@article{miko_friedrich_yoder_hines_deitz_bertone_seltmann_wallace_deans_2012, title={On Dorsal Prothoracic Appendages in Treehoppers (Hemiptera: Membracidae) and the Nature of Morphological Evidence}, volume={7}, ISSN={["1932-6203"]}, DOI={10.1371/journal.pone.0030137}, abstractNote={A spectacular hypothesis was published recently, which suggested that the “helmet” (a dorsal thoracic sclerite that obscures most of the body) of treehoppers (Insecta: Hemiptera: Membracidae) is connected to the 1st thoracic segment (T1; prothorax) via a jointed articulation and therefore was a true appendage. Furthermore, the “helmet” was interpreted to share multiple characteristics with wings, which in extant pterygote insects are present only on the 2nd (T2) and 3rd (T3) thoracic segments. In this context, the “helmet” could be considered an evolutionary novelty. Although multiple lines of morphological evidence putatively supported the “helmet”-wing homology, the relationship of the “helmet” to other thoracic sclerites and muscles remained unclear. Our observations of exemplar thoraces of 10 hemipteran families reveal multiple misinterpretations relevant to the “helmet”-wing homology hypothesis as originally conceived: 1) the “helmet” actually represents T1 (excluding the fore legs); 2) the “T1 tergum” is actually the anterior dorsal area of T2; 3) the putative articulation between the “helmet” and T1 is actually the articulation between T1 and T2. We conclude that there is no dorsal, articulated appendage on the membracid T1. Although the posterior, flattened, cuticular evagination (PFE) of the membracid T1 does share structural and genetic attributes with wings, the PFE is actually widely distributed across Hemiptera. Hence, the presence of this structure in Membracidae is not an evolutionary novelty for this clade. We discuss this new interpretation of the membracid T1 and the challenges of interpreting and representing morphological data more broadly. We acknowledge that the lack of data standards for morphology is a contributing factor to misinterpreted results and offer an example for how one can reduce ambiguity in morphology by referencing anatomical concepts in published ontologies.}, number={1}, journal={PLOS ONE}, author={Miko, Istvan and Friedrich, Frank and Yoder, Matthew J. and Hines, Heather M. and Deitz, Lewis L. and Bertone, Matthew A. and Seltmann, Katja C. and Wallace, Matthew S. and Deans, Andrew R.}, year={2012}, month={Jan} }
 @book{wallace_deitz_2004, title={Phylogeny and systematics of the treehopper subfamily Centrotinae (Hemiptera:Membracidae)}, ISBN={1566650798}, publisher={New York: Associated Publishers}, author={Wallace, M. S. and Deitz, L. L.}, year={2004} }
 @article{wallace_deitz_2003, title={Aconophora lineosa Walker 1858, new junior synonym of Thelia bimaculata (Fabricius 1794) (Hemiptera: Membracidae)}, volume={105}, number={4}, journal={Proceedings of the Entomological Society of Washington}, author={Wallace, M. S. and Deitz, L. L.}, year={2003}, pages={1051–1052} }
 @article{wallace_deitz_rothschild_2003, title={Checklist of the treehoppers (Hemiptera: Membracidae) of Great Smoky Mountains National Park}, volume={105}, number={3}, journal={Proceedings of the Entomological Society of Washington}, author={Wallace, M. S. and Deitz, L. L. and Rothschild, M. J.}, year={2003}, pages={578–591} }
 @article{wallace_hain_2000, title={Field surveys and evaluation of native and established predators of the hemlock woolly adelgid (Homoptera : Adelgidae) in the southeastern United States}, volume={29}, ISSN={["0046-225X"]}, DOI={10.1603/0046-225X-29.3.638}, abstractNote={Abstract There has been little research conducted on the effects of native or established predators on populations of the hemlock woolly adelgid, Adelges tsugae Annand. This study used field surveys and cage exclusion experiments to examine the relationship between established predators and A. tsugae in the southeastern United States. Predators were collected in very low densities in both years. Harmonia axyridis Pallas (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae), lacewings (Neuroptera: Chrysopidae and Hemerobiidae), and gall gnats (Diptera: Cecidomyiidae) represented 81% of the total predators collected in 1998. Cage exclusion experiments revealed no significant predator effects in all three sites in 1997 and 1998. It is unlikely that established predators are exhibiting any significant control on adelgid populations because of the low densities of predators that were encountered at a time when adelgids were abundant. Therefore, controlled releases of non-native predators into these sites should be considered.}, number={3}, journal={ENVIRONMENTAL ENTOMOLOGY}, author={Wallace, MS and Hain, FP}, year={2000}, month={Jun}, pages={638–644} }