Brown Lacewings (of Florida) (Insecta: Neuroptera: Hemerobiidae) Brown Lacewings (of Florida) (Insecta: Neuroptera: Hemerobiidae)
Brown Lacewings (of Florida) (Insecta: Neuroptera: Hemerobiidae)1
Ellis G. MacLeod and Lionel A. Stange2Introduction
Brown lacewings are small to medium-sized insects (forewing length 3 to 9 mm in Florida) which are predaceous both as adults and larvae. They prefer soft-bodied insects such as aphids, mealybugs, and also insect eggs. Because of the longevity of the adults (at least months in some species), voracious appetites (for example, Micromus posticus (Walker) larva consumed an average of 41 aphids during its life (Cutright 1923), and high reproductive capacity (one female Hemerobius humulinus Linnaeus can lay 460 eggs (Smith 1923), they are useful biological control agents. Some species have been utilized for this purpose, but limited work has been done. In Texas, Sympherobius barberi Banks is being mass reared for control of citrus mealybug (Hart, pers. comm.). Florida has a small fauna of 10 species in four genera, and the present circular provides keys to identification of the adults of our species.Distribution
Of the 58 North American species, all are found in northern Florida and three of these (S. occidentalis, S. gracilis, B. fidelis) are here recorded for the first time for Florida (all from Gainesville). B. speciosa has not been rediscovered in Florida since Carpenter (1940) recorded it from Sanibel Island. S. amiculus, S. barberi and H. stigma are known as far south as Highlands County, whereas both species of Micromus are found throughout peninsula Florida (M. subanticus also in the Keys and in the Caribbean). H. humulinus and H. stigma are Holaretic, but the former is relatively uncommon in Florida.Biology
Females lay non-stalked eggs, usually singly or in small groups. There are three larval instars. The 1st instar is active in all species. It can run fast, moving the head from side to side as it moves. In Sympherobius spp. and especially Boriomyia spp., the later instars are relatively immobile. A white cocoon of double structure (outer loose thread, inner compact structure) is constructed in protected areas. Most groups appear to prefer aphids, but Sympherobius spp. may prefer coccid insects (especially mealybugs). Spiders are considered one of the most important natural enemies of lacewings. References on biology for species occurring in Florida are: Cutright (1923 - Micromus posticus), Smith (1923 - Sympherobius amiculus, Hemerobius humulinus, H. stigma, M. posticus; 1934 - S. barberi), and MacLeod (1960 - Boriomyia fidelis).Identification
Adults have a wing venation with two or more branches arising directly from the fused stem of R1 + Rs. The wing membrane has microtrichia (contrasted with Chrysopidae), ovipositor not exerted, antenna moniliform and front legs not raptorial.
![]()
CREDITS: Division of Plant Industry
Figure 1. Adult brown lacewing (Neuroptera: Hemerobiidae).
![]()
CREDITS: Ken Gray, Oregon State University
Figure 2. Adult brown lacewing Hemerobius sp. (Neuroptea: Hemerobiidae). Larvae have jaws which are fairly straight basally and curved apically, mandibles lacking teeth along medial margin, pretarsal claws lack a trumpet-shaped empodium (a spine or lobelike process) (except 1st instar), and are not trash bearers, in contrast to many statements in the older literature (e.g., Comstock 1925, Introduction to Entomology, p. 297).
Detection and Survey
Adults are commonly attracted to lights. Adults and larvae can be found by beating or sweeping plants, especially oaks and pines and plants with high aphid infestations such as alfalfa. Brown lacewings resemble green lacewings (Chrysopidae) but are brownish and are less common. There are 58 North American species. The eggs are laid on plants, but not stalked. The brown lacewing larvae differ from green lacewing larvae in that they do not possess tubercles (a small knoblike or rounded protuberance). Both adults and larvae prey on aphids, other soft-bodied insects and mites.Key to Genera and Species of Brown Lacewings of Florida
(Wings and male terminalia after Carpenter 1940)1. Forewing with costal area quite narrow at base, lacking a recurrent humeral vein (Figures 4 , 5 ) . . . . . . . . Micromus Rambur . . . . . . . 2
1'. Costal area of forewing much broader basally ( Figure 6 ) often abruptly broadened ( Figures 7 , 8 ) and always with a recurrent humeral vein . . . . 3
2 (1). Inner gradate veins of forewing much more than their lengths apart (Figure 4 ); male terminalia as in Figure 9a . . . . . Micromus subanticus (Walker)
2'. Inner gradate crossveins of forewing at most only their lengths apart ( Figure 5 ) ; male terminalia as in Figure 9b . . . . . . Micromus posticus (Walker)
- Observations: M. subanticus is found throughout Florida and also in the Caribbean (Cuba, Dominican Republic, etc.). It occurs in a variety of habitats including both trees and grasses. It is often found in alfalfa fields where both larvae and adults feed on aphids.
3 (1'). Forewing with three or more branches arising from the fused stem of R1 and Rs distal to separation of MA ( Figure 7 ); maxillary palpus 5-segmented, labial palpus with three segments . . . . . . . . . Boriomyia Banks . . . . . . . . 4
- Observations: In most of the Nearctic Region this is the most common Micromus, but in Florida it is apparently somewhat less common than subanticus and does not occur in the Keys. Its habitats are similar to those of M. subanticus. Smith (1923) and Cutright (1923) published biological observations.
3'. Forewing with fewer than 3 branches arising from R1 + Rs distal to separation of MA (Figure 6), most-basal branch arising from R1 + Rs often stalked with MA ( Figure 8 ); maxillary and labial palpi with a small peg-like apiculus so that they appear 6- and 4-segmented respectively ( Figure 10 ) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4 (3). Male paramere with lateral process not forked distally ( Figure 11a ); forewing usually lacking dark brown spots around distal crossveins between branches of Cu (although light-brown cloudings of the membrane adjacent to the crossveins may be present), usually with 2 broad transverse light-brown bands paralleling the inner and outer series of gradate crossveins . . . . . . . . . Boriomyia fidelis (Banks)
4'. Male paramere with lateral process forked distally ( Figure 11b ); forewing usually with discrete dark brown spots around distal crossveins of Cu and the M-Cu crossvein, pale brown maculations sometimes present elsewhere, especially around the inner and outer series of gradate crossveins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Boriomyia speciosa (Banks)
- Observations: Recorded here for the first time from Florida (34 specimens from Gainesville, March to September).
5 (3'). Forewing with five or more outer gradate veins ( Figure 6 ); forewing without crossvein between MP and MA . . . . . . Hemerobius Banks . . . . . . . 6
- Observations: Carpenter (1940) recorded female specimens from Sanibel Island but we know of no new records from Florida. Few specimens are known so that the constancy of the wing markings must still be verified.
5'. Forewing with four or fewer outer gradate veins Figure 8); MP and MA connected by crossvein shortly after origin of former ( Figure 8 ) . . . . . Sympherobius Banks . . . . . 7
6 (5). Pronotum and mesonotum with broad yellow stripe; upper process of male ectoproct forked distally ( Figure 12 ) . . . . . . . Hemerobius humulinus Linnaeus
6'. Pronotum and mesonotum with, at most, a narrow median stripe (this is often absent); mesonotum without defined stripe ( Figure 13 ); upper process of male ectoproct not forked ( Figure 14 ) . . . . . . . . . . . . . Hemerobius stigma Stephens
- Observations: This holarctic species appears to be uncommon in Florida. Killington (1937) and Smith (1923) provided biological data.
7 (5'). Forewing without radial crossvein; male ectoproct with three processes, none bifurcate; upper process shorter than lower one ( Figure 15 ) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sympherobius barberi Banks
- Observations: This is the most common Hemerobius, ranging from the Panhandle to Highlands County. Smith (1923) gave some biological data. Adults hibernate. Tjeder (1960) synonymized stigmaterus Fitch.
7'. Forewing with radial crossvein ( Figure 8 , "rc"); male ectoproct either with two processes, or, if three, one is bifurcate or the upper as long as lower one . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
- Observations: This is the most widespread U.S. species and has been introduced into Hawaii for biological control. It is being released in Texas for control of citrus mealybug. In Florida there are records from Escambia County to Hillsborough County.
8 (7'). Forewing vein Cul forks nearer hindmargin than to crossvein m-cu; male ectoproct with two processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sympherobius occidentalis Fitch
8'. Forewing vein Cul forks at or near crossvein m-cu ( Figure 8 ); male ectoproct with three processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
- Observations: This is an uncommon species recorded here from Florida for the first time (two males, Gainesville, March, October). Besides the distinctive wing venation and male ectoproct, the forewing markings are characteristic with veins dark brown and cell pattern similar to S. gracilis, but with the gradates more boldly margined.
9(8'). Most cells of forewing pale in centers and along margins of veins; veins nearly uniformly dark with at most slightly darker points at bases of setae; male ectoproct with lower process bifurcate ( Figure 16 ) . . . . . . . . Sympherobius gracilis Carpenter
9'. Cells of forewing membrane hyaline with irregular gray or brown blotching; veins pale with dark spots at setal bases (especially along Cu and A) and where crossed by membrane maculations; male ectoproct without bifurcate process ( Figure 17 ) . . . . . . . . . . . . Sympherobius amiculus (Fitch)
- Observations: This uncommon species is recorded here from Florida for the first time (14 specimens from Gainesville, May to July).
- Observations: This appears to be the most common species in Florida, ranging from the Panhandle south to Highlands County. Smith (1923) described its biology. Both male terminalia and wing maculation are distinctive.
![]()
Figure 4. Forewing - Micromus subanticus (Walker).
![]()
CREDITS: Division of Plant Industry
Figure 5. Forewing - Micromus posticus (Walker).
![]()
Figure 6. Forewing - Hemerobius stigma Stephens.
![]()
CREDITS: Division of Plant Industry
Figure 7. Forewing - Boriomyia fidelis (Banks).
![]()
CREDITS: Division of Plant Industry
Figure 8. Forewing - Sympherobius amiculus (Fitch).
![]()
Figure 9. Male terminalia -- a. Micromus subanticus (Walker) b. Micromus posticus (Walker).
![]()
CREDITS: Division of Plant Industry
Figure 10. Head of Hemerobius (after Tjeder, 1961).
![]()
CREDITS: Division of Plant Industry
Figure 11. Male paramere - a. Boriomyia fidelis (Banks) b. Boriomyia speciosa (Banks).
![]()
CREDITS: Division of Plant Industry
Figure 12. Male terminalia - Hemerobius humulinus Linnaeus.
![]()
CREDITS: Division of Plant Industry
Figure 13. Hemerobius stigma (after Smith, 1923).
![]()
CREDITS: Division of Plant Industry
Figure 14. Male terminalia - Hemerobius stigma Stephens.
![]()
CREDITS: Division of Plant Industry
Figure 15. Male terminalia - Sympherobius barberi Banks.
![]()
CREDITS: Division of Plant Industry
Figure 16. Male terminalia - Sympherobius gracilis Carpenter.
![]()
Figure 17. Male terminalia - Sympherobius amiculus (Fitch). Selected References
Carpenter, F.M. 1940. A revision of the Nearctic Hemerobiidae, Berothidae. Sisyridae, Polystoechotidae and Dilaridae. Proc. American Acad. Arts & Sci. 74: 193-280.Cutright, C.R. 1923. Life history of Micromus posticus Walker. J. Econ. Ent. 16: 448-456.
Dean, H.A., W.G. Hart, and S. Ingle. 1971. Citrus mealybug, a potential problem on Texas grapefruit. J. Rio Grande Hort. Soc. 25: 46-53.
Killington, F. 1937. A monograph of the British Neuroptera. Vol. II. The Ray Society, London. p. 1-269, i-xix.
MacLeod, E.G. 1960. The immature stages of Boriomyia fidelis (Banks) with taxonomic notes on the affinities of the genus Boriomyia. Psyche 67: 26-40.
Short, D.E., R.F. Mizell, and T.R. Fasulo. (1998). Woodybug: A knowledgebase of pest and beneficial arthropods of Florida woody ornamentals . UF/IFAS. SW-19. CD-ROM.
Smith, R.C. 1923. The life histories and stages of some hemerobiids, and allied species. Ann. Ent. Soc. America 16: 129-15 1.
Smith, R.C. 1934. Notes on the Neuroptera and Mecoptera of Kansas, with keys to the identification of species. J. Kansas Ent. Soc. 7: 120-144.
Tjeder, B. 1961. Neuroptera Planipennia IV. Hemerobiidae. South African Animal Life 8: 296-408.
Tjeder, B. 1960. Neuroptera from Newfoundland, Miquelon, and Labrador. Opuscula Ent. 25: 146- 149.
Footnotes
1. This document is EENY-225 (originally published as DPI Entomology Circular 227), one of a series of Featured Creatures from the Entomology and Nematology Department, Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida. Published: August 2001. Revised: June 2005. Reviewed: March 2008. This document is also available on Featured Creatures Website at http://creatures.ifas.ufl.edu. Please visit the EDIS Website at http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu.2. Ellis G. MacLeod and Lionel A. Stange, Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Division of Plant Industry, Gainesville, FL.
The Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences (IFAS) is an Equal Opportunity Institution authorized to provide research, educational information and other services only to individuals and institutions that function with non-discrimination with respect to race, creed, color, religion, age, disability, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin, political opinions or affiliations. For more information on obtaining other extension publications, contact your county Cooperative Extension service.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Cooperative Extension Service, University of Florida, IFAS, Florida A. & M. University Cooperative Extension Program, and Boards of County Commissioners Cooperating. Larry Arrington, Dean.
Copyright Information
This document is copyrighted by the University of Florida, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences (UF/IFAS) for the people of the State of Florida. UF/IFAS retains all rights under all conventions, but permits free reproduction by all agents and offices of the Cooperative Extension Service and the people of the State of Florida. Permission is granted to others to use these materials in part or in full for educational purposes, provided that full credit is given to the UF/IFAS, citing the publication, its source, and date of publication.