Hoppers of North Carolina:
Spittlebugs, Leafhoppers, Treehoppers, and Planthoppers
Scientific Name: Search Common Name:
Family (Alpha):
« »
DELPHACIDAE Members: NC Records

Stenocranus vittatus - No Common Name



© Kyle Kittelberger- note length of hind
tibia and tarsus

© Kyle Kittelberger

© Margarita Lankford
Taxonomy
Family: DELPHACIDAESubfamily: Stenocraninae
Taxonomic Author: (Stål, 1862)
Identification
Online Photographs: BugGuide                                                                                  
Description: This species very closely resembles S. lautus and in some instances there may not be a way to differentiate between the two. Charles Bartlett notes that he is "not sure that the two can be consistently separated without tails, but there is some coloration difference" (pers. comment). Hamilton (2006) notes that in S. vittatus, the dorsomedial length of the hind tibia is greater than that of the hind tarsus, whereas in S. lautus the lengths are essentially the same. Furthermore, males of S. vittatus are 4.5 mm or longer while females are 5.0 mm or longer; adults of S. lautus are listed at being 5-6 mm long. See vittatus and lautus for comparisons of pinned specimens. See here and here for two probable vittatus individuals that show the hind tibia longer than the hind tarsus. As in S. lautus, the head is rounded and the face is dark with a pale midline. (UDEL)
Distribution in North Carolina
County Map: Clicking on a county returns the records for the species in that county.
Distribution: Eastern North America; Bartlett notes that records are generally Maryland and North
Abundance: Recorded from several counties in the Piedmont and Coastal Plain, likely under collected and more abundant in the right habitat, but probably not a common species.
Seasonal Occurrence
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Habitats and Life History
Habitats: Has been found near mixed hardwood forest.
Plant Associates:
Behavior: Can be attracted at night with a light.
Comment: NOTE: As mentioned above, S. lautus and S. vittatus can be very difficult to distinguish from one another. Since lautus is much more common than vittatus, on default individuals that fall in this category can be tentatively identified as lautus. However, having a clear view of the side, showing the hind tibia and tarsus would allow for a proper identification
Status: Native
Global and State Rank:

Species Photo Gallery for Stenocranus vittatus No Common Name

Photo by: Erich Hofmann
Craven Co.
Comment: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/46406493- dorsomedial length of hind tibia is greater than that of hind tarsus. Male, 4.8 mm; photographed by K. Kittelberger
Photo by: Erich Hofmann
Craven Co.
Comment: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/46406493- dorsomedial length of hind tibia is greater than that of hind tarsus. Male, 4.8 mm; photographed by K. Kittelberger
Photo by: Erich Hofmann
Craven Co.
Comment: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/46406493- dorsomedial length of hind tibia is greater than that of hind tarsus. Male, 4.8 mm; photographed by K. Kittelberger
Photo by: Erich Hofmann
Craven Co.
Comment: dorsomedial length of hind tibia is longer than hind tarsus; https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/46406456. Female, 5.4 mm; photographed by K. Kittelberger
Photo by: Erich Hofmann
Craven Co.
Comment: dorsomedial length of hind tibia is longer than hind tarsus; https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/46406456. Female, 5.4 mm; photographed by K. Kittelberger
Photo by: Erich Hofmann
Craven Co.
Comment: dorsomedial length of hind tibia is longer than hind tarsus; https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/46406456
Photo by: Margarita Lankford
Orange Co.
Comment: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/50620313
Photo by: Margarita Lankford
Orange Co.
Comment: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/50620313
Photo by: Margarita Lankford
Orange Co.
Comment: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/50620313
Photo by: Margarita Lankford
Orange Co.
Comment: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/50620313
Photo by: Ken Kneidel
Mecklenburg Co.
Comment: 5.6 mm female
Photo by: Ken Kneidel
Mecklenburg Co.
Comment: 5.6 mm female
Photo by: Ken Kneidel
Mecklenburg Co.
Comment: 5.6 mm female
Photo by: Ken Kneidel
Mecklenburg Co.
Comment: 5.6 mm female
Photo by: Ken Kneidel
Mecklenburg Co.
Comment: 5.6 mm female
Photo by: Rob Van Epps
Mecklenburg Co.
Comment: ID based on lengths of hind tibia and tarsus. Came to UV light in back yard.
Photo by: Randy Emmitt
Orange Co.
Comment: uv light - unid_planthopper
Photo by: Kyle Kittelberger
Wake Co.
Comment: mixed hardwood forest habitat
Photo by: Kyle Kittelberger
Wake Co.
Comment: mixed hardwood forest habitat
Photo by: Kyle Kittelberger
Wake Co.
Comment: mixed hardwood forest habitat