identifier	taxonID	type	CVterm	format	language	title	description	additionalInformationURL	UsageTerms	rights	Owner	contributor	creator	bibliographicCitation
03DF200EFFB9FF9EFF70FEADFAEFFAFA.text	03DF200EFFB9FF9EFF70FEADFAEFFAFA.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Mongolojassus caucasicus Tishechkin 2022	<div><p>Mongolojassus caucasicus sp. n.</p><p>Figs. 1–15</p><p>Material examined. Holotype, ♂, Russia, Northern Caucasus, Southern Dagestan, Chekhychay River in the environs of Kurush Village, about 2500 m above sea level, from Trisetum sp. and other Gramineae ( Koeleria sp., Festuca sp., Phleum sp.), R. Rakitov leg., 9. VII. 1990; paratypes: same locality and date, 57 ♂, 29 ♀; same locality, from Trisetum sp., 12. VII. 1990, 25 ♂, 38 ♀.</p><p>Description. Similar in appearance to other species of Mongolojassus . Male pale yellowish with brown pattern on head, pro-, and mesonotum (Fig. 1). Forewings slightly extending beyond end of abdomen, pale whitish, with some cells partially or entirely bordered with brown or with brown spot occupying part of cell. Brown pattern forms three indistinct transverse stripes at level of mesonotum apex, at middle of clavus, and at its end. Female similar to male, but abdomen reaches beyond ends of forewings (Fig. 2).</p><p>Pygofer lobes smoothly rounded, with dense groups of long setae in dorsal two thirds (Figs. 3–4). Subgenital plates rather long, with outer margins twice as long as width of plate at base (Fig. 5). In back view, aedeagal processes at bases perpendicular to shaft, then bent basad and somewhat diverging, with small additional branches before middles, and with tips bent inwards (Figs. 6–8). Length of processes exceeds one third of shaft length.Aedeagal shaft not narrowed beyond gonopore (Fig. 9), slightly S-curved in lateral view, with processes almost parallel to distal part of shaft (Figs. 10–14).</p><p>Body length (in male, including forewings): ♂, 2.8–3.0 mm; ♀, 3.1–3.4 mm.</p><p>Diagnosis. Differs from most other species of Mongolojassus in aedeagal processes with well-developed additional branches. Somewhat similar in this trait to M. sibiricus (Figs. 22–23), but differs in diverging aedeagal processes (more or less parallel to aedeagal shaft in M. sibiricus). Most closely related to M. servadeinus (Fig. 15) and similar to it in rather long subgenital plates and aedeagus shape, including long processes with additional branches. Differs from it in narrower aedeagal shaft not narrowed near gonopore and in diverging aedeagal processes almost straight in middle parts (smoothly curved and convergent in distal halves in M. servadeinus).</p><p>Etymology. The species name derives from the name of the mountain system where it was found.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03DF200EFFB9FF9EFF70FEADFAEFFAFA	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Tishechkin, Dmitri Yu.	Tishechkin, Dmitri Yu. (2022): Contributions to the study of the genus Mongolojassus Zakhvatkin, 1953 (Homoptera: Cicadellidae: Deltocephalinae: Paralimnini) with description of a new species from Northern Caucasus. Zootaxa 5128 (4): 574-580, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5128.4.6
03DF200EFFB9FF9BFF70FA9DFB6AFE5A.text	03DF200EFFB9FF9BFF70FA9DFB6AFE5A.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Mongolojassus bicuspidatus (J. Sahlberg 1871)	<div><p>Mongolojassus bicuspidatus (J. Sahlberg, 1871)</p><p>Figs. 16–21</p><p>Material examined. Russia, Western Siberia, Altai Mts., Chulyshman Plateau, A. Zhelokhovtsev, 4. VIII. 1935, 2 ♂, 6 ♀ .</p><p>Description. Similar in appearance to other species of Mongolojassus .</p><p>Aedeagal processes in posterior view at bases bent basad and diverging at angle slightly less than 90 o, with small additional branches before midlength, and with tips bent outwards (Fig. 16). Length of processes does not exceeds one third of shaft length. Aedeagal shaft slightly S-curved in lateral view, with processes almost parallel to distal part of shaft (Figs. 17–18), not narrowed beyond gonopore (Fig. 19).</p><p>Very similar to M. sibiricus and differs from it only in diverging aedeagal processes (more or less parallel in M. sibiricus; Figs. 22–23).</p><p>Distribution. Northern part of European Russia (Ossiannilsson, 1983), Northern and Southern Urals (Galinichev &amp; Anufriev, 2012b), Altai Mts., Western Siberia (new record).</p><p>Remarks. A comprehensive illustrated description of M. bicuspidatus was published by Ossiannilsson (1983).</p><p>Mityaev (2002) treats M. sibiricus as a junior synonym of M. bicuspidatus and points out that this taxon is widespread in the steppe zone of Northern, Central, and Eastern Kazakhstan. However, in his keys for identification of Auchenorrhyncha of Kazakhstan (Mityaev, 1971), he gives drawings of the aedeagus of a typical M. sibiricus (as on Figs. 22–23).</p><p>M. bicuspidatus and M. sibiricus are, apparently, fully sympatric, since M. sibiricus was recorded from Estonia (Vilbaste, 1965), steppes of the Southeastern European Russia (Emelyanov, 1964b), the Urals (Galinichev, Anufriev, 2012a), Altai Mts. (Vilbaste, 1965), and the steppe zone of Kazakhstan (Mityaev, 1971). Still, we have not seen males with traits intermediate between these two species. On the contrary, aedeagus shape in males from distant localities is remarkably similar (Figs. 16–17 and 20–21). Thus, investigation of genitalia variability based on numerous materials from different localities is necessary to clarify the status of these taxa.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03DF200EFFB9FF9BFF70FA9DFB6AFE5A	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Tishechkin, Dmitri Yu.	Tishechkin, Dmitri Yu. (2022): Contributions to the study of the genus Mongolojassus Zakhvatkin, 1953 (Homoptera: Cicadellidae: Deltocephalinae: Paralimnini) with description of a new species from Northern Caucasus. Zootaxa 5128 (4): 574-580, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5128.4.6
03DF200EFFBCFF9AFF70FB45FB03FEB6.text	03DF200EFFBCFF9AFF70FB45FB03FEB6.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Mongolojassus elpatjevskii (Zakhvatkin 1953)	<div><p>Mongolojassus elpatjevskii (Zakhvatkin, 1953)</p><p>Figs. 32–34</p><p>Most specimens of Auchenorrhyncha investigated by Prof. Zakhvatkin are deposited in the collection of the Zoological Museum of Moscow State University. However, type specimens of a considerable number of his species are absent in the collection, and male specimens usually lack genital segments. For this reason, we found it useful to provide information about the type series of M. elpatjevskii .</p><p>The original description (Zakhvatkin, 1953) is based on two males and two females. All four specimens are present in the collection, among them holotype, ♀ (Fig. 32), with labels: “L. [Lake] Kosogol [misspelled “Khubsugul”], V. S. Elpatyevsk [y].”, “Mth. [Mouth] R. [of the River] Khabtsyl, 5. VIII. [19]03” (in Russian, comments in square brackets), “Cotypus”, and “Delt. sp. nov. prop. bellevoyei Put. A. Zachvatkin det.” (Fig. 33) and paratypes, 2 ♂, both dissected, genitalia preparations are absent (Fig. 34), 1 ♀ with only two first labels same as in holotype, “ L. Kosogol, V. S. Elpatyevsk. ” and “Mth. R. Khabtsyl, 5. VIII. 03” .</p><p>This species is similar in appearance to other species of Mongolojassus (Figs. 32, 34). Drawings of the aedeagus were published by Zakhvatkin (1953) and Dlabola (1965).</p><p>The description of M. elpatjevskii was published after the death of Prof. Zakhvatkin in a collection of works, the manuscripts of which, in a more or less finished form, were found in his archive. For this reason, some works contain omissions or inaccuracies. In particular, in the description of M. elpatjevskii there is a contradiction concerning the generic placement of this species. The description begins as follows.</p><p>“ Deltocephalus elpatjevskii A. Zachvatkin, sp. n.</p><p>— 2 ♂♂, 2 ♀♀ (Fig. 2). The mouth of the Khabtsyl River, 5/VIII .</p><p>Close to D. sibiricus Horv. 1901, forming together with it a sharply separated association, belonging to the wellknown group “ocellati”, which, of course, can be separated as a special genus ( Mongolojassus A. Zachvatkin, g. n.; typ. gen. Deltocephalus sibiricus Horv. 1901). Very similar in general appearance, type of coloration and anatomical features to D. sibiricus, only somewhat stouter and distinctly smaller [below, the description of the species follows]” (Zakhvatkin, 1953: 249). Thus, this species was described in the genus Deltocephalus Burmeister, 1838, but was immediately attributed to the new genus, Mongolojassus in the same publication. Therefore, the original combination with Deltocephalus can be considered a lapsus attributable to the unfinished nature of Zachvatkin’s manuscript, given the author’s clear intent to include both D. sibiricus and “ D. elpatjevskii ” in Mongolojassus .</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03DF200EFFBCFF9AFF70FB45FB03FEB6	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Tishechkin, Dmitri Yu.	Tishechkin, Dmitri Yu. (2022): Contributions to the study of the genus Mongolojassus Zakhvatkin, 1953 (Homoptera: Cicadellidae: Deltocephalinae: Paralimnini) with description of a new species from Northern Caucasus. Zootaxa 5128 (4): 574-580, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5128.4.6
03DF200EFFBCFF9BFF70FE3DFA61FBC2.text	03DF200EFFBCFF9BFF70FE3DFA61FBC2.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Mongolojassus vinokurovi Emelyanov 1976	<div><p>Mongolojassus vinokurovi Emelyanov, 1976</p><p>Figs. 24–31</p><p>Material examined. Russia, Eastern Siberia, Irkutsk Oblast, Balagansk Region, env. Khairyuzovka Village on the bank of Angara River, A. Zakhvatkin, 15–26. VI. 1932, 6 ♂, 3 ♀ .</p><p>Description. Similar in appearance to other members of the genus Mongolojassus .</p><p>Aedeagal processes in posterior view at bases smoothly bent basad and diverging at angle slightly less than 90 o, without additional branches or denticles, straight or with tips only slightly bent outwards (Figs. 24–25). Length of processes averages 1/5–1/6 of shaft length. Aedeagal shaft S-curved in lateral view, with processes either parallel to or slightly bent towards shaft (Figs. 26–27). Gonopore somewhat distant from aedeagal apex, postgonoporal part of shaft distinctly narrowed (Fig. 28).</p><p>Investigated specimens from Irkutsk Oblast are indistinguishable from type specimens from Yakutia in aedeagus shape (Figs. 24–28 and 29–31) in spite of the fact that the distance between these localities exceeds 1800 km.</p><p>Distribution. Until now M. vinokurovi was considered endemic to Yakutia (Sivtsev &amp; Vinokurov, 2002). The finding of this species in the steppe enclave in the Lower Angara River Valley significantly expands its known distribution. Further records of this species in local steppe areas in river valleys of Eastern Siberia can be expected.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03DF200EFFBCFF9BFF70FE3DFA61FBC2	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Tishechkin, Dmitri Yu.	Tishechkin, Dmitri Yu. (2022): Contributions to the study of the genus Mongolojassus Zakhvatkin, 1953 (Homoptera: Cicadellidae: Deltocephalinae: Paralimnini) with description of a new species from Northern Caucasus. Zootaxa 5128 (4): 574-580, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5128.4.6
