Hoppers of North Carolina

Hoppers of North Carolina:
Spittlebugs, Leafhoppers, Treehoppers, and Planthoppers

Family (Alpha):

Stenocranus vittatus Stål, 1862 - No Common Name DELPHACIDAE Members:			NC Records	Public View

synonym

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

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

habitat

Has been found near mixed hardwood forest.

plant associates

behavior

Can be attracted at night with a light.

comments

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:] [Introduced:] [Extirpated:]

list_type

[Official:] [Provisional:]

adult_id

Unmistakable and widely known Identifiable from good quality photos of unworn specimens
Identifiable from photos showing undersides, or other specialized views [e.g., legs, face]
Identifiable only by close inspection of structural features or by DNA analysis NULL

nymph_id

Unmistakable and widely known Identifiable from good quality photos, especially where associated with known host plants
Identifiable from close inspection of specimens or by DNA analysis
Identifiable only through rearing to adulthood NULL

G_rank

S_rank

rank_comments

tribe

subgenus

Species Photo Gallery for Stenocranus vittatus No Common Name
	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	Photo by: Randy Emmitt Orange Co. Comment: uv light - unid_planthopper
	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: 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
	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: 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: 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: 5.2 mm female, collected in a sweep through a weedy detention basin, hind tibia 1.7 X hind foretarsus	Photo by: Ken Kneidel Mecklenburg Co. Comment: 5.2 mm female, collected in a sweep through a weedy detention basin, hind tibia 1.7 X hind foretarsus
	Photo by: Ken Kneidel Mecklenburg Co. Comment: 5.2 mm female, collected in a sweep through a weedy detention basin, hind tibia 1.7 X hind foretarsus	Photo by: Ken Kneidel Mecklenburg Co. Comment: 5.2 mm female, collected in a sweep through a weedy detention basin, hind tibia 1.7 X hind foretarsus
	Photo by: John Petranka Dare Co. Comment: Hind tarsus length > tibia?

Species Photo Gallery for Stenocranus vittatus No Common Name