdilov, 2003 (Homoptera, Fulgoroidea: Nogodinidae) Entomological Review 93, 337–353.]Google Scholar
Gnezdilov, V. M. 2013. Modern classification and the distribution of the family Issidae Spinola (Homoptera, Auchenorrhyncha: Fulgoroidea). Entomologicheskoe Obozrenie 92, 724–738.Google Scholar
Gnezdilov, V. M. 2017. Notes on higher classification of the family Nogodinidae (Hemiptera: Auchenorrhyncha: Fulgoroidea), with description of new tribe and new species. Far Eastern Entomologist 347, 1–21.Google Scholar
Godoy, C. & Webb, M. D. 1994. Recognition of a new subfamily of Cicadellidae from Costa Rica based on a phenetic analysis with similar taxa (Hemiptera Homoptera Auchenorrhyncha). Tropical Zoology 7, 131–144.Google Scholar
Golub, V. B. 2001. Archepopovia yurii n. gen., n. sp. a new remarkable lace bug from Baltic amber, with some notes on phylogeny and classification of Tingidae (Heteroptera, Tingidae). Mitteilungen des Geologisch-Paläontologischen Institut der Universität Hamburg 85, 263–276.Google Scholar
Golub, V. B. & Popov, Y. A. 1998. Cantacaderid lace bug from the Baltic amber (Heteroptera, Tingidae, Cantacaderinae). Mitteilungen aus dem Geologisch-Paläontologischen Institut der Universität Hamburg 81, 223–250.Google Scholar
Golub, V. B. & Popov, Y. A. 1999. Composition and evolution of Cretaceous and Cenozoic faunas of bugs of the superfamily Tingoidea (Heteroptera: Cimicomorpha). Proceedings of the first Palaeoentomological Conference, Moscow 1998. AMBA Projects International, Bratislava, 33–39.Google Scholar
Golub, V. B. & Popov, Y. A. 2000. New cantacaderid bugs from Dominican amber (Heteroptera: Tingidae, Cantacaderinae). Acta Geologica Hispanica 35, 165–169.Google Scholar
Golub, V. B. & Popov, Y. A. 2002. A new cantacaderid lace bug from Baltic amber, and a key to fossil Cenozoic species of the family Tingidae (Insecta: Heteroptera). Mitteilungen aus dem Geologisch-Paläontologischen Institut der Universität Hamburg 86, 245–252.Google Scholar
Golub, V. B. & Popov, Y. A. 2003. Two new species of lace bugs from Dominican amber (Heteroptera: Tingidae, Tinginae). Annals of the Upper Silesian Museum (Entomology) 12, 101–110.Google Scholar
Golub, V. B. & Popov, Y. A. 2005a. The third representative of the fossil genus Intercader from Baltic amber (Insecta: Heteroptera: Tingidae, Cantacaderinae). Mitteilungen aus dem Geologisch-Paläontologischen Institut der Universität Hamburg 89, 167–172.Google Scholar
Golub, V. B. & Popov, Y. A. 2005b. Sinalda applanata sp. n., a new lace bug from Baltic amber, is described, together with notes on the evolution of some morphological structures in the Eocene Tingidae (Heteroptera, Tingoidea). Euroasian Entomological Journal 4, 279–282.Google Scholar
Golub, V. B. & Popov, Y. A. 2016. Istoricheskoe razvite I voprosy klassyfikatsii poluzhestokrylykh nadsemeïstva Tingoidea (Hemiptera: Heteroptera, Cimicomorpha) [Historical development and problems of classification of the heteropteran insects of the superfamily Tingoidea (Hemiptera: Heteroptera, Cimicomorpha)]. Chteniya pamyati N.A. Kholodkovskogo [Meetings in memory of N.A. Cholodkovsky] 66, 1–93.Google Scholar
Grimaldi, D. A., Engel, M. S. & Nascimbene, P. C. 2002. Fossiliferous Cretaceous Amber from Myanmar (Burma): Its Rediscovery, Biotic Diversity and Paleontological Significance. American Museum Novitates 3361, 1–71.Google Scholar
Grimaldi, D. A. & Engel, M. S. 2005. Evolution of the insects. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gullan, P. J. & Cook, L. G. 2007. Phylogeny and higher classification of the scale insects (Hemiptera: Sternorrhyncha: Coccoidea). Zootaxa 1668, 413–425.Google Scholar
Haglund, C. J. E. 1899. Beiträge zur Kenntnis der Insektenfauna von Kamerun. Öfversigt Af Kongliga Svenska Vetenskaps-Akademiens Förhandlingar 56, 49–71.Google Scholar
Hahn, C. W. 1833. Die Wanzenartigen Insekten 1, 37–118. Nürnberg: C. H. Zeh.Google Scholar
Handlirsch, A. 1906–1908. Die fossilen Insekten und die Phylogenie der rezenten Formen. Leipzig: Verlag von Wilhelm Engelmann. ix+1430+51 plates (1906: 1–672; 1907: 673–1120; 1908: 1121–1430), 51 taf. (1906: plates 1–36; 1907: plates 37–51).Google Scholar
Handlirsch, A. 1925. Ordung: Homoptera (Latr.) Westw. (Homopteren). In Schröder, C. (ed.) Systematische Übersicht (Schluss.). Handbuch der Entomologie 3, 1102–1126. Jena: Gustav Fischer.Google Scholar
Harris, A. C., Bannister, J. M. & Lee, D. E. 2007. Fossil scale insects (Hemiptera, Coccoidea, Diaspididae) in life position on an angiosperm leaf from an Early Miocene lake deposit, Otago, New Zealand. Journal of the Royal Society of New Zealand 37, 1–13.Google Scholar
Hartig, T. 1839. Jahresberichte über die Fortschritte der Forstwissenschaft und forstlichen Naturkunde im Jahre 1836 und 1837 nebst Original-Abhandlungen aus dem Gebiete dieser Wissenschaften. Förstner Berlin 1, 640–646.Google Scholar
Hausmann, F. 1802. Beiträge zu den Materialien für eine künstrige Bearbeitung der Gattung der Blattläuse. Magazin für Insektenkunde 1, 426–445.Google Scholar
Heer, O. 1853. Die Insektenfauna der Tertiargebilde von Oeningen & von Rabodoj in Croatien Part III. Rhynchoten. Leipzig: Wilhelm Engelmann.Google Scholar
Heer, O. 1856. Über die fossilen Insekten von Aix in der Provence. Vierteljahrsschrift der Naturforschenden Gesellschaft in Zürich 1, 1–40.Google Scholar
Heie, O. E. 1967. Studies on fossil aphids (Homoptera: Aphidoidea), especially in the Copenhagen collection of fossils in Baltic amber. Spolia Zoologica Musei Hauniensis Copenhagen 26, 1–274.Google Scholar
Heie, O. E. 1968. Pliocene aphids from Willershausen (Homoptera: Aphidoidea). Beihandlungen Berichte der Naturhistorischen Gesellschaft Hannover 6, 25–40.Google Scholar
Heie, O. E. 1970. Notes on six little known Tertiary aphids (Hem., Aphidoidea). Entomologica Scandinavica 1, 109–119.Google Scholar
Heie, O. E. 1976. Taxonomy and phylogeny of the fossil family Elektraphiididae Steffan, 1968 (Hooptera: Aphidoidea). Entomologica scandinavica 7, 53–58.Google Scholar
Heie, O. E. 1980. The Aphidoidea (Hemiptera) of Fennoscandia and Denmark. I. General Part. The families Mindaridae, Hormaphididae, Thelaxidae, Anoeciidae and Pemphigidae. Fauna Entomologica Scandinavica 9, 1–236.Google Scholar
Heie, O. E. 1989. Fossil aphids (Insecta, Homoptera) from the Tertiary deposits of Bolshaya Svetlovodnaya, the USSR. Entomologica scandinavica 19, 475–488.Google Scholar
Heie, O. E. 1995. An aphid from the Plio-Pleistocene København Formation, North Greenland. Entomologiske Meddelelser 63, 17–18.Google Scholar
Heie, O. E. 2005. Fossil aphids (Hemiptera: Sternorrhyncha) from Canadian Cretaceous amber and from the Miocene of Nevada. Insect Systematics and Evolution 37, 91–104.Google Scholar
Heie, O. E. & Lutz, H. 2002. Fossil aphids from Early Oligocene deposits near Céreste, France, with descriptions of new genera and species (Hemiptera, Sternorrhyncha, Aphidoidea). Mainzer Naturwissenschaftliches Archiv 40, 113–122.Google Scholar
Heie, O. E. & Wegierek, P. 1998. A list of fossil aphids (Homoptera: Aphidinea). Annals of the Upper Silesian Museum in Bytom Entomology 8/9, 159–192.Google Scholar
Heie, O. E. & Wegierek, P. 2011. A list of fossil aphids (Hemiptera, Sternorrhyncha, Aphidomorpha). Monographs of the Upper Silesian Museum 6, 1–82.Google Scholar
Heiss, E. 2002. Weitschatiella elenae gen. n., sp. n., in Baltischem Bernstein (Heteroptera, Cantacaderidae). Mitteilungen aus dem Geologisch-Paläontologischen Institut der Universität Hamburg 86, 221–228.Google Scholar
Heiss, E. & Golub, V. B. 2013. Reconsideration of Baltic Amber “Sinalda” with description of a new genus and species (Hemiptera, Heteroptera, Tingidae). Linzer Biologische Beiträge 45, 1865–1871.Google Scholar
Henriksen, K. L. 1922. Eocene insects from Denmark. Danmarks Geologisske Undersoegelse 32, 1–36.Google Scholar
Heslop-Harrison, G. 1952. LXXII. Preliminary notes on the ancestry, family relations, evolution and speciation of the Homopterous Psyllidae. II. Annals and Magazine of Natural History, Series 12, 5, 679–696.Google Scholar
Hodgson, C. J. & Hardy, N. B. 2013. The phylogeny of the superfamily Coccoidea (Hemiptera: Sternorrhyncha) based on the morphology of extant and extinct macropterous males. Systematic Entomology 38, 794–804.Google Scholar
Hooker, J. J., Collinson, M. E., Van Bergen, P. F., Singer, R. L., De Leeuw, J. W. & Jones, T. P. 1995. Reconstruction of land and freshwater palaeoenvironments near the Eocene-Oligocene boundary, southern England. Journal of the Geological Society of London 152, 449–468.Google Scholar
Hooker, J. J., Collinson, M. E. & Sille, N. P. 2004. Eocene–Oligocene mammalian faunal turnover in the Hampshire Basin, UK: calibration to the global time scale and the major cooling event. Journal of the Geological Society of London 161, 161–172.Google Scholar
Hooker, J. J., Collinson, M. E., Grimes, S., Sille, N. & Mattey, D. 2007. Discussion on the Eocene-Oligocene boundary in the UK. Journal of the Geological Society of London 164, 685–688.Google Scholar
Hooker, J. J., Grimes, S., Mattey, D., Collinson, M. E. & Sheldon, N. D. 2009. Refined correlation of the UK Late Eocene–Early Oligocene Solent Group and timing of its climate history. In Koeberl, C. & Montanari, A. (eds) The Late Eocene Earth – hothouse, icehouse, and impacts. Geological Society of America Special Paper 452, 179–195.Google Scholar
Hope, F. W. 1847. Observations on the fossil insects of Aix in Provence, with descriptions and figures of three species. Transactions of the Entomological Society of London 4, 250–255.Google Scholar
Izzard, R. J. 1936. The Hemiptera of Christmas Island. Annals and Magazine of Natural History, Series 10, 17, 577–600.Google Scholar
Jarzembowski, E. A. 1976. Report of Easter Field meeting: the Lower Tertiaries of the Isle of Wight, 27-31.III.1975. Tertiary Research 1, 11–16.Google Scholar
Jarzembowski, E. A. 1980. Fossil insects from the Bembridge Marls, Palaeogene of the Isle of Wight, southern England. Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History), Geology 33, 237–293.Google Scholar
Jarzembowski, E. A. & Ross, A. J. 1994. Time flies: the geological record of insects. Geology Today 9, 218–223.Google Scholar
Jones, S. S., Burke, S. V. & Duvall, M. R. 2014. Phylogeneomics, molecular evolution and estimated ages of lineages from deep phylogeny of Poaceae. Plant Systematics and Evolution 300, 1421–1436.Google Scholar
Karban, R. 1986. Prolonged development in cicadas. In Taylor, R. & Karban, R. (eds) The evolution of insect life cycles, 222–233. New York: Springer Verlag.Google Scholar
Kinugasa, H. & Miyatake, Y. 1976. A Neogene Cicada From Tatsumi-tôge, Tottori Pref., Japan (Hemiptera: Cicadidae). Bulletin of the Osaka Museum of Natural History 30, 5–10.Google Scholar
Kinugasa, H. & Yorio, M. 1979. The Second Neogene Cicada from Tatsumi-tôge, Tottori. Bulletin of the Osaka Museum of Natural History 32, 1–6.Google Scholar
Kirkaldy, G. W. 1904. Bibliographical and nomenclatorial notes on the Hemiptera. No. 3. Entomologist 37, 279–283.Google Scholar
Kirkaldy, G. W. 1905. Catalogue of the genera of the hemipterous family Aphidae, with their typical species, together with a list of the species described as new from 1885-1905. Canadian Entomologist 37, 414–420.Google Scholar
Kirkaldy, G. W. 1906. Leafhoppers and their natural enemies. Pt IX. Leafhoppers – Hemiptera. Bulletin of the Hawaiian Sugar Planters Association, Division of Entomology 1, 271–479.Google Scholar
Kirkaldy, G. W. 1907. Leafhoppers – Supplement (Hemiptera). Bulletin of the Hawaiian Sugar Planters Association, Division of Entomology, 3, 1–186.Google Scholar
Kirschbaum, C. L. 1868. Die Cicadinen der Gegend von Wiesbaden und Frankfurt a. M. nebst einer Anzahl neuer oder Schwer zu unterscheidender Arten aus anderen Gegenden Europa's Tabellarisch Beschreiben. Jahrbücher des Nassauischen Vereins für Naturkunde 21–22, 1–202.Google Scholar
Klimaszewski, S. M. 1993a. New species of Miocene psyllids (Homoptera, Psylloidea). Acta biologica silesiana 22, Prace Naukowe Uniwersytetu Śląskiego 1336, 19–29.Google Scholar
Klimaszewski, S. M. 1993b. New species of Eocene psyllids representing the tribe Paleopsylloidini Becker-Migdisova (Homoptera, Aphalaridae). Acta Biologica Silesiana 22, Prace Naukowe Uniwersytetu Śląskiego nr 1336, 57–67.Google Scholar
Klimaszewski, S. M. 1996. New psyllids (Homoptera, Psylloidea) from Dominican amber. Acta Biologica Silesiana 29, Prace Naukowe Uniwersytetu Śląskiego nr 1568, 24–44.Google Scholar
Klimaszewski, S. M. 1997a. Further data concerning Dominican amber jumping plant lice (Homoptera, Psylloidea). Prace Naukowe Uniwersytetu Śląskiego nr 1620. Acta Biologica Silesiana 30, 19–27.Google Scholar
Klimaszewski, S. M. 1997b. Protoscena baltica gen.et.sp.n from the Eocene Baltic amber (Hemiptera, Homoptera). Annalen des Naturhistorisches Museum in Wien 98A, 69–72.Google Scholar
Klimaszewski, S. M. 1997c. New psyllids from the Baltic amber (Insecta: Homoptera, Aphalaridae). Mitteilungen der Geologisch-Paläontologisches Institut der Hamburg Universität 80, 157–171.Google Scholar
Klimaszewski, S. M. & Popov, Y. A. 1993. New fossil hemipteran insects from Southern England (Hemiptera: Psyllina + Coleorrhyncha). Annals of the Upper Silesian Museum, Entomology, Supplement 1, 13–36.Google Scholar
Koch, C. L. 1856. Die Pflanzenläuse Aphiden, getreu nach dem Leben abgebildet und beschrieben, II. Nürnberg 8, 237–274.Google Scholar
Koch, C. L. 1857. Die Pflanzenläuse Aphiden, getreu nach dem Leben abgebildet und beschrieben, III. Nürnberg 9, 275–336.Google Scholar
Koteja, J. 1985. Essay on the prehistory of the scale insects (Homoptera, Coccinea). Annales Zoologici 38, 462–503.Google Scholar
Koteja, J. 1988. Eomatsucoccus gen. n. (Homoptera, Coccinea) from Siberian Lower Cretaceous deposits. Annales Zoologici 42, 141–163.Google Scholar
Koteja, J. 1989. Baissococcus victoriae gen. et sp. n. – a Lower Cretaceous coccid (Homoptera, Coccinea). Acta Zoologica Cracovienisia 32, 93–106.Google Scholar
Koteja, J. 1999. Eomatsucocus andrewi sp. nov. (Hemiptera: Sternorrhyncha: Coccinea) from the Lower Cretacous of southern England. Cretaceous Research 20, 863–866.Google Scholar
Koteja, J. 2000a. The scale insects (Homoptera, Coccinea) from Upper Cretaceous New Jersey amber. In Grimaldi, D. (ed.) Studies on fossils in amber, with particular reference to the Cretaceous New Jersey, 147–229. Leiden: Backhuys Publishers.Google Scholar
Koteja, J. 2000b. Advances in the study of fossil coccids (Hemiptera: Coccinea). Polskie Pismo Entomologiczne 69, 187–218.Google Scholar
Koteja, J. 2001. Essays on coccids (Hemiptera: Coccinea). Paleontology without fossils? Prace Muzeum Ziemi 46, 41–53.Google Scholar
Koteja, J. 2004. Scale insects (Hemiptera: Coccinea) from Cretaceous Myanmar (Burmese) amber. Journal of Systematic Palaeontology 2, 109–114.Google Scholar
Koteja, J. 2008. Xylococcidae and related groups (Hemiptera: Coccinea) from Baltic amber. Prace Muzeum Ziemi 49, 19-56.Google Scholar
Koteja, J. & Azar, D. 2008. Scale insects from Lower Cretaceous amber of Lebanon (Hemiptera: Sternorrhyncha: Coccinea). Alavesia 2, 133–167.Google Scholar
Koteja, J. & Ben-Dov, Y. 2003. Notes on the fossil armoured scale insect Aspidiotus crenulatus (Pampaloni) (Hem. Coccoidea, Diaspididae). Bulletin de la Société entomologique de France 108, 165–166.Google Scholar
Krzemiński, W., Blagoderov, V., Azar, D., Lukashevich, E., Szadziewski, R., Wedmann, S., Nel, A., Collomb, F.-M., Waller, A. & Nicholson, D. B. 2019. True flies (Insecta: Diptera) from the late Eocene Insect Limestone (Bembridge Marls) of the Isle of Wight, England, UK. Earth and Environmental Science Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh. DOI: 10.1017/S1755691018000464.Google Scholar
Laporte, F. L. de 1832–1833. Essai d'une classification systématique de l'ordre des Hémiptères (Hétéroptères Latr.). Magasin de Zoologie 2(Suppl. 1), 1–88.Google Scholar
Laporte, F. L. de 1833. Note sur un nouveau genre et un nouvel insecte Homoptère (Caliscelis heterodoxa). Annales de la Société entomologique de France 2, 251–253.Google Scholar
Latreille, P. A. 1802. Histoire naturelle, générale et particulière des crustacés et des insectes 3, Paris: Dufart.Google Scholar
Latreille, P. A. 1804. Division seconde. Famille quarante-huitième. Cicadaires; cicadairae. Histoire naturelle, générale et particulière, des crustacés et des insectes 12, 5–424.Google Scholar
Latreille, P. A. 1807. Genera Crustaceorum et Insectorum secundum ordinem naturalem in familias disposita, iconibus exemplurisque plurimis explicata. 3, 1–258. Parisiis et Argentorati: Amand Koenig.Google Scholar
Latreille, P. A. 1810. Considérations générales sur l'ordre naturel des animaux composant les classes des crustacés, des arachnides, et des insectes; avec tableau méthodique de leurs genres, disposés en familles. Paris: Schoell.Google Scholar
Leach, W. E. 1815. Entomology. In Brewster, D. (ed.) The Edinburgh encyclopaedia 9, 57–172. Edinburgh: John Murray Baldwin & Cradocle.Google Scholar
Leach, W. E. 1818. Notes on the insect Aphis lanigera. Transactions of the Horticultural Society of London 3, 60.Google Scholar
van Lenteren, J. C. & Noldus, L. P. J. J. 1990. Whitefly-plant relationships: behavioural and ecological aspects. In Gerling, D. (ed.) Whiteflies: their biology, pest status and management, 47–89. Andover: Intercept.Google Scholar
Leston, D., Pendergrast, J. G. & Southwood, T. R. E. 1954. Classification of the Terrestrial Heteroptera. Nature 174, 91–92.Google Scholar
Lewis, S. E. 1989. Bibliographic data on insect Homoptera from the Paleozoic and Cenozoic of the Australian, Ethiopian, Nearctic, Neotropical, Oriental and Palaearctic zoogeographical regions. Occasional Papers in Palaeobiology, St. Cloud State University 3, 1–23.Google Scholar
Lewis, S. E. & Heikes, P. M. 1991. A catalog of fossil insect sites from the Tertiary of the United States. Occasional Papers in Paleobiology at St. Cloud State University 5, 487.Google Scholar
Lin, Q.-B., Szwedo, J., Huang, D.-Y. & Stroiński, A. 2010. Weiwoboidae fam. nov. of ‘higher' Fulgoroidea (Hemiptera: Fulgoromorpha) from the Eocene deposits of Yunnan, China. Acta Geologica Sinica (English Edition) 84, 751–755.Google Scholar
Linnaeus, C. 1758. Systema Naturae per Regna tria Naturae, secundum classes, ordines, genera, species, cum characteribus, differentiis, synonymis, locis, Editio decima, reformata. Tomus 1. Holmiae: Laurentiii Salvii.Google Scholar
Linnaeus, C. 1761. Fauna Suecica sistens animalia Sueciae regni: Mammalia, Aves, Amphibia, Pisces, Insecta, Vermes. Distributa per classes et ordines, genera et species, cum differentiis specierum, synonymis auctorum, nominibus incolarum, locis natalium, descriptionibus insectorum. Editio altera. Stockholm: Laurentii Salvii.Google Scholar
Linnavuori, R. 1977. Hemiptera of the Sudan, with remarks on some species of the adjacent countries 5. Tingidae, Piesmatidae, Cydnidae, Thamastellidae and Plataspidae. Acta Zoologica Fennica 147, 1–81.Google Scholar
Linnavuori, R. 1979. Revision of the African Cicadellidae (Homoptera, Auchenorrhyncha). Part II. Revue de Zoologie et de Botanique Africaines 93, 929–1010.Google Scholar
Lis, J. A. 2006. Cydnidae Billberg, 1820 - burrowing bugs (burrower bugs). In Aukema, B. & Rieger, C. (eds) Catalogue of the Heteroptera of the Palaearctic Region, 119–147. Wageningen, The Netherlands: Entomological Society.Google Scholar
Löw, F. 1879. Zur Systematik der Psylloden. Verhandlungen der Zoologisch-botanischen Gesellschaft in Wien 28, 585–610.Google Scholar
Magallón, S., Gómez-Acevedo, S., Sánchez-Reyes, L. L. & Hernández-Hernández, T. 2015. A metacalibrated time-tree documents the early rise of flowering plant phylogenetic diversity. New Phytologist 207, 437–453.Google Scholar
Manzari, S. & Quicke, D. L. J. 2006. A cladistic analysis of whiteflies, subfamily Aleyrodinae (Hemiptera: Sternorrhyncha: Aleyrodidae). Journal of Natural History 40, 2423–2554.Google Scholar
Martin, J. H. 2003. Whiteflies (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) – their systematic history and the resulting problems of conventional taxonomy, with special references to descriptions of Aleyrodes proletella (Linnaeus, 1758) and Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius, 1889). Entomologist's Gazette 54, 125–136.Google Scholar
Martin, J. H., Mifsud, D. & Rapisarda, C. 2000. The whiteflies (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) of Europe and the Mediterranean Basin. Bulletin of Entomological Research 90, 407–448.Google Scholar
Martin, J. H. & Mound, L. A. 2007. An annotated check list of the world's whiteflies (Insecta: Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae. Zootaxa 1492, 1–84.Google Scholar
Martynov, A. V. 1935. Permian fossil insects from Arkhangelsk District. Part. 5. Homoptera. Trudy Paleozoologischeskogo Instituta Akademii Nauk SSSR 4, 1–35.Google Scholar
Matsumura, S. 1914. Die Cixiinen Japans. Annotationes Zoologicae Japonenses 8, 393–434.Google Scholar
Mayer-Eymar, K. 1883. Grundzüge der Klassifikation der Belemniten. Zeitschrift der Deutschen geologischen Gesellschaft, C. Verhandlungen der Gesellschaft 35, 640–643.Google Scholar
Mayr, G. 1853. Zwei neue wanzen aus Kordofan. Verhandlungen der Zoologisch-Botanischen Vereins in Wien 2, 14–18.Google Scholar
McKenna, M. C. 1983. Cenozoic paleogeography of North Atlantic land bridges. In Bott, M. P. H., Saxov, S., Talwani, M. & Thiede, J. (eds) Structure and development of the Greenland–Scotland bridge: new concepts and methods, 351–395. NATO Conference Series IV, Marine Sciences, 8, New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
Melichar, L. 1898. Monographie der Ricaniiden (Homoptera). Annalen des Kaiserlich-Königlichen Naturhistorischen Hofmuseums Wien 13, 197–359.Google Scholar
Melichar, L. 1906. Monographie der Issiden (Homoptera). Abhandlungen der Kaiserlich-Königlichen Zoologisch-Botanischen Gesellschaft in Wien 3, 1–327.Google Scholar
Melichar, L. 1914. Monographie der Tropiduchinen (Homoptera). Verhandlungen des Naturforschenden Vereines in Brünn 53, 1–145, figs. 1–35.Google Scholar
Melichar, L. 1915. Monographie der Lophopinen. Annales Historico-Naturales Musei Nationalis Hungarici 13, 337–385.Google Scholar
Menge, A. 1856. Lebenszeichen vorweltlicher im Bernstein eingeschlossener Thiere. Programm Petrischule Danzig. Danzig: Verlag A.W. Kafemann.Google Scholar
Metcalf, Z. P. 1954. Fascicle IV Fulgoroidea. Part 11 Tropiduchidae. In General Catalogue of the Homoptera, i–viii+1–167. Raleigh, NC: North Carolina State College.Google Scholar
Metcalf, Z. P. 1958. Fascicle IV Fulgoroidea. Part 15 Issidae. In General Catalogue of the Homoptera, Paper No. 866, i–vii+1–561. Contribution from the Entomology Faculty of the Division of Biological Sciences, North Carolina Agricultural Experiment Station, Raleigh, NC, USA. . Raleigh, NC: North Carolina State College.Google Scholar
Metcalf, Z. P. & Wade, V. 1966. A Catalogue of the fossil Homoptera (Homoptera: Auchenorrhyncha). In General Catalogue of the Homoptera, Paper Nr. 2049, i–v+1–245. A Supplement to Fascicle I. Membracidae of the General Catalogue of the Hemiptera. Contribution from the Entomology Department, North Carolina Agricultural Experiment Station. Raleigh, NC, USA. Raleigh, NC: North Carolina State University.Google Scholar
Meyer, H. W. 2003. The fossils of Florissant. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Books.Google Scholar
Milne, R. I. 2006. Northern Hemipshere plant disjunctions: a window on Tertiary land bridges and climate change? Annals of Botany 98, 465–472.Google Scholar
Monell, J. 1877. A new genus of Aphidae. Canadian Entomologist 9, 102–103.Google Scholar
Moran, N. A., Tran, P., Gerardo, N. M. 2005. Symbiosis and Insect Diversification: an Ancient Symbiont of Sap-Feeding Insects from the Bacterial Phylum Bacteroidetes. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 71, 8802–8810.Google Scholar
Mordvilko, A. K. 1908. Tableaux pour servir à la détermination des groupes et des genres des Aphididae Passerini. Annuaire du Musée Zoologique de l'Académie Impériale des Sciences de St.-Pétersbourg 13, 353–384.Google Scholar
Moulds, M. S. 2005. An appraisal of the higher classification of cicadas (Hemiptera: Cicadoidea) with special reference to the Australian fauna. Records of the Australian Museum 57, 375–446.Google Scholar
Moulds, M. S. 2018. Cicada fossils (Cicadoidea: Tettigarctidae and Cicadidae) with a review of the named fossilised Cicadidae. Zootaxa 4438, 443–470.Google Scholar
Moulton, J. C. 1923. Cicadas of Malaysia. Journal of the Federated Malay States Museums 11, 69–182.Google Scholar
Mound, L. A. 1984. Zoogeographical distribution of whiteflies. Current Topics in Vector Research 2, 185–197.Google Scholar
Mound, L. A., Martin, J. H. & Polaszek, A. 1994. The insect fauna of Selaginella (Pteridophyta: Lycopsida), with descriptions of three new species. Journal of Natural History 28, 1403–1415.Google Scholar
Mound, L. A. & Halsey, S. H. 1978. Whitefly of the world. Chichester: British Museum (Natural History)/John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Muir, F. 1923. On the Classification of the Fulgoroidea (Homoptera). Proceedings of the Hawaiian Entomological Society 5, 205–247.Google Scholar
Myers, J. G. 1929. Observation on the biology of two remarkable cixiid plant-hoppers (Homoptera) from Cuba. Psyche 36, 283–292.Google Scholar
Myers, J. G. & China, W. E. 1929. The systematic position of the Peloridiidae as elucidated by a further study of the external anatomy of Hemiodoecus leai China. Annals and Magazine of Natural History Series 10 3, 282–294.Google Scholar
Nel, A. 1992. Nouveaux Tingidae fossiles du Cénozoïque de France (Heteroptera). École Pratique des Hautes Études, Biologie et Évolution des Insectes 5, 97–104.Google Scholar
Nel, A., Waller, A. & de Plöeg, G. 2004. The oldest fossil Tingidae from the Lowermost Eocene amber of the Paris Basin (Heteroptera: Cimicomorpha:Tingoidea). In Nel, A. (ed.) The ambers of France. Geology and state of the art of their palaeoentomological content. Geologica Acta 2, 37–43.Google Scholar
Nel, A., Prokop, J. & Ross, A. J. 2008. New genus of leaf-mimicking katydids (Orthoptera: Tettigoniidae) from the Late Eocene–Early Oligocene of France and England. Comptes Rendus Palevol 7, 211–216.Google Scholar
Nel, A., Roques, P., Nel, P., Prokin, A. A., Bourgoin, T., Prokop, J., Szwedo, J., Azar, D., Desutter-Grandcolas, L., Wappler, T., Garrouste, R., Coty, D., Huang, D.-Y., Engel, M. S., Kirejtshuk, A. G. 2013. The earliest known holometabolous insects. Nature 503, 257–261.Google Scholar
Nickel, H. 2003. The leafhoppers and planthoppers of Germany (Hemiptera, Auchenorrhyncha): patterns and strategies in a highly diverse group of phytophagous insects. Sofia–Moscow: Pensoft Publishers, Keltern: Goecke & Everes.Google Scholar
Nielson, M. W. & Godoy, C. 1995 (1992). New species of Colladonus (Homoptera: Cicadellidae) from Costa Rica, with key to species. Brenesia 38, 37–44.Google Scholar
Nielson, M. W. & Knight, W. J. 2000. Distributional patterns and possible origin of leafhoppers (Homoptera, Cicadellidae). Revista brasileira de Zoologia 17, 81–156.Google Scholar
Osten-Sacken, C. R. 1861. Üeber die Gallen und andere durch Insecten hervorgebrachte Pflanzendeformationen in Nord-America. Entomologische Zeitung 22, 405–423.Google Scholar
Ouvrard, D. 2019. Psyl'list – The World Psylloidea Database. http://www.hemiptera-databases.com/psyllist. DOI: 10.5519/0029634.Google Scholar
Ouvrard, D., Burckhardt, D. & Greenwalt, D. 2013. The oldest jumping plant-louse (Hemiptera: Sternorrhyncha) with comments on the classification and nomenclature of the Palaeogene Psylloidea. Acta Musei Moraviae, Scientiae biologicae 98, 21–33.Google Scholar
Ouvrard, D. & Martin, J. H. 2019. The White-files – Taxonomic checklist of the world's whiteflies (Insecta: Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae). http://www.hemiptera-databases.org/whiteflies/.Google Scholar
PalaeoBioDB. 2018. The Paleobiology Database. https://paleobiodb.org Last updated 23 January 2018.Google Scholar
Pampaloni, L. 1902. I resti organici nel disodile di Melilli in Sicili. Palaeontographia Italica. Memorie di Palaeontologia 8, 121–130.Google Scholar
Pampaloni, L. 1903. Microflora and microfauna in “disodile” in Melilli, Sicily. Bollettino dell'Accademia Gioenia di Scienze Naturali Catania 67, 248–253.Google Scholar
Petrulevičius, J. F. 2005. A plant hopper (Nogodinidae) from the Upper Palaeocene of Argentina: systematics and taphonomy. Palaeontology 48, 299–308.Google Scholar
Poinar, G. O. Jr. 1992. Life in amber. Palo Alto, California: Stanford University Press, 1–350.Google Scholar
Popov, Y. A. 1968. The origin and basic evolutionary trends of Nepomorpha bugs (Heteroptera). 13th International Congress of Entomology, Moscow 1968, Abstract of Papers, 203.Google Scholar
Popov, Y. A. 1971. Historical development of true bugs of the infraorder Nepomorpha (Heteroptera). Trudy Paleontologicheskogo Instituta 129, 1–230. [In Russian.]Google Scholar
Popov, Y. A. 1989. On the Miocene Bug Genus Diacorixa, with the description of a new fossil species from Southern Germany (Insecta: Heteroptera, Corixidae). Stuttgarter Beiträge zur Naturkunde, Serie B (Geologie und Paläontologie), 156, 1–12.Google Scholar
Prokop, J. & Boulard, M. 2000. Tibicina sakalai n. sp., Cigale fossile du Miocéne inférieur de Republique Tchéque (Auchenorrhyncha, Cicadoidea: Tibicinidae). Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes, Biologie et Evolution des Insectes 13, 127–131.Google Scholar
Qadri, M. A. H. 1967. Phylogenetic study of Auchenorrhyncha. University Studies (Karachi) 4, 1–16.Google Scholar
Rafinesque, C. S. 1815. Analyse de la nature ou Tableau de l'univers et des corps organisés. Palerme: Aux dépens de l'auteur.Google Scholar
Rasnitsyn, A. P. 1988. Problem of global crisis of land biocoenoses during the mid-Cretaceous period. In Ponomarenko, A. G. (ed.) Cretaceous biocoenotic crisis and insect evolution, 191–207. Moscow: Nauka.Google Scholar
Rietschel, S. 1983. Aleurochiton petri n. sp., eine Mottenschildlaus (Homoptera, Aleyrodina) aus dem Pliozän von Neu-Isenburg, Hessen. Carolinea, Karlsruhe, 41, 97–100.Google Scholar
Riou, B. 1995. Lyristes renei n. sp., Cigale fossile du Miocène ardéchois. Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes, Biologie et Evolution des Insects 7/8, 73–76.Google Scholar
Rosen, K. von 1913. Die fossilen termiten: eine kurze zusammenfassung der bis jetzt bekannten funde. 2nd International Congress of Entomology, Oxford 2, 318–334.Google Scholar
Ross, A. J. 2019. The Blattodea (cockroaches), Mantodea (praying mantises) and Dermaptera (earwigs) of the Insect Limestone (late Eocene), Isle of Wight, including the first record of Mantodea from the UK. Earth and Environmental Science Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh. DOI: 10.1017/S1755691018000440.Google Scholar
Ross, A. J. & Self, A. 2014. The fauna and flora of the Insect Limestone (late Eocene), Isle of Wight, UK: introduction, history and geology. Earth and Environmental Science Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh 104, 233–244.Google Scholar
Sanborn, A. 2014. Catalogue of the Cicadoidea (Hemiptera: Auchenorrhyncha). With contributions to the bibliography by Martin H. Villet. San Diego: Elsevier/Academic Press.Google Scholar
Sanmartín, I., Enghoff, H. & Ronquist, F. 2001. Patterns of animal dispersal, vicariance and diversification in the Holarctic. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 73, 345–390.Google Scholar
Schilling, P. S. 1829. Hemiptera Heteroptera Silesiae systematice disposuit. Beiträge zur Entomologie, Breslau, 1, 34–92.Google Scholar
Schlee, D. 1970. Verwandtschaftsforschung an fossilien und rezenten Aleyrodina (Insecta, Hemiptera). Stuttgarter Beiträge zu Naturkunde 213, 1–72.Google Scholar
Schlee, D. 1990. Das Bernstein–Kabinett. Stuttgarter Beitrage zur Naturkunde, Serie C, 28, 1–100.Google Scholar
Schlotheim, E. F. von 1820. Die Petrefactenkunde auf ihrem jetzigen Standpunkte durch die Beschreibung seiner Sammlung versteinerter und fossiler Überreste des Thier- und Pflanzenreichs der Vorwelt erläutert. I–LXII. Gotha: Becker'schen Buchhandlung.Google Scholar
Schmidt, A. R., Perrichot, V., Svojtka, M., Anderson, K. B., Belete, K. H., Bussert, R., Dörfelt, H., Jancke, S., Mohr, B., Mohrmann, E., Nascimbene, P. C., Nel, A., Nel, P., Ragazzi, E., Roghi, G., Saupe, E. E., Schmidt, K., Schneider, H., Selden, P. A. & Vávra, N. 2010. Cretaceous African life captured in amber. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 107, 7329–7334.Google Scholar
Schmidt, A. R., Kaulfuss, U., Bannister, J. M., Baranov, V., Beimforde, C., Bleile, N., Borkent, A., Busch, A., Conran, J. G., Engel, M. S., Harvey, M., Kennedy, E. M., Kerr, P., Kettunen, E., Philie Kiecksee, A., Lengeling, F., Lindqvist, J. K., Maraun, M., Mildenhall, D., Perrichot, V., Rikkinen, J., Sadowski, E.-M., Seyfullah, L. J., Stebner, F., Szwedo, J., Ulbrich, P. & Lee, D. E. 2018. Amber inclusions from New Zealand. Gondwana Research 56, 135–146.Google Scholar
Schmidt, E. 1912. Diagnosen neuer Fulgoriden-Gattungen und Arten nebst einigen bemerkungen. Stettiner entomologische Zeitung, Herausgegeben von dem entomologische Vereine zu Stettin 73, 67–102.Google Scholar
Schmidt, E. 1919. Zur Kenntnis der Ricaniinae (Rhynchota Homoptera) I und II. Stettiner entomologische Zeitung, Herausgegeben von dem entomologische Vereine zu Stettin 80, 132–175.Google Scholar
Schuh, R. T. & Slater, J. A. 1995. True bugs of the world (Hemiptera: Heteroptera). Classification and natural history. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Scudder, S. H. 1890. The Tertiary insects of North America. Report of the United States Geological Survey of the Territories 13, 1–734.Google Scholar
Scudder, S. H. 1892. Some insects of special interest from Florissant, Colorado and other points in the Tertiaries of Colorado and Utah. Bulletin of the United States Geological Survey 93, 1–25.Google Scholar
Scudder, S. H. 1894 [1892–1893]. The American Tertiary Aphidae. Annual Report of the United States Geological Survey of the Territories 13, 341–66, pls. 102–106.Google Scholar
Shcherbakov, D. E. 1982. Diagnositka semeïstv tsikadovykh (Homoptera, Auchenorrhyncha) po kryl'yam. II. Zadnee krylo. Entomologicheskoe Obozrenie 61, 528–536. Published in English as: Shcherbakov, D. Ye. 1982. Diagnostics of the families of the Auchenorrhyncha (Homoptera) on the basis of the wings. II. Hindwing. Entomological Review 61, 70–78.Google Scholar
Shcherbakov, D. E. 2000a. The most primitive whiteflies (Hemiptera; Aleyrodidae; Bernaeinae subfam. nov.) from the Mesozoic of Asia and Burmese amber, with an overview of Burmese amber hemipterans. Bulletin of The Natural History Museum, Geology Series, 56, 29–37.Google Scholar
Shcherbakov, D. E. 2000b. Permian faunas of Homoptera (Hemiptera) in relation to phytogeography and the Permo-Triassic crisis. Paleontological Journal 34(Suppl. 3), S251–67.Google Scholar
Shcherbakov, D. E. 2006. The earliest find of Tropiduchidae (Homoptera: Auchenorrhyncha), representing a new tribe, from the Eocene of Green River, USA, with notes on the fossil record of higher Fulgoroidea. Russian Entomological Journal 15, 315–322.Google Scholar
Shcherbakov, D. E. 2008. Mesozoic Velocipedinae (Nabidae s.l.) and Ceresopseidae (Reduvioidea), with notes on the phylogeny of Cimicomorpha (Heteroptera). Russian Entomological Journal 16, 401–414.Google Scholar
Shcherbakov, D. E. 2009. Review of the fossil and extant genera of the cicada family Tettigarctidae (Hemiptera: Cicadoidea). Russian Entomological Journal 17, 343–348.Google Scholar
Shcherbakov, D. E. & Popov, Y. A. 2002. 2.2.1.2.5. Superorder Cimicidea Laicharting, 1781 Order Hemiptera Linné, 1758. The Bugs, Cicadas, Plantlice, Scale Insects, etc. (=Cimicida Laicharting, 1781, = Homoptera Leach, 1815 + Heteroptera Latreille, 1810). In Rasnitsyn, A. P. & Quicke, D. L. J. (eds) History of Insects, 143–157. Dordrecht/Boston/London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
Shmakov, A. 2014. Thrips (Insecta: Thysanoptera) from the Insect Limestone (Bembridge marls, late Eocene) of the Isle of Wight, UK. Earth and Environmental Science Transactions of the the Roayal Society of Edinburgh 104, 317–325.Google Scholar
Simon, E. & Żyła, D. 2015. New fossil taxa of Monophlebidae (Sternorrhyncha: Coccoidea) from Baltic amber. European Journal of Entomology 112, 381–388.Google Scholar
Slater, J. A. 1964. A catalogue of the Lygaeidae of the World 1, 2. Baltimore, MD: Wavery Press.Google Scholar
Smith, T., Rose, K. D. & Gingerich, P. D. 2006. Rapid Asia–Europe–North America geographic dispersal of earliest Eocene primate Teilhardina during the Paleocene–Eocene Thermal Maximum. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 103, 11223–27.Google Scholar
Soulier-Perkins, A. 1998. The Lophopidae (Hemiptera: Fulgoromorpha): description of three new genera and key to the genera of the family. European Journal of Entomology 95, 599–618.Google Scholar
Soulier-Perkins, A. 2000. A phylogenetic and geotectonic scenario to explain the biogeography of the Lophopidae (Hemiptera, Fulgoromorpha). Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 160, 239–254.Google Scholar
Soulier-Perkins, A., Ouvrard, D., Attié, M. & Bourgoin, T. 2007. Evolutionary patterns in biogeography and host plant association: ‘taxonomic conservatism' in Lophopidae (Hemiptera, Fulgoromorpha). Systematic Entomology 32, 305–311.Google Scholar
Spinola, M. 1839. Essai sur les Fulgorelles, sous-tribu de la tribu des Cicadaires, ordre des Rhyngotes. Annales de la Société entomologique de France 8, 133–137, pls. 1–7 [10–16].Google Scholar
Stål, C. 1859. Novae quaedam Fulgorinorum formae speciesque insigniores. Berliner Entomologische Zeitschrift 3, 313–327.Google Scholar
Stål, C. 1862a. Bidrag till Rio de Janeiro-tratkens Hemipterfauna. II. Handlingar. Kongliga Svenska Vetenskaps Akademien, Stockholm 3, 1–75.Google Scholar
Stål, C. 1862b. Hemiptera mexicana enumerativit speciesque novas descripit. Stettiner Entomologische Zeitung 23, 289–325, 437–462.Google Scholar
Stål, C. 1863. Hemipterorum exoticorum generum et specierum nonnullarum novarum descriptiones. Transactions of the Entomological Society of London 1, 571–603.Google Scholar
Stål, C. 1864. Hemiptera mexicana enumeravit speciesque novas descripsit. (Continuatio). Stettiner entomologische Zeitung, Herausgegeben von dem entomologische Vereine zu Stettin 25, 49–86.Google Scholar
Stål, C. 1866. Analecta hemipterologica. Berliner entomologische Zeitung 10, 381–394.Google Scholar
Stål, C. 1870. Hemiptera insularum Philippinarum. Bidrag till Philippinska öarnes Hemipter-fauna. Öfversigt af Kongliga Svenska Vetenskaps-Akademiens Förhandingar 27, 607–776.Google Scholar
Stål, C. 1873. Enumeratio Hemipterorum. 3. Kungliga Svenska Vetenskapakademiens Handlingar (N.F.) 11, 1–163.Google Scholar
Stalle, J. van 1987. A revision of the Neotropical species of the genus Mnemosyne Stål, 1866 (Homoptera, Cixiidae). Bulletin de l'Institut Royal des Sciences Naturelles de Belgique 57, 121–139.Google Scholar
Statz, G. 1950. Cicadariae (Zikaden) aus den oberoligocänen Ablagerungen von Rott. Palaeontographica 98, 1–46.Google Scholar
Steffan, A. W. 1968. Elektraphididae, Aphidinorum nova familia e sucino baltico (Insecta: Homoptera: Phylloxeroidea). Zoologisches Jahrbuch, Systematischer Biologie 95, 1–15.Google Scholar
Steffan, A. W. & Schlüter, T. 1981. Further evidence for egg-laying plant lice in Early Tertiary (Homoptera: Aphidina: Elektraphididae). Entomologia Generalis 7, 5–15.Google Scholar
Stroiński, A. & Szwedo, J. 2008. Thionia douglundbergi sp. nov. from the Miocene Dominican amber (Hemiptera: Fulgoromorpha: Issidae) with notes on extinct higher planthoppers. Annales Zoologici 58, 529–536.Google Scholar
Stroiński, A. & Szwedo, J. 2011. Abraracourcix gen. nov. of Ricaniidae from the Lowermost Eocene Oise amber. Annales de la Société entomologique de France 47, 480–486.Google Scholar
Stroiński, A. & Szwedo, J. 2012. The oldest known Lophopidae planthopper (Hemiptera: Fulgoromorpha) from the European Palaeocene. Geobios 45, 413–420.Google Scholar
Sun, Y., Meng, R. & Wang, Y. 2015. Molecular systematics of the Issidae (Hemiptera: Fulgoroidea) from China based on Wingless and 18S rDNA sequence data. Entomotaxonomia 37, 15–26.Google Scholar
Szwedo, J. 2000. First fossil Tropiduchidae with a description of a new tribe Jantaritambini from Eocene Baltic amber (Hemiptera: Fulgoroidea). Annales de la Société Entomologique de France (N.S.) 36, 279–286.Google Scholar
Szwedo, J. 2002. The first fossil Bothriocerinae from Eocene Baltic amber with notes on recent taxa (Hemiptera: Fulgoromorpha: Cixiidae). Deutsche Entomologische Zeitschrift 49, 197–207.Google Scholar
Szwedo, J. 2004. Autrimpus sambiorum gen. and sp. nov. from Eocene Baltic amber and notes on Mnemosynini stat. nov. (Hemiptera: Fulgoroidea: Cixiidae). Annales Zoologici 54, 567–578.Google Scholar
Szwedo, J. 2005a. Notes on Otiocerini with a second record of Derbidae in Eocene Baltic amber (Hemiptera: Fulgoromorpha: Derbidae). Insect Systematics and Evolution 36, 161–172.Google Scholar
Szwedo, J. 2005b. Jantarivacanthus kotejai gen. et sp. n. from Eocene Baltic amber, with notes on the Bathysmatophorini and related taxa (Hemiptera: Cicadomorpha: Cicadellidae). Polskie Pismo Entomologiczne 74, 251–276.Google Scholar
Szwedo, J. 2006a. A new genus Waghilde gen. nov. representing a new tribe of the planthopper family Achilidae from the Eocene Baltic amber (Hemiptera: Fulgoromorpha). Annales Zoologici 56, 167–174.Google Scholar
Szwedo, J. 2006b. First fossil record of Cedusini in the Eocene Baltic amber with notes on the tribe (Hemiptera: Fulgoromorpha: Derbidae). Russian Entomological Journal 15, 327–333.Google Scholar
Szwedo, J. 2007. Glisachaemus jonasdamzeni gen. et sp. nov. of Cixiidae from the Eocene Baltic amber (Hemiptera: Fulgoromorpha). Alavesia 1, 109–116.Google Scholar
Szwedo, J. 2008. Worskatini trib. nov. of the Dictyopharidae from the Eocene Baltic amber (Hemiptera: Fulgoromorpha: Fulgoroidea), with notes on the fossil register of the family. Palaeodiversitas 1, 75–85.Google Scholar
Szwedo, J. 2011. Ordralfabetix sirophatanis gen. et sp. n. – the first Lophopidae from the Lowermost Eocene Oise amber, Paris Basin, France (Hemiptera: Fulgoromorpha). Zootaxa 2822, 52–60.Google Scholar
Szwedo, J. 2018. The unity, diversity and conformity of bugs (Hemiptera) through time. Earth and Environmental Science Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh 107, 109–128.Google Scholar
Szwedo, J., Bourgoin, T. & Lefebvre, F. 2004. Fossil planthoppers (Hemiptera: Fulgoromorpha) of the world. An annotated catalogue with notes on Hemiptera classification. Warszawa: Studio 1.Google Scholar
Szwedo, J., Bourgoin, T. & Lefebvre, F. 2006. New Mnemosynini taxa (Hemiptera, Fulgoromorpha: Cixiidae) from the Palaeogene of France with notes on their early association with host plants. Zootaxa 1122, 25–45.Google Scholar
Szwedo, J., Gębicki, C. & Kowalewska, M. 2010. Microelectrona cladara gen. et sp. nov.: a new Protodikraneurini from the Eocene Baltic amber (Hemiptera: Cicadomorpha: Cicadellidae: Typhlocybinae). Acta Geologica Sinica (English Edition) 84, 696–704.Google Scholar
Szwedo, J., Stroiński, A. & Lin, Q.-B. 2013. Discovery of Flatidae planthopper (Hemiptera: Fulgoromorpha) in the Palaeocene of Northern Tibet and its taxonomic and biogeographic significance. Geodiversitas 21, 291–298.Google Scholar
Szwedo, J., Stroiński, A. & Lin, Q.-B. 2015. Tip of the clade on the top of the World – the first fossil Lophopidae (Hemiptera: Fulgoromorpha) from the Palaeocene of Tibet. The Science of Nature – Naturwissenschaften 102, 28.Google Scholar
Szwedo, J. & Drohojowska, J. 2016. A swarm of whiteflies – the first record of gregarious behavior from Eocene Baltic amber. The Science of Nature (Naturwissenschaften) 103, 35.Google Scholar
Szwedo, J. & Gębicki, C. 2008. Protodikraneura ferraria sp. nov. of Protodikraneurini from the Eocene Baltic amber (Hemiptera: Cicadellidae: Typhlocybinae). Alavesia 2, 177–181.Google Scholar
Szwedo, J. & Soulier-Perkins, A. 2010. Hopping in Palaeo-World – new proposal for mi-gration routes of Lophopidae (Hemiptera: Fulgoromorpha). 13th International Auchenor-rhyncha Congress, 7th International Workshop on Leafhoppers and Planthoppers of Economic Significance, 28th of June – 2nd of July 2010, Vaison-la-Romaine, France, 28–29. Paris, Département de Vaucluse: Museum national d'Histoire naturelle. .Google Scholar
Szwedo, J. & Stroiński, A. 2002. First fossil Pentastirini from Eocene Baltic amber (Hemiptera: Fulgoromorpha: Cixiidae). Annales Zoologici 52, 173–179.Google Scholar
Szwedo, J. & Stroiński, A. 2010. Austrini – a new tribe of Tropiduchidae planthoppers from the Eocene Baltic amber (Hemiptera: Fulgoromorpha). Annales de la Société entomologique de France 46, 132–137.Google Scholar
Szwedo, J. & Stroiński, A. 2013. An extraordinary tribe of Tropiduchidae from the Eocene Baltic amber, with notes on fossil taxa (Hemiptera: Fulgoromorpha: Fulgoroidea). Zootaxa 3647, 371–381.Google Scholar
Szwedo, J. & Stroiński, A. 2017. Who's that girl? The singular Tropiduchidae planthopper from the Eocene Baltic amber (Hemiptera: Fulgoromorpha). Palaeontologia Electronica , 1–20.Google Scholar
Szwedo, J. & Wappler, T. 2006. New planthoppers (Insecta: Hemiptera: Fulgoromorpha) from the Middle Eocene Messel Maar. Annales Zoologici 56, 555–566.Google Scholar
Szwedo, J. & Żyła, D. 2009. New Fulgoridiidae genus from the Upper Jurassic Karatau deposits, Kazakhstan (Hemiptera: Fulgoromorpha: Fulgoroidea). Zootaxa 2281, 40-52.Google Scholar
Théobald, N. 1937. Note complémentaire sur les insectes fossiles Oligocènes des gypses d'Aix-en-Provence. Extrait du Bulletin de la Société des Sciences de Nancy 6, 157–178.Google Scholar
Thompson, V. 2004. Associative nitrogen fixation, C4 photosynthesis, and the evolution of spittlebugs as major pests on Neotropical sugar cane and forage grasses. Bulletin of Entomological Research 94, 189–200.Google Scholar
Vea, I. M. & Grimaldi, D. A. 2012. Phylogeny of ensign scale insects (Hemiptera: Coccoidea: Ortheziidae) based on the morphology of Recent and fossil females. Systematic Entomology 37, 758–783.Google Scholar
Vea, I. M. & Grimaldi, D. A. 2015. Diverse new scale insects (Hemiptera: Coccoidea) in amber from the Cretaceous and Eocene with a phylogenetic framework for fossil Coccoidea. American Museum Novitates 3823, 1–15.Google Scholar
Wagner, W. 1967. Die Singzikaden (Homoptera: Cicadidae) aus dem Pliozän von Willershausen. Berichten Naturhistorische Gesselschaft Hannover 111, 91–94.Google Scholar
Walker, F. 1857. Catalogue of the Homopterous insects collected at Sarawak, Borneo, by Mr. A.R. Wallace, with descriptions of new species. Journal of the Proceedings of the Linnean Society. London, 1, 141–175.Google Scholar
Walker, F. 1858. Supplement. In List of the specimens of homopterous insects in the collection of the British Museum, 1–307. London: British Museum.Google Scholar
Wang, B., Zhang, H.-C. & Szwedo, J. 2009. Jurassic Palaeontinidae from China and the higher systematics of Palaeontinoidea (Insecta: Hemiptera: Cicadomorpha). Palaeontology 52, 53–64.Google Scholar
Wang, B., Xia, F., Wappler, T., Simon, E., Zhang, H.-C., Jarzembowski, E. A. & Szwedo, J. 2015. Brood care in a 100-million-year-old scale insect. eLife 4, e05447.Google Scholar
Wappler, T. 2003. New fossil lace bugs (Heteroptera: Tingidae) from the Middle Eocene of the Grube Messel (Germany), with a catalog of fossil lace bugs. Zootaxa 374, 1–26.Google Scholar
Wappler, T. & Ben-Dov, Y. 2008. Preservation of armoured scale insects on angiosperm leaves from the Eocene of Germany. Acta Palaeontologica Polonica 53, 627–634.Google Scholar
Weigelt, J. 1940. Der heutige Stand der Geiseltalforschung. Naturwissenschaften 22, 343–350.Google Scholar
Westwood, J. O. 1838. The entomologist's text book. London: W. S. Orr and Co.Google Scholar
Westwood, J. O. 1840. An introduction to the modern classification of insects. London: Longman, Orme, Brown, Green, and Longmans.Google Scholar
Wilson, S. W., Mitter, C., Denno, R. F. & Wilson, M. R. 1994. Evolutionary patterns of host plant use by Delphacid planthoppers and their relatives. In Denno, R. F. & Perfect, T. J. (eds) Planthoppers. Their ecology and management, 7–113. New York – London: Chapman & Hall.Google Scholar
Wu, R. J. C. 1996. Secrets of a lost world. Dominican amber and its inclusions. Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic.Google Scholar
Young, D. A. 1968. Taxonomic study of the Cicadellinae (Homoptera: Cicadellidae). Part 1. Proconiini. Bulletin of the U.S. National Museum 261, 1–287.Google Scholar
Young, D. A. 1977. Taxonomic Study of the Cicadellinae (Homoptera: Cicadellidae). Part 2. New World Cicadellini and the Genus Cicadella. North Carolina Agricultural Experiment Station, Technical Bulletin 239, 1–1135.Google Scholar
Young, D. A. 1986. Taxonomic study of the Cicadellinae (Homoptera: Cicadellidae), Part 3. Old world Cicadellini. North Carolina Agricultural Research Series, Technical Bulletin 281, 1–639.Google Scholar
Zalessky, M. 1930. Sur deux représentants nouveaux des Paléohémiptères du Permien de la Kama et du Perebore dans le bassin de la Pétchora. Izvestiya Akademii Nauk SSSR, Otdelenie Fiziko-Matematicheskikh Nauk, 1930, 1017–1027.Google Scholar
Zeuner, F. E. 1938. Die Insektenfauna des Mainzer Hydrobienkalks. Paleontologicheskiï Zhurnal 20, 104–159.Google Scholar
Zeuner, F. E. 1944. X. – Notes on Eocene Homoptera from the Isle of Mull, Scotland. Annals and Magazine of Natural History, Series 11 74, 110–117.Google Scholar
Zherikhin, V. V. 2002. 3.2. Ecological history of the terrestrial insects. In Rasnitsyn, A. P. & Quicke, D. L. J. (eds) History of insects, 331–388. Dordrecht/Boston/London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar