Beamerana Young

Catalano, María Inés, Paradell, Susana L. & Dietrich, Christopher H., 2014, Review of the genera Paulomanus Young, 1952 and Beamerana Young, 1952 (Hemiptera: Cicadellidae: Typhlocybinae: Empoascini) with description of a new species from Argentina, Zootaxa 3802 (2), pp. 285-291 : 290

Genus Beamerana Young

Beamerana Young, 1952: 110 . Type species: Erythroneura tropicalis Osborn, 1928 .

Description. Head angulately produced in dorsal view, wider than pronotum; crown flat, eyes large, distance between base of eyes narrower than eye width; ocelli absent; lorum obsolete.

Legs with front femur AM1 seta enlarged and shifted to ventral margin; intercalary row with numerous fine setae subequal in length, without enlarged basal setae; hind femur with macrosetal formula 2+1; tibia row AM with 4 preapical macrosetae; tarsus elongate, tarsomere I longer than II and III combined.

Forewing with inner apical cell elongate, parallel-sided; second and third apical cells elongated, parallel-sided, sessile basally, their bases forming a continuous transverse line; outer apical cell open basally.

Hindwing with vein 1V separating from vein 2V near its base; submarginal vein extending around wing apex and confluent with apex of vein R+M; apical portion of CuA fused with apical portion of vein MP, vein Cu appearing unbranched apically; vein CP confluent with submarginal vein near midlength of wing.

Male genitalia: subgenital plate elongate, with a group of microsetae on distal half; pygofer lacking setae, in lateral aspect triangular, with posterior margin broadly thickened in to form heavily sclerotized v-shaped bar; style without preapical lobe or apical extension, apical portion smoothly curved dorsolaterad and tapered, with few macrosetae irregularly arranged on narrowed curved apex and pair of lateral preapical macrosetae; connective triangular; aedeagus with numerous small spinelike processes.

Notes. Species of this genus are apparently indistinguishable from Paulomanus in external morphology, but may be separated based on the lack of elongate, symmetrical, paired distal processes on the aedeagus and the presence of numerous spicules and/or scalelike sculpturing on the shaft.