| This is the CEC archive of Psyche through 2000. Psyche is now published by Hindawi Publishing. |
Revisional Study of the Order Palaeodictyoptera in the Upper Carboniferous Shales of Commentry, France. Part II.
Psyche 76(4):439-486, 1969.
This article at Hindawi Publishing: https://doi.org/10.1155/1969/20732
CEC's scan of this article: http://psyche.entclub.org/pdf/76/76-439.pdf, 4428K
This landing page: http://psyche.entclub.org/76/76-439.html
The following unprocessed text is extracted automatically from the PDF file, and is likely to be both incomplete and full of errors. Please consult the PDF file for the complete article.
REVISIONAL STUDY OF
THE ORDER PALAEODICTYOPTERA IN
THE UPPER CARBONIFEROUS SHALES
OF COMMENTRY, FRANCE
PART 111
BY JARMILA KUKALOVA~
Charles University, Prague
An introductory discussion of the Palaeodictyoptera found in the Cornmentry shales and of the collection in the Institut de Palion- tologie in Paris, as well as an account of the background of this investigation, was included in the first part of these studies. The present part deals with the following seven families : Homoiopteridae, Lycocercidae, Graphiptilidae, Breyeriidae, Eugereonidae, Archaemeg- aptilidae and Megaptilidae. Compared with the Spilapteridae, con- sidered in Part I, all of these families are small, consisting of only a few genera, at least from the Commentry shales. However, they show much diversity of structure and indicate the extensive range of wing modifications which occurred in the Palaeodictyoptera, indud- ing the reduction and shortening of the hind wings. The third part of this study will deal with the Dictyoneuridae, which provide us with more information about the body structure in this order of insects.
Family Homoiopteridae HandIirsch
Homoio~teridae Handlirsch, 1906: 91; Lameere, 1917: 102; Handlirsch, 1919: 16; Handlirsch, 1921: 133.
Roechlingiidae Guthorl, 1934: 188; Kukalov5, 1960: 1. Thesoneuridae Carpenter, 1944: 10.
Scepasmidae Haupt, 1949: 42.
Type genus: Homoioptera Brongniart, 1893. This family, as established by Handlirsch, included Hodptera Brongniart, Graphiptiloides Handlirsch ( 1906), Homoeophlebia Handlirsch ( I 906) all from Commentry ; and Anthracentomon Handlirsch ( 1904) from Belgium. Of these genera, Graphiptiloides (= Graphiptilus) is here assigned to the Graphiptilidae; Homoeo- 'Published with the aid of a grant from the Colles Fund of the Museum of Comparative Zoology at Harvard College and a Grant-in-Aid of Research from the Society of the Sigma Xi. This study has also been supported in part by grants numbered GB2038 and GB7038 (F. M. Carpenter, Principal Investigator) from the National Science Foundation. Part I, dealing with the family Spilapteridae, was published in Psyche, Vol. 76, pp. 163-215. 'Alexander Agassiz Lecturer in Zoology, Harvard University, 1969.
================================================================================
440 Psyche [December
Nebia has already been synonymized with Homoioptera by Lameere (1917, p. 151) ; and Anthracentomon, on the basis of Handlirsch's figures, is also considered a synonym of Ho7noioptera. The present revisional study of the Commentry material has brought new aspects to the family classification of the Paleodictyop- tera. The family Homoiopteridae now appears to include several genera from localities other than Commentry. Three families, Roech- lingiidae, Scepasmidae and Thesoneuridae, seem to be synonymous with the Homoiopteridae; and the relationships of the Homoiop- teridae with the Graphiptilidae, Breyeriidae and Lycocercidae have become more obvious.
The wings of the Homoiopteridae, as here treated, are the largest known in the Palaeodictyoptera. They are characterized especially by the following four features:
(I) stems of main veins with a
more or less pronounced bend in the basal third of the wings; (2) MA either simple or with very short branches and CuA always with branches (usually short ones) ; (3) CuA and CUP tending to be parallel to each other; and (4) a sclerotized strip with tubercles lying along the costa, just posterior to it. The cross veins are nu- merous, irregular and often connected.
The bending of the main veins basally is present in Homoioptera, Boltopruvostia, and to a lesser extent in Thesoneura; it also occurs in the related family Lycocercidae. MA is simple or has a little fork in Homoioptera (see left wing of the type specimen) and in Thesoneura; it gives rise to very short branches in Boltopruvostia (see B. nigra Kukalovi, 1958). It is simple in the Breyeriidae but has a very short branch in Graphiptilus (type specimens of heeri). The branches on CuA are very short in Homoioptera and Bolto- pmvostia, longer in Thesoneura and completely reduced in Lyco- cercidae. In the Breyeriidae (B. boulei) and in Graphiptilus (G. heeri, specimen 19-12) CuA forms a short branch. The tendency for CuA and CUP to be pa,rallel is a very persistent feature, com- mon in all Homoiopteridae and noticeable also in some Lycocercidae (L. pictus), Graphiptilidae (R habdoptilus) and some Breyeriidae (B. barborae) . The cross venation of Homoiopteridae and related families is very characteristic; it is readily distinguished from the more regular and rarely anastomosed venation of spilapterids and from the denser and usually relatively coarser pattern of the dic- tyoneurids.
From the foregoing account, it can be deduced that within the Homoiopteridae and related groups the branches of MA and CuA
================================================================================
were in the process of reduction. The number of branches varies within the several genera of Homoiopteridae, and twigs occasionally occur in related families, in which MA and CuA are generally simple. In my opinion the families Hom~io~teridae, Breyeriidae, Gra~hi~tilidae and Lycocercidae form a phylogenetic unit, in which the Hom~io~teridae represent in many respects the most primitive series. It is to be emphasized that the simple form of CuA and MA does not necessarily represent the more primitive stage, as generally believed. This hypothesis was based by Handlirsch on the assumption that the most primitive Palaeodictvoptera were the Dictyoneuridae. However, this family, except for the archedictyon, is a very advanced one, with venation very specialized and already reduced. Of course, it is very difficult to determine, in our present state of meagre in- formation of the body structures, which of the families has the most primitive features. The geological record seems to be indicating more and more that probably all the larger families of the Paleodictyoptera were present and already well developed at the base of the Upper Carboniferous and that their representatives evolved very little dur- ing the rest of that period. As a rule within the insects, the many morphological features of wing venation do not have equal signif- icance for classification in all families of the orders. The presence or absence of branches of MA and CuA appears to be more stable for the spilapterid group than for the homoiopterid group. A remarkable feature, present to a more or less extent in all homoiopterid specimens I have had occasion to study [Homoioptera, Boltopruvostia, Amousus, Anzetretus and Thesoneura] , is the sclero- tized strip and tubercles strengthening the costal area. It is especially marked in the largest specimens of the family, i.e., in all species of Boltopruvostia and in Homoioptera gigantea. This family includes the largest species of Palaeodi~tyo~tera known. The wings are of nearly equal length, the hind wings being somewhat the broader. In addition to the venational characteristics discussed above, the following should be noted: postcostal area large, with several branches included; Sc long; area of Rs small; MA simple or with short branches; MP with several branches; CuA and CUP parallel to each other; CuA with several short branches directed anteriorly (usually), CUP with several branches. Body structures: head small, with projecting eyes and large clypeus. Prothoracic lobes with radiating veins and many cross veins, often with undulated margins. Legs longer than in Spilapteridae, with elongate tibiae. Abdomen unknown.
================================================================================
442 Psyche [December
The family Homoiopteridae differs from the related families Lyco- cercidae, Breyeriidae, and Graphiptilidae in having CuA always branched and in possessing the sclerotized strip posterior to the costa. Only the genus Homoioptera is known from the Commentry shales. The following genera occur in other deposits: Homoioptera Brong- mart (= Anthracetomon Handlirsch, 1go4), Westphalian of Bel- gium ; Boltopruvostia Strand, 1929 (po Boltonia Pruvost, 1919) ( Roechlingia Guthorl, 1934, and Ostrava Kukalovii, 1960)) West- phalian of France, Westphalian C of Germany, Namurian C of Czechoslovakia. The following species appear to belong to the family Homoiopteridae but the status and relationship of the genera estab- lished for them are uncertain : A4ammia alutacea Handlirsch I 906, Scepasma gigas Handlirsch,
1911, Amouzus mazonus Handlirsch,
IQI I, and Ametretus laevis Handlirsch, 191 I, all from the West- phalian of Illinois.
Genu,s Homoioptera Brongniart, 1893
Homoloptera Brongniart, 1893 : 353 ; Agnus, 1902: 259 ; Woodward, 1906: 28; Handlirsch, 1906: 91; Lameere, 1917: 151; Handlirsch, 1919: 16. Homoeophlebia Handlirsch, 1906: 92 ; Handlirsch, 1919: 16. Anthracetomon Handlirsch, 1904: 6; Handlirsch, 190,6: 93. Type species :
Homoioptera woodwardi Brongniart, I 893 (OD). A few years after Brongniart described woodwardi, Agnus (1902) added another species, gigantea; this Handlirsch ( 1906) later made the type of another genus, Homoeophlebia. As pointed out by Lameere ( 191 7), the generic separation of gigantea seemed totally unneces- sary. Meunier ( 1912, p. 5)
added to the taxonomic confusion by
the erection of a new species, gaullei, in another genus Archaeo@tilus, basing it on the counterpart of Agnus' type specimen of g-igantea! Handlirsc'h's hthracetomon, based on latipe'nne from the West- phalian of Belgium, is actually inseparable from Homoioptera. The
following account is based on woodwardi and gigantea. Wings relatively broad, almost identical, the hind pair being only a little broader than the fore; color markings in the form of nu- merous small, rounded spots. Precostal strip present (bordering the costal margin) ; anterior margin convex in the basal third of the wing; Rs with 3-4 branches, often forking; stem of M touching or nearly touching R near the base; M dividing near mid-wing, MA being simple and convex, MP with 3-4 branches; CuA and CUP with short branches, often originating at the same level. Anal
veins 6-8 in number, sometimes forked. Cross veins often connected by numerous anastomoses, branched or forming a loose network.
================================================================================
================================================================================
444 Psyche [December
Body structures: prothoracic lobes relatively small, high on pro- thorax, their bases relatively near to each other. Fme leg with
strong femur, elongate tibia and narrow tarsus. Homoioptera differs from the related genus Boltopruvostia Strand by having broader and shorter wings, smaller area of the radial sector, bv more distal division of M (shortly before mid-wing), by MA being essentially simple and more convex, by CUP having fewer branches and by having a smaller anal area with less branching of the anal veins.
All cross veins weak. From Thesoneura, Homoiop- tera differs in the more pronounced convex curvature of the ma'n veins in the basal third of the wing and in having fewer branches on CuA.
The species included in the Cornmentry shales are Homoioptera woodwardi Brongniart and IT. gigantea Agnus (= Archaeitzegaptilus gaullei Meunier, obj. syn.). One other species, latipenne, from the Westphalian of Belgium, appears to belong here, as noted above. Homoiofitera woodwardi Brongniart
Figure 29
Homoioptera woodwardi Brongniart, 1893:354, fig. 15, pi. 20, fig. 10; Handfirsch, 1906: 91, pi. 11, fig. 1; Handlirsch, 1921: 134, fig. 61. This species was based by Brongniart on one specimen (20-IO), showing the fore and hind wings, prothoracic lobes and a fragment of fore leg. The wings present a remarkable color pattern of cir- cular dots, a pattern which occurs repeatedly in the families related to the Hom~io~teridae. The shape of the prothoracic lobes probably has little taxonomic value other than at the specific level. Great variability in the shape of the lobes also occurs in the Spilapteridae. My study of the type specimen shows that the cross venation is much denser and is less regular than indicated in Brongniart's figure. Fore wing: length 75 mm, width 27 mm. Wing membrane spotted by circular markings of varying diameters; wing uniformly broad in the proximal half, then abruptly narrowing; apex at about the wing axis; Sc, R and M almost parallel and convex at the end of the first quarter of the wing; M notably concave before the divi- sion into AIA and MP; Rs with 3-4 branches, each forked several times; Rs area very small. Cross veins more simple in the areas of the subcosta, sc-r and r-rs, with much less anastomosis. A cluster of long hairs occurs at the bases of both fore wings. Hind wing: length 75 mm, width 31 mm. The sigmoidal curvature of the main
================================================================================
veins near the base is much less pronounced than in the fore wing; anal veins only rarely forked.
Body structures: prothoracic lobes with undulated margin, their veins S-shaped, about 11 in number. Numerous anastomoses of cross veins.
Homoioptera gigantea Agnus
Figure 30
Homoioptera gigantea Agnus, 1902: 259, pi. 1; Lameere, 1917: 151. Homoeophlebia gigantea Handlirsch, 1906: 93, pi. 11, fig. 3. Archaeopt.'lus gaullei Meunier, 1910: 233, fig. 1; Meunier, 1912: 5, pi. 6, fig. 1.
Homoeophlebia gaullei Handlirsch, 1919: 16, fig. 18. This monotypic species was based by Agnus upon a remarkably well preserved, large fore wing, with a single prothoracic lobe and vague outlines of the head, including the base of the beak, and suggestions of the thorax and a fragment of a fore leg. The reverse, as already noted, was described by Meunier (1910) as Archaeoptilus gaullei.
Fore wing: length 187 mm, width 65 mm. Wing membrane spotted with ( I ) extremely dense, small, light markings, irregularly grouped into small clusters; (2) larger spots arranged into 4 trans- verse bands. Wing abruptly narrowed in the apical third, with the apex pointed and falcate. Anterior margin very convex in the basal third, the posterior margin S-shaped in the apical third. Sc, R, M following the convex curvature of the anterior margin. Sc somewhat shortened; subcostal area broad in the proximal half, then very nar- row; stems of R and M touching near the base; M deeply concave before division into MA and MP; Rs with about four very oblique branches, the first of them long and forked. Anal area with about seven branches, the first forked several times. Cross veins parallel and directed in different directions, with much anastomosis. Long hairs are clustered at the base.
Body structures:
prothoracic lobe length 27 mm, width 24 mm, with a complete covering of long hairs. Prothoracic lobe cordate, with seven radiating veins and densely arranged, simple cross veins; margin of lobe not undulated.
This species differs from woodwardi by its larger size, more spe- cialized shape of the wing with its falcate apex, the larger rs area, the contact of the stems of R and M and the smoothly curved margins of the prothoracic lobes, as well as the color pattern of the wings.
================================================================================
Figure 30. Homoioptera gigantea Agnus; prothoracic lobe, fore wing. Holotype. Figure 31. Lycocercus $ictus Handlirsch; fore wing. Holotype.
================================================================================
19691 Kukalovd - Palaeodictyoptera 447
Family Lycocercidae Handlirsch, I 906
Lycocercidae Handlirsch, 1906 : 675 ; Handlirsch, 1906: 88 ; Handlirsch, 1921 : 133; Handlirsch, 1919: 15; Lameere, 1917: 102. Polycreagridae Handlirsch, 1906: 110 ; Handlirsch, 1906 : 678 ; Handlirsch, 1921: 137.
Apopappidae Lameere, 1917 : 42.
Patteiskyidae Laurentiaux, 1958: 302 ; Demoulin, 1958 : 363. Type genus :
Lycocercus Handlirsch, I 906
The family Lycocercidae was established by Handlirsch for Lyco- cercus and was characterized as having more numerous branches than Lithomanteidae3 and as having cross veins forming at least partially a dense network of the dictyoneurid type. His interpretation of the fossils on which Lycocercus was based is only partly correct. The cross veins of the Lycocercidae are indeed denser, more irregular and more often connected by anastomoses than in Lithomanteidae but they do not form a real network of the dictyoneurid type. This revisional study of the type material has revealed three additional and important features for the Lycocercidae : ( I ) the hind wing is as long as but narrower than the fore wing; (2) the MP area is of triangular shape, with many branches; (3) the origins of MA and the first fork of MP are very close. The following families are considered by me to be synonymous with Lycocercidae :
( I ) Polycreagridae Handlirsch, I 906, based on the single genus Polycreagra Handlirsch, 1906; this genus differs from Lycocercus only by having more obliquely oriented branches, with longer forks and by having Rs more richly branched. (2) Apo- pappidae Lameere, I 9 I 7, based upon Apopappus Handlirsch, I 906, which differs from Lycocercus by having a more regular cross vena- tion and by having CUP somewhat richer in branches. (3) Pat- teislcyidae Laurentiaux, 1958, based upon the oldest palaeodictyop- teron so far known, Patteiskya houckaerti4 (Namurian B, Germany), which differs from the other species of Lycocercus only in having M dividing more proximately; it is therefore inseparable from Ly cocercus.
Wings about equal in length, hind pair narrower, similar in vena- 'The family Lithomanteidae is here understood to include the genus Lithomantis Woodward (syn. Hadroneuna Handlirsch and Lithosialis Scud- der), Macroptera Laurentiaux (syn. Lusiella Laurentiaux and Texeira) and Synarmoge Handlirsch.
?In the figure published by Laurentiaux (1958, figure 1) Sc is correctly drawn but the subcostal area is broader proximally and is shaped as in Lycocercus goldenbergi.
In the figure published by Demoulin (1958, p. 359, fig. 1)
the vein designated as the costa is actually the subcosta. Lycocercus bouckaerti is not represented by a hind wing but by a fore wing.
================================================================================
448 Psyche
[December
tion; wing membrane usually dark, with light bands and spots. Fore wings resembling hind wings in outline but with broader subcostal area. Anterior margin nearly straight, often with precostal strip; stems of main veins convex in the basal third, as in Homoiopteridae; Sc long; MA simple, curved, originating near the first fork of MP; MP with many branches, occupying a markedly triangular area; CuA simple and curved; CUP parallel to CuA, but with several branches. Anal area often large, with many branches. Cross veins fine, numerous, more or less irregular, sometimes connected. Body structures: head small with conspicuous eyes and large clypeus. Prothoracic lobes with fan-like veins and many cross veins, often with undulated margins. Thorax broad, metathorax shorter than mesothorax; legs homonornous, not very short. Ovipositor not
sculptured, stout and curved. Cerci robust, long. The family Lycocercidae is related to the Homoiopteridae in the characteristic curvature of stems of main veins near the base, in the late division of M, in the general character of cross veins, in the presence of many small forks along the posterior margin, etc. It differs from the Homoiopteridae in the narrowed hind wing and more richly branched MP and CUP and simple CuA. Another related family is the Graphiptilidae, from which the Lycocercidae differ in the richly branched MP and CUP and the narrower hind wings.
Genera included in the Cornmentry shales : Lycocercus Handlirsch and Apopappus Handlirsch.
Occurrence in other deposits: Lycocercus Handlirsch, Namurian B, Germany.
Genus Lycocercus Handlirsch
Lycocercus Handlirsch, 1906: 89, Handlirsch, 1919: 15; Lameere, 1917: 153. Patteiskya Laurentiaux, 1958 : 302 ; Demoulin, 1958 : 360. Type species : Dicty oneura goldenbergi Brongniart, I 893 ( SD Handlirsch I 922).
This genus was erected by Handlirsch for goldenbergi Brongniart, as represented by specimen 2 I - I. Specimen 2 I -2, correctly described by Brongniart under the same specific name, was erroneously re- ferred by Handlirsch (1906, p. 90) to a separate species brongniarti (Lameere, 1917, p. 153). Meunier (191 I, p. 121) described Homoi- optera brongniarti, which Handlirsch later ( I g I 9, p. I 5 ) recognized as Lycocercus. The specific name having been preoccupied within the genus since 1906, Handlirsch ( 1919, p. 16) changed it to Lycocercus pictus. Though Lameere (1917, p. 153) believed that pictus was conspecific with goldenbergi, he was apparently incorrect.
================================================================================
================================================================================
4.50 Psyche [December
Figure 33. Lycoccrcus goldcnbergi (Brongniart) ; specimen 21-1 ; fore and hind wings. Holotype.
Figure 34.
Apopappus guernei (Brongniart) ; specimen 19-3 ; fore wing. Holotype.
================================================================================
19691 KukaZovd -- Palaeodictyoptera 45 1 Although the differences in venation might conceivably be considered as due to individual variability and although the cross venation and color markings are almost identical, there is a marked difference in the length of the legs and probably also of the beak. In Lycocercus the hind wings are like the fore wings in shape but are narrower. This assertion is based on specimen 21-2, in which the wings are preserved in their natural positions. If found isolated, a fore or hind wing can be recognized only by the width of the proximal part of the subcostal area, which is broader in the fore wings.
Fore wings unusually broad in the proximal half, shaped as hind wings. Hind wings similar but somewhat narrower. RI simple; Rs with six branches, first of them forked; MP forked 10-20 times. Number of CUP branches variable; about 8 anal veins, mostly forked. Cross veins dense, irregular, often connected. Body structures:
beak short or long. Legs stout but not very short.
Lycocercus differs from Apopappus in less regular anastomosing of cross veins, smaller CUP area and in the larger number of short branches of Rs and CUP.
As a whole, the venation of Lycocercus
is much less regular.
From Polycreagra Handlirsch (Westphalian, Illinois) it differs in the less densely branched and less obliquely oriented branches of main veins.
Species included in the Commentry shales : Lycocercus goldenbergi Brongniart, 1893 ; Lycocercus pictus Handlirsch, 191 9. Occurrences in other deposits: Lycocercus bouckaerti (Lauren- tiaux, 1958) of Namurian B, Germany.
Lycocercus goldenbergi (Brongnkrt)
Figures 32, 33, 35
Dictyoneura goldenbergi Brongniart, 1883: 265 (for additional references see Handlirsch, 1922: 39).
Lithornantis goldenbergi, Brongniart, 1893 : 369, pi. 21, fig. 1, 2. Lycocercus goldenbergi, Handlirsch, 1906: 89, pi. 10, fig. 20; Handlirsch, 1921: 138, fig. 60; Handlirsch, 1919: 15, 16; Lameere, 1917: 101; Lameere, 1917: 153 ; Demoulin, 1960: 1-4, pi. 1. Lycocercus brongniarti Handlirsch, 1906: 90, pi. 10, fig. 21; Handlirsch, 1919: 15, fig. 17.
This species was based by Brongniart on specimen 21-1, one of the most remarkable Palaeodictyoptera known, and on specimen 21-2, a fragment of fore and hind wing in natural positions. Handlirsch ( 1922) designated specimen 21-1 as the type; specimen 21-2, which is important for showing the wing shapes, was referred by Hand-
================================================================================
452 Psyche [December
lirsch to a separate species, brongniarti, but was identified again as gddenbergi by Lameere ( 1917, p. I 53).
The type specimen (21-1) has been discussed many times by various authors but of these only Brongniart and Lameere actually studied the fossil. Most interpretations are highly speculative and not worth discussing here. The fossil shows so many structures which are important for the whole order that it deserves the most detailed study. Actually, the specimen might contribute even more details than I was able to work out in my limited stay of several weeks at the Paris Museum. The following discussion is based mostly on the obverse, with the exception of the abdominal ap- pendages, which are better preserved in the reverse. In figure 32, as usual, both obverse and reverse have been used. The type specimen shows fragments of two twisted wings. The broad wing on the right side is a fore wing, having a broader sub costal and r-rs areas than the narrower hind wing on the left side. This conclusion was reached after noting that the second specimen (21-2, shown in figure 35), with fore and hind wings in natural positions, showed the same differences.
The body of specimen 21-1 is twisted in such a way that the thorax shows the dorsal side, while the abdomen shows the distal end in full lateral view. The head is in ~erfect frontal position. The insect apparently first rested with the beak oriented along the body axis ; later the head became loose and shifted 90' to the left. The prothoracic lobes lifted from the pronotum and overlapped so that they are now in lateral position. Such preservation is unusual for the Palaeodictyoptera and proves beyond any doubt that (I) the prothoracic lobes were not fused together to form a pronotal shield, as claimed by Sharov (1966)~; and (2) that they were easily move- able. The legs of specimen 21-1 are extended on both sides of the body. All three right legs have a deep suture near the proximal end of the tibia, giving the impression of an extra segment fused with the tibia. I have observed similar sutures in Stenodictya ngnitci (Meu- nier) and Stenodictya oustalet'i (Brongniart). It is. of great interest
that in Recent Ephemeroptera there is a marked bend in the same part of the tibia (e.g., Ecdyonurus).
But the suture on the tibia
does not seem to be present in the related orders Megasecoptera and Diaphanopterodea and not even in all Palaeodictyoptera. At any The prothoracic lobes were attached to the pronotum by short cuticular ridges in the center of their basal part. The perfectly preserved prothoracic lobes of Stenodictya will be described in Part I11 of this series of papers.
================================================================================
================================================================================
454 Psyche [December
rate, the part divided by the suture makes a single piece with the tibia, so that it probably had hardly any functional significance. The segments of the abdomen undoubtedly because of decaying processes and distortion, show varying portions of the intersegmental membrane. The ovipositor is robust and opened widely. Between the ovipositor valves, a pair of sac-like cuticular structures appears to come from the abdomen. These have been incorrectly interpreted as gonapophyses by many authors. Demoulin ( I 960) considered them the evaginated cuticle of the oviduct and pointed to similar cases known in Recent Ephemeroptera after the laying of the eggs in paired large clusters (e.g., Polymitarciidae) . Above the end of the abdomen, twisted backwards, there are two structures described by Brongniart as "crochets dorsaux." Detailed examination shows that they are "attached" to the cercus. These seem like parts of a smaller and much less heavily sclerotized ovi- positor and could be part of a cast cuticle. It is conceivable that the Palaeodictyoptera had an adult molt, in which case this "ovipositor" could have been part of the previously molted cuticle. The ovipositor of Lycocercus goZdenbergi resembles, in its broad attachment to the 9th segment, the ovipositors of certain dragonflies, such as the Z~goptera and some Anisoptera, especially those adapted for endophytic oviposition. Moreover, it resembles the ovipositor of some Diaphanopterodea (Permian of Kansas and Czechoslovakia, un- published material) in the prolongation of the lateral margin of the 9th tergite anteriorly. The surface of the gonapophyses does not show any sculpturing, whereas in Asthenohymen it is armed by ridges and even stout hairs directed backwards, as in the endophytic Hymenoptera.
The following account is based on the type specimen and on specimen 2 I -2.
Fore wing:
length 73 mm, width 25 mm, broadest in the first third. Precostal strip extending to about the middle of the wing. Posterior margin with small convexities at the end of each area. Apex directed posteriorly, rounded. Rs with about 5 branches, the first two of them more or less richly branched; MA arising occa- sionally distally from the first branch of MP. ME' forked I 1-19 times. Cu dividing near the base, CUP with 3-5 posteriorly directed branches, often forked. Anal area moderately large with veins forked many times. Cross veins fine, dense, curved, sometimes branched and connected. Hind wing fragment: length 39 mm, width 22 mm.
Basic body structures:
head small, with very large clypeus hav-
================================================================================
19691 Kukalovd - Palaeodictyoptera 45 5
ing a median ridge. Beak relatively shorter than in any other known Palaeodictyoptera; length I I mm.
Labrum triangular, long.
Thorax broad and robust. Mesothorax slightly longer than the metathorax and about the same length as the prothorax. Prothoracic lobes large, with fan-like veins and undulated margins. Legs stout, femur length 8.5 mm in all three pairs.
Proximal end of tibia
provided with a deep suture on all legs. Lengths of tibia and tarsi
unknown. Abdomen relatively short and broad (length 48 mm), segments subequal, the first two being shorter than the following ones. Lateral margin of the 9th segment prolonged anteriorly. Ovi- positor robust, heavily sclerotized, gonapophyses not sculptured ; an- terior valves arising from 8th segment, 8th sternite being shortened; 9th segment with the anterior margin concave; lateral valves much broader than the anterior ones. Cerci robust, multisegmented. Lycocercus goldenbergi differs from the related species bouckaerti (Laurentiaux, I 958) of Namurian B, Germany ( = Patteiskya bouckaerti) in the more distal division of the stem of M. From Lycocercus pictus Handlirsch it differs in having shorter legs and probably also in having a shorter beak, having more numerous branches of CUP, smaller anal area; also, Cu divides more prox- imally and the cross venation is denser, with more numerous an- astomoses.
Lycocercus pictus Handlirsch, IQI 9
Figures 3 I, 36
Homoioptera brongniarti Meunier, 1911: 121, fig. 5; Meunier, 1912: 11, pi. 7, fig. 6 (nec brongniarti Handlirsch, 1906). Lycocercus pictus Handlirsch, 1919: 15, fig. 17 (pro brongn'iarti Meunier). This species is monotypic, based by Meunier ( 19 I I ) upon a speci- men showing both fore wings, prothoracic lobes, vague outlines of the beak and a fore leg and part of the head. Handlirsch ( 1919) correctly referred this species to Lycocercus using the name pictus for it to avoid homonymy. Lycocercus pictus was discussed in detail by Lameere
( 1917, p. 1531-154)) who erroneously assumed it to be conspecific with &denberg-i. Lameere in his account described the head and beak with a clypeus similar to that of the Fulgoridae and a trace of palpus on the side.
Of all these structures I was able
to see only weak outlines of the beak, which seemed to be longer than in goldenbergi.
The prothoracic lobes are aligned by their posterior margins with the posterior edge of the pronotum, giving the appearance of a shield. This is misleading, as shown by the related species, goldenbergi, in which both lobes are raised up above the pronotum.
================================================================================
Psyche
[December
Figure 36.
Lycocercus $ictus Handlirsch; prothorax, basal part of fore wing, fragment of fore leg (1) and beak (b). Holotype. Fore wing:
69 mm long, 22 mm broad, the wing uniformly broad in the proximal half. Anterior margin very slightly concave, posterior margin with a slight concavity also in the apical third; apex directed posteriorly, rounded. Precostal strip reaching to the end of the first third; subcostal area relatively narrow. Rs with 6 branches, mostly forked ; MP forked g times ; Cu dividing very distally, shortly before the origin of Rs; CUP as in Homoioptera, with a few terminal branches. Anal area very large, with 8 richly forked branches arising from separate stems. Cross veins dense, rather regular, sometimes connected.
Body structure :
beak probably long (about 2.5 cm) . Prothoracic lobes large, high on pronotum, their posterior margins corresponding to the posterior edge of the prothorax. Prothorax relatively long with median line. Legs longer than in goldenbergi, apparently with long tibia.
Lycocercus pictus differs from goldenbergi by the several venational traits and body structures already noted. Apopappus Handlirsch, I 906
Apopappus Handlirsch, 1906: 100; Lameere, 1917: 149; Lameere, 1917: 103; Handlirsch, 1919: 20.
Type species :
Spilaptera guernei ( Brongniart, I 893) (OD).
================================================================================
This genus was erected by Handlirsch upon Spilaptera pernei Brongniart, specimen 19-3, because of a simple MA and CuA but it was erroneously classified with the family Graphiptilidae. Later, Lameere ( 191 7, p. 103) suggested that Apopappus was a transitional form between the Spilapteridae and Ephemeroptera. Finally the same author ( 191 7, p. 42) established for this genus a separate family, Apopappidae. With Triplosobidae, he referred this family to the Protephemeroidea because he believed that in the mp area of guernei there is the beginning of intercalary sectors, indicating its relationship to the Ephemeroptera.
The venation of Apopappus shows typical lycocercid features, such as the large triangular MP area, simple MA and CuA and fine but rather dense pattern of cross veins. The fusion of the distal branch of MPI with the proximal branch of MP2,, considered by Lameere as an intercalary sector, is in all probability an individual variation only.
Wing broad. Branches of main veins running parallel. Rs with 6 pectinate branches, most of them simple; MA arising near the first fork of MP; MP forked 9 times. CUP with a series of 6 branches. Anal area unknown. Cross veins fine, not very dense, mostly regular and simple.
Apopappus differs from Lycocercus in the regularly distributed branches of the main veins, in the very rich branches of CUP and in the more regular, less numerous and mostly simple cross veins. Species included in the Cornmentry shales: Apopappus guernei ( Brongniart, I 893).
Apopappus guernei (Brongniart)
Figure 34
Spilaptera guernei Brongniart, 1893: 341, pi. 19, fig. 3. Apopappus guernei Handlirsch, 1906: 100, pi. 11, fig. 13; Handlirsch, 1919: 20; Lameere, 1917: 149.
This species is monotypic, based by Brongniart upon specimen 19-3, which I was not able to find in the collections of the Museum. This account has been made from a good photograph which Dr. Carpenter kindly placed at my disposal and which showed the vena- tion very clearly.
As in other Lycocercidae, it is difficult to recognize the fore and hind wing if found isolated, especially if the subcostal area is missing. From the more pronounced convexity of posterior margin in the apical third and beyond the width, I believe the wing is probably the fore one.
================================================================================
458 Psyche [December
Rs with 6 branches, the first of them with a small simple fork; MA curved as in other Lycocercidae; MPI sending off 4 branches posteriorly, MP2 another four branches anteriorly. CUP with four simple branches, the fifth being forked several times. Cross veins tending to form rows in rs area.
Apopappus guernei is similar in the MP area to Lycocercus $ictus but the forking of the last branch of CUP resembles the Lycocercus goldenbergi, specimen 21-2. The cross venation is slightly more simple and more regular than in pictus.
Family Graphiptilidae Handlirsch
Graphiptilidae Handlirsch, 1906: 99; Handlirsch, 1921: 136. Rhabdoptilidae Handlirsch, 1919: 15.
Type genus: Graphiptilus Bsongniart, 1893. The family Gra~hiptilidae was erected on Graph'iptilus but in- cluded Apopappus Handlirsch and Spiloptilus Handlirsch. The fam- ily, having been based upon an incomplete description and on a mis- interpretation of the type specimens of Graphiptilus, represents a heterogeneous group, as treated by Handlirsch. The genus Apopappus belongs, in all probability, to the Lycocercidae; and Spiloptilus, having MA and CuA branched, has already been referred to the Spilapteridae (Kukalovii, 1969). The structure of Graphiptilus, on the other hand, certainly justifies reference of the genus to a separate family. Graphiptilus is known so far only from the hind wing, which is markedly and broadly triangular in form. The principal characters of its venation are the very small rs area, simple MA and CuA, and the numerous weak cross veins. Within the Palaeodictyoptera only the genus Rhabdoptilns and representatives of the family Breyeriidae show similar venational features.
The relationship of Graphiptilus to Rhabdoptilus, though not pre- viously mentioned, is obvious from the similarity not only of the venation and cross venation but even of the color pattern, which seems to be a more significant feature for the Graphiptilidae and Breyeriidae than for other families of the order Palaeodictyoptera. As noted by Professor Carpenter (1967, p. 61) the small circular spots on the wings of Breyeriidae are actually cuticular thickenings on the membrane. The well preserved Commentry material of Breyeria shows long hairs, probably macrotrichia, in clusters at these spots; similar structures may well have been present on the wings of the Graphiptilidae.
================================================================================
19691 Kukalovd - Palaeodictyoptera 459
It is to be emphasized that the hind wings of both Graphiptilus and Rhabdoptilus, though broad and therefore relatively short, do not show any sign of reduction. This fact together with the vena- tional pattern places them far from Lithoptilus, which has been erroneously associated with Rhabdoptilus (Demoulin, 1958). The fore wing is unknown. The hind wing is of broadly triangular shape. Anterior margin almost straight; Sc long; Rs area reduced in size, with 3-4 branches; MA simple, MP with several branches; CuA simple, CUP branched several times; several anal veins. Cross veins dense, fine, long, sometimes connected by anastomoses. Color markings usually in the form of irregularly distributed larger spots and smaller rounded spots.
The family Graphiptilidae resembles Breyeriidae in several f ea- tures, already noted above, including the wing markings. The graph- iptilids differ from the breyeriids in having a denser pattern of cross veins and in having the branches of the main veins obliquely oriented (not perpendicular to posterior margin, as in some breyeriids) and in having these branches closer together. Among the Breyeriidae,
the less specialized genus Stobbsia recalls most Graphiptilidae and may turn out to belong to that family.
Two genera are included in Commentry shales: Graphiptilus Brongniart, I 893 ; Rhabdoptilus Brongniart, I 893. Genus Graphiptilus Brongniaxt
Graphiptilus Brongniart, 1893: 348; Handlirsch, 1906: 99; Handlirsch, 1919: 20; Lameere, 1917: 150.
Graphiptiloides Handlirsch, 1906: 92 ; Handlirsch, 19-9 : 16. Type species: Graphiptihis heeri Brongniart, 1893 (SD Hand- lirsch I 906).
This genus was erected by Brongniart for heeri, williainsoni and ramondi. Ranzondi was referred by Handlirsch (1906, p. IOO) to a new genus Spiloptilus, which has been transferred to the Spilap- teridae (Kukalovi, 1969) ; willianisoni was assigned by Handlirsch (1906, p. 92) to a new genus Graphiptiloides and placed in the Hornoiopteridae. As mentioned already by Lameere ( I 9 I 7, p. I 5 I ) heeri and willianzsoni are actually very close and they are undoubtedly conspecific ; for some reason Lameere believed that willianzsoni was based on a fore wing, though the unique type has the same wing form as heeri, characteristic for hind wings in this family. A careful study of the specimens has made possible a reliable determination of the outline of the hind wings, their triangular
================================================================================
460 Psyche [December
form becoming obvious. For the relationship of Graphiptilus (as well as for most other Palaeodictyoptera), the cross veins are most important. Those cf Grafthiptihs, being very fine and close to- gether, have not been observed or at any rate mentioned by previous authors.
Hind wing very broad in proximal half; wing membrane usually with many elongate spots and small circular spots. Rs with four short branches; branches of main veins obliquely oriented to the posterior margin. Anal area reaching about midwing. Cross veins fine, dense, straight, regular.
Graphiptilus differs from the related genus Rhabdoptilus Brongni- art by its fewer branches of MP, more obliquely oriented branching of main veins and in the more regular cross venation. The color pattern differs by the shape of the elongate spots. Only the type-species is known from the Commentry shales. Graphiptilus heeri Brongniart
Figure 37, 38
Graphiptilus heeri Brongniart, 1893: 349, pi. 19, fig. 13, Handlirsch, 1906: 100, pi. 11, fig. 12; Handlirsch, 1919: 20; Lameere, 1917: 150. Graphiptilus williamsoni Brongniart, 1893 : 350, pi. 19, fig. 12 ; Lameere, 1917: 151.
Graphiptiloides williamsoni Handlirsch, 1906:92 ; Handlirsch, 1919 : 16. r 7
I his species was based by Brongniart on a single specimen, 19-13, a hind wing without base but with a well preserved color pattern. As noted above, I consider the type of williamsoni (specimen 19-12) to be the same species.
Hind wing:
length about 60 mm, width 27 mm, broadest at the end of the first third of the wing; light spots of diverse length are present, limited by cross veins, and in addition small round light spots irregularlv distributed over the wing. Anterior margin straight, anal area moderately rounded. Apical half of wing abruptly narrow- ing distally, apex rounded, shifted anteriorly to the axis of the wing. R-rs area only a little broadened; anal area large with at least nine long branches reaching or extending beyond the middle of the wing; some cross veins in costal and subcostal area stronger than the others and more oblique.
The differences between specimens 19-13 (type of heeri) and 19- 12
(type of wiZ/iavisoni} are in the presence or absence of small forks on CuA and CUP, in one branch more or less on MP and CUP and in the relative lengths of the anal areas. None of these seem to be at the specific level.
================================================================================
19691 Kukalovd -- Palaeodicty optera 46 1 Genus Rhabdopttltis Brongniart
Rkabdoptilus Brongniart, 1893: 364; Handlirsch, 1906: 88; Lameere, 1917: 102; Lameere, 1917: 154; Demoulin, 1958: 4. Type species : Rhabdoptilus edwardsi Brongniart, I 893 (OD). This genus is monotypic, erected by Brongniart upon a fragment of a large hind wing without base, apex or posterior margin. Rhab- doptilus was referred by Handlirsch first (1906) to the Lithoman- teidae and later ( 1919, p. 15) to a separate family Rhabdoptilidae, on the basis of it<s parallel, dense cross venation. Lameere (1917, p. 154) associated Rhabdoptilus with Fouquea in spite of the simple MA and CuA because the cross veins in both genera seemed to him to be very much alike.
Demoulin ( 1958) placed Rhabdoptilus
with Lithoptilus and referred both genera to Handlirsch's family Rhabdoptilidae, which he thought was near to the Breyeriidae and Thesoneuridae.
I have explained above that Handlirsch's misinterpretation of Graphiptilus prevented recognition of the close relationship between Rhabdoptilus and Graphiptilus, despite the marked similarity in venation, cross veins and color markings. Nevertheless, there are some differences in wing membrane characters between these genera, most probably of functional significance, as noted below. The wing area being large, the membrane thin, and cross veins weak, the wing tends to be strengthened in several ways. First,
the membrane is heavily pigmented and the pigmentation even pene- trates into light spots in the form of peculiar tooth-like projections; second, the membrane between the veins is rippled, producing a corrugated effect, and the thin cross veins usually run on the ridges of the ripples.
These are probably functional structures and re- stricted to the genus and possibly to the type species. Lameere was not correct in considering the strong conspicuous cross veins of Fotiquea to be like those of R habdoptilus. In Rhahdoptilus the hind wing is not reduced in length and all branches of the main veins are fully developed. In Lithoptilus the
hind wing, on the other hand, is greatly reduced with branching levels of RI, Rs and
M shifted distally. The cross venation of Lifhoptilm is very dense, with numerous, coarse connections, dis- tinctly different from Rhabdoptilus. For that reason I consider that Demodin's conclusion about the relationship of these genera i,s in- supportable. In this paper, Lithopfilzu is referred to Eugereonidae. Hind wing: probably broadly triangular; markings forming large, elongate and small circular light spots. Anterior margin slightly convex. Rs originating in the basal third of the wing, with several
================================================================================
462 Psyche
[December
Figure 37.
Holotype.
Graphiptilus
heeri Brongniart ; specimen
19-13; hind wing.
Figure 38. Graphiptilus heeri Brongniart; specimen 19-12; hind wing. Figure 39. Rhabdoptilus cdwardsi Brongniart ; specimen 20-9 ; hind wing. Holotype.
================================================================================
19691 Kukalov~ - Palaeodictyoptera 463
short branches; MA simple; MP forked several times; CuA simple; CUP with few branches. Cross veins fine, dense, curved, rarely with anastomoses.
The distinctions between Rhabdoptilus and Graphiptilus have al- ready been noted above.
Only the type species is known from the Commentry shales. Rhaba'optihis edwardsl Brongniart
Figure 39
Rhabdoptilus edwardsi Brongniart, 1893: 365, pi. 20, fig. 9; Handlirsch, 1906: 88, pi. 10, fig. 19; Lameere, 1917: 154; Handlirsch, 1919: 15 ; Demoulin, 1958 : 4.
This species is monotypic, being based by Brongniart upon speci- men 20-9, a fragment of a large hind wing with the posterior margin missing. The preserved part of the wing is very clear and all details of venation and color pattern in the heavy pigmentation of the mem- brane are perfectly distinct.
Hind wing fragment: length 87 mm, width 29 mm. Light spots of diverse lengths, with rounded lateral margins, some with pigmen- tation penetrating into them, as shown in figure 39. Small rounded spots are numerous, irregularly distributed. R-rs area broadened; Rs with about 5 branches, first of them forked; MP forked about 5 times; CUP slightly concave near its origin, sending off several branches. Cross veins regularly distributed; in subcostal and sc-r1 areas they are not anastornosed, and they are unusually strong. Family Breyeriidae H andlirsch
Breyeriidae Handlirsch, 1906: 95 ; Handlirsch, 1921 : 135 ; Handlirsch, 1919 : 18 ; Laurentiaux-Vieira and Laurentiaux, 1963 : 173-8 ; Laurentiaux- Vieira and Laurentiaux, 1964: 1282-1284; Captenter, 1967: 58. Type genus : Breyeria Borre 1875.
This family was established by Handlirsch on Breyeria Borre, Borrea Brongniart and Megfiptilo'ldes Handlirsch; three other genera were subsequently added to the family; Pseudoborrea Hand- lirsch, Stobbsia Handlirsch and Breyerioj&s Laurentiaux. The family is represented in Upper Carboniferous strata of England, Belgium, Holland, France, Czechoslovakia and the United States (Tennessee) but despite that record no body structures are known so far. The uniformity of the venational pattern of the Breyeriidae being obvious, it does not seem possible to recognize more than two valid genera (Kukalovi, 1959, p. 311 ; Laurentiaux, 1964, p. 3; Carpenter, 1967, p. 61) : Breyeria Borre and Stobbsia H andlirsch.
================================================================================
464 Psyche
[December
Although specimens found in deposits other than Commentry are the better preserved, the Commentry material contributes some very interesting morphological details. Both B-reyeria Zachlani and Breyeria boulei show clusters of long hairs, in a dense pattern and extending along the anterior part of the proximal half of the wing membrane, long: hairs at the wing base, and a border of long hairs along the anterior and posterior margins of the wing. In lachlani clusters of hairs have been observed also arising from some of the circular light spots in the cua-cup area. The short hairs on the wings are now well known in Palaeodic- tyoptera. They are common on veins and cross veins, and in some families, as Dictyoneuridae. a dense covering of hairs can be seen over the entire wing and body surfaces. Clusters of long hairs on the wing base were found also in the related family Homoiopteridae; similar hairs were noted in Archaemegaptilidae along the basal part of C, Sc and Cu. However, as far as I have been able to determine from the Commentry specimens, long hairs in clusters on the wing membrane and along the wing margin occur only in the Breyeriidae. In other Bre~eriidae, outside of the Commentry deposit, traces of hairs have been described
on the basal part of the costa and the
posterior wing margin, as in Breyeria barborae (Kukalovii, 1959) but the hairs themselves were not preserved. The clusters of long hairs on the wing membrane might be macrotrichia serving as sense organs, an hypothesis which seems to be supported by their presence in the light spots, which are actually cuticular thickenings of the wing membrane (Carpenter, 1967, p. 61). Wing; of large size, broad, equal in length, the hind pair broader. Sc shortened. Stems of R and M approaching or touching near the base. Branches of main veins few, widely separated from each other. CuA and MA simple; MP forked; CUP usually with a fork. Hind wings often broadly triangular in shape. Cross veins numerous, thin, irregular, often connected by anastomoses. The family Bi-eyeriidae seems related to the Graphiptilidae on the basis of the small rs area, simple MA and CuA the few branches of ?lIP and CUP, the presence of numerous long, fine cross veins and the triangular shape of the hind wings. Small circular spots frequently occur in color patterns of both groups. Genera included in the Commentry shales: Breyeria Borre, I 875 ; Af~gaptiloidcs Handlirsch, 1906. Other occurrences : Byyeria Borre ( Westphalian-Stephanian of Europe, Westphalian of North America) ; Stobbsia Handlirsch (Westphalian of England).
================================================================================
Breyeria Borre
Breyeria Borre, 1875 : 7 ; Laurentiaux, 1953 : 421. Borrea Brongniart, 1893 : 378 ; Handlirsch, 1906 : 97 ; Handlirsch, 1919 : 18. Pseudoborrea Handlirsch, 1919: 18.
Breyeriopsis Laurentiaux, 1949 : 47-54.
Type species: Pachytylopsis borinensis Borre, 1875 (OD), West- phalian, Belgium.
A revised figure of the type has been published by Laurentiaux ( 1949, p. 50, fig. Ia and 1953, p. 42, fig. 19b). In the Com- mentry shales two species have been found: Breyeria lachlani (Brongniart, I 893 ) and Breyeria boulei ( Meunier, I 910) , both based on slightly damaged hind wings. Laurentiaux (1949, p. 52) considered them to be conspecific and places boulei as a synonym Figure 40. Breyeria lachlani (Brongniart) ; specimen 21-9; hind wing. Holotype.
Figure 41. Breyeria boulei (Meunier) ; hind wing. Holotype.
================================================================================
466 Psyche [December
of lachlani. After having removed much matrix on the specimen of bodei I was able to see more details of its venation, including some which are specific differences and which eliminate the possi- bility of the synonymy with lachlani.
Specimen 21,-5, designated by Handlirsch ( 1906, p. 97) as Megaptiloides brodiei, is too fragmentary for definite classification. It shows dense cross veins, richly anastomosed and tending to form short intercalary sectors. The hairs along the margin are absent. Handlirsch's classification of brodiei into a separate genus is prob- ably justified.
The following account is based mostly on the details already published by Laurentiaux Laurentiaux and Laurentiaux-Vieira, Carpenter and Kukalovii.
Wings subequal, hind wing being somewhat shorter and broader. Hind wing sometimes very broad in the anal third and often of triangular shape. Postcostal area triangular, with several short branches. Sc terminating far before the apex, on R; Rs with 3-6 branches, the first of them often forked. Branches of M, Cu and the anals are curved sharply toward the posterior margin. MP with 1-5 broad forks; ma-cup area often markedly broad. CUP with 1-2 forks, seldom simple. Anal area either with a series of about 5 simple branches or with a series of simple long forks. Cross veins fine, irregular, rather dense, sometimes connected by irregular anastomoses. In the anal area, there are often present stronger and straighter cross veins (in addition to the finer ones) tending to be arranged in regular rows. Circular cuticular thicken- ings are often present in rows in the areas of m, rs and cu. Breyeria Borre differs from Stobbsia Handlirsch by having Sc ending on R and by the branches of M, Cu and the anals abruptly curving toward the posterior margin.
Species included in the Commentry shales: Breyeria ZachZani ( Brongniart ) , Breyeria boulei ( Meunier ) ; Afegaptiloides brodei (Bi-ongniart).
Species from other deposits: Breyeria borinensis (Borre) (West- phalian, Belgium) ; Breyeria barborae Kukalovi (Westphalian A, Czechoslovakia) ; Breyeria limburgica Laurentiaux (Westphalian A, Holland) ; Breyeria delruei Laurentiaux (Westphalian B, France) ; Breyeria vrankeni Laurentiaux-Vieira and Laurentiaux (Westphalian B, Holland) ; Breyeria rappi Carpenter (West- phalian C, Tennessee) ; Breyeria stopai Laurentiaux and Lau~en- tiaux-Vieira (Westphalian C, France) ; ?Breyeria britannica Lau- rentiaux and Laurentiaux-Vieira ( Westphalian B, England).
================================================================================
19691 KukaZovd - Palaeodictyoptera 467
Breyeria Zuchlani ( Brongniart)
Figure 40
Borrea lachlani Brongniart, 1893: 379, pi. 21, fig. 9; Handlirsch, 1906: 97, pi. 11, fig. 8; Handlirsch, 1919: 18; Lameere, 1917: 157; Laurentiaux, 1949: 52.
This species was erected by Brongniart on specimen 21-9, a hind wing lacking the base and most of the posterior margin. The
following account was completed after exposing additional features following the removal of substantial matrix. Hind wing: length 65 mm; preserved width 26.5 mm. Anterior margin straight, strongly curved towards apex; apex broadly round- ed. Sc terminating at the end of the second third of the length of the wing on R; Rs with 3 branches, first of them forked; MA slightly concave soon after its origin with a small fork at the end; MP probably with 2 branches extending anteriorly; CuA slightly concave in the first third of its course, CUP twice forked; anal area with 6 widely spaced branches. Cross venation dense, some- times the cross veins connected, forming a network in the rs area. Strong, regular cross veins present in anal area. Long hairs occui- in two clusters in the subcostal and sc-r areas, arising in circular, cuticular thickenings in cua-cup area and bordering the posterior margin.
Small rounded cuticular thickenings forming rows between some branches.
Bre- lachlani (Brongniart) differs from bodei in its denser and more reticulated cross venation and in the widely spaced anal veins, resembling those of the fore wing. It is similar to many other species, such as delruei, vrankeni, rappi, etc. Breyeria boulei ( Meunier)
Figure 41
Borrea boulei Meunier, 1910: 236, fig. 4; Meunier, 1912: 7, pi. 7, fig. 1. Pseudoborrea boulei Handlirsch, 1919: 18, fig. 20. Borrea lachlani Laurentiaux, 1949: 52.
Breyeria (Borrea) lachlani Laurentiaux and F. Laurentiaux-Vieira, 1951: 590.
This species was erected by Meunier upon a nearly complete hind wing. In comparison with all other hind wings of the genus, boulei does not have a very broad anal area and consequently it lacks the typical triangular shape.
Hind wing": length 59 mm, width 25 mm, broadest at about the first third of the wing length. Anterior margin, strongly curved towards the apex. Apex directed posteriorly, slightly pointed. Posterior margin as a whole convex, slightly concave in the cua-cup
================================================================================
Psyche
[December
area and slightly convex just before the apex. Sc terminating at the end of the second third of the wing on R; Rs with 3 branches, first of them forked; MA slightly concave soon after its origin; MP with 2 branches arising anteriorly. CuA slightly concave in the first third of its course, CUP forked; cua-cup area very broad; anal area with about six parallel branches, not widely spaced. Cross veins not very dense, sometimes connected. Stronger and more regular cross veins in the anal area and also in rs and m areas. Long hairs are present in a cluster in the r-m area at the base and bordering the proximal part of the anterior margin and the whole posterior margin.
Cuticular thickening in rows probably
present.
Brcyeria boule'i differs from lachluni as previously indicated. Family Eugereonidae Handlirsch
E~gereonid~ae Handlirsch, 1906: 388; Carpenter, 1964: 104. Dictyoptilidae Lameere, 1917: 194.
Peromapteridae Handlirsch, 1906: 79 ; Handlirsch, 1919 : 11 ; Handlirsch, 1921: 130.
Type genus: Eugereon Dohrn, 1866 (Lower Permian of Ger- many) .
The family Eugereonidae has been recently (1964) reviewed by Professor Carpenter who synonymized the Dictyoptilidae with it and discussed Eugereon and the Commentry genus Dictyoptilus. Details of that study are not repeated here. On the basis of my own studies of Commentry material, I am adding certain details on the structure of the wing base of Eugereonidae and the related family Calvertiellidae which were not included in previous papers (Carpenter 1964, Kukalovk 1964). To keep the revisional study as nearly complete as possible I am including in this paper figures of all Commentry Eugereonidae (Figures 42, 43, 44, 45). The Eugereonidae are made spectacular by the more or less pronounced reduction of the hind wings, which often (to varying degrees)
differ from the fore wings in shape and venation. The tendency to reduce the hind wings apparently occurred repeatedly in families of Palaeodictyoptera. Sometimes, the hind wings are broader but slightly shorter (Di~t~oneuridae, Mecynostomatidae, some Spilapteridae) while in others the hind wings are as long as the fore wings but are narrower (Lycocercidae). Extremely shortened hind wings are so far known in two families - Eugereoni- dae and Megaptilidae.
Within the Eugereonidae, as understood in this paper, the
================================================================================
Figure 42. Dictyoptilus sepultus (Meunier) ; fore wing. Holotype. pc = precostal area; f = furrow. Figure 43. Dictyoptilus peromapteroides (Meunier) ; fore and hind wings. Holotype.
================================================================================
470 Psyche [December
amount of variability in the hind wing shape and venation seems to be very great. Nevertheless, I do not consider it practical, at least at our present stage of knowledge, to separate into different families those genera in which the fore wings are much alike. In my opinion, the hind wings representing reduced structures may have been variable in form. The most modified hind wing of the Palaeodictyoptera occurs in Peromaptera Brongniart, the wing be- ing very short, broad and having an extremely reduced rs area. The hind wing of P'aZdemia Teixeii-a is very short and broad also but the venation is similar to that of its fore wing (according to Teixeira, 1941, fig. I). In both Eugereon and Dictyoptilus (fig. 43) the hind wing is less shortened and narrow, approximately of the same width as the fore wing; the venation is modified more in the basal third, that is in the anal and cubital areas; the rs area is relatively well developed (Carpenter, 1964). So far, I consider these differences of generic level.
Another remarkable morphological feature of Eugereonidae is the precostal area. This was mentioned for the first time by Lameere ( I 9 I 7, p. I 60) in Dictyoptilus sepultus ( Meunier ) and later in the same species by Laurentiaux (1953, p. 423). As far as I am aware, the largest precostal area is present in bath fore and hind wings of the families Eugereonidae and Calvertiellidae; a narrower precostal area occurs in the related family Archaemegapti- lidae. It was probably present also in Protagrionidae. The precostal area of the families mentioned above is comparable with that of the Orthoptera, being formed by a series of short branches coming out anteriorly from a strong costa at its very base. It continues distally, forming a long membraneous precostal strip. However, a precostal strip, not broadened basally to form a precostal area, is common in Palaeodictyoptera, being especially pronounced in the Dictyoneuridae, Lycocercidae, Homoiopteridae and some Spilapteridae. In families with the precostal area well developed, the postcostal area is completely missing. The postcostal area, as far as I was able to observe it in the specimens, is present in all families of Palaeodictyoptera without a precostal area.
Besides the Palaeodictyoptera, I was able to see it in those Megasecoptera which did not have the wings very narrowed basally. The postcostal area was first described by me in the Breyeriidae ( I 959) and in the Roechlingiidae ( I 960) under the inappropriate term "precostal area." It is formed by a short
vein, often branched, arising from the very base of the costa and oriented obliquely, finally terminating again on the costa after a
================================================================================
19691 Kukalovd -- Palaeodictyoptera 47 1 short distance. To avoid confusion and to emphasize the postcostal position of this area, I changed (1964) the term to postcostal area and pointed out its probable homology with the so-called costal brace of Epheme~optera.~ The interesting and intermediate condition between the well developed triangular postcostal area and its com- plete reduction and replacement by the precostal area is present in Dictyoneuridae. In this family, which has a broad precostal strip and which is very probably related to Eugereonidae and Calvertielli- dae, there is only one weak postcostal vein, oriented along the wing axis and ending usually on Sc, recalling the costal brace of the may- flies more than structures in other Palaeodictyoptera. The origin of the costal brace-postcostal area probaly goes back to the common ancestors of Palaeodictyoptera, Megasecoptera, Diaphanopterodea and Ephemeroptei-a. The strongly developed costal brace has been found in aquatic Permian mayfly nymphs (Kukalovi, I 969) probably helping to support the obliquely oriented and independent wing pads. In adult Permian mayflies the costal brace was less developed than in the nymph and probably non- functional. On the other hand, the terrestrial (apparently) nymphs of 3legasecoptei-a (Carpenter, 1969) and Palaeodictyoptera (un- described material from Westphalian, Illinois) have a vestigial post- costal area very much as in the adults. It is possible that in ancestral palaeoptero~is nymphs there was a selective trend towards the ability to hold the wings in a more posterior position. The costal brace- postcostal veins possibly helped to hold the wings in this favorable position.
The other striking morphological feature of the Eugereonidae is the presence of a deep furrow crossing the anal area obliquely and ending on the stem of M. It has been found in Dictyoptilus, Eugereon and very probably also in Peromaptera. This feature is best beveloped, though not unique, in this family and apparently developed independently in the very thin wings or very large wings, so-called, in addition to Eugereonidae and is most pronouncd in the Calvertiellidae (thin wings) and Homoiopteridae (very large wings). The fuction of this furrow is very puzzling, since the wings 'New and undescribed material of Calvertiellidae from the Lower Permian of Czechoslovakia shows beyond any doubt that in all known specimens of this family (including Calvertiella, which I had an opportunity to restudy recently) there is a well developed, large precostal area; the postcostal area is completely missing, as in the Eugereonidae. In this respect my account on Calvertiellidae (1964) has to be corrected.
================================================================================
472 Psyche [December
of Palaeodictyoptera break off easily along this line. Thus, Cal-
vertiellidae are usually found with the base of the anal area broken away. In Homoiopteridae the anal veins and cross veins are distinctly different before and behind the furrow, which thus forms some type of a separate basal area. The high percentage of palaeodictyopterous wings with similarly broken bases indicates the presence of the basal furrow in many families. At the present time I am not able to explain this structure.
Wings unequal in length, the fore pair being longer. Hind wings shortened, with modified venation, different from that of the fore wings. Wing membrane usually dark with very small light spots restricted to individual cells of the reticulation. Fore wings long and very narrow, with the precostal area and precostal strip present; deep furrow obliquely crossing the anal area and terminating on R; Sc terminating before apex; stems of R and M arising separately but touching for some distance beyond the base; MA simple, MP with 2-4 branches; CuA usually simple, CUP usually with one branch only. Anal area long and narrow with pectinate and widely separated veins. A very dense pattern of coarse cross veins present, often with anastomoses and sometimes forming a network. The nearest relatives of the Eugereonidae appear to be the Archae- megaptilidae, Calvertiellidae and Protagrionidae; more distantly re- lated are the Dictyoneuridae. All these affinities have at least partially been mentioned by previous authors (Handlirsch 1906, 1937; Lameere 1917, 1935 ; Martynov 1932; Tillyard and Fraser I 938 ; Laurentiaux I 953 ; Carpenter I 964 ; Kukalovi I 964) . There is also, in my opinion, a more distant relationship with another family that has markedly shortened hind wings - Megaptilidae. This family differs in having much broader and shorter fore wings, with a very large rs area but it recalls the Eugereonidae in having the branches of the main veins often arranged perpendicularly to the posterior margins; also in the simple MA and CuA, the branching of MP and in the very dense, richly anastornosing cross venation. The families mentioned above probably form a related group within the order.
Genera included in commentry shales: Dictyoptilus Brongniart, I 893 ; Peromaptera Brongniart, I 893.
Other genera in other deposits: Eugereon Dohrn, 1866 (Lower Permian of Germa,ny ; Valdeania Teixeira, I 941 ( Stephanian, Portugal).
================================================================================
Genus Peromaptera Brongniart
Peromaptera Brongniart, 1893: 391; Handlirsch, 1906: 79; Lameere, 1917: 160; Handlirsch, 1919: 11.
Type species: Peromaptera filholi Brongniart, 1893. (OD) This genus is monotypic, based upon a single specimen with fore and hind wings preserved. Unfortunately, this remarkable fossil, showing a greatly reduced hind wing with the venation modified to the highest degree among Palaeodictyopera, could not be found in the collection in Paris since I began this study. The following account is based on Lameere's revision ( 1917) and on photographs which Professor Carpenter made in 1938, when the specimen was in the collection.
Peromaptera was referred by Brongniart to the Dictyoneuridae. Handlirsch
(1906, p. 79) erected for it a separate family on the basis of the shortened hind wing. Lameere ( 191 7, p. 160) considered this separation as unnecessary because of the obvious relationships of the genus to Dictyoptilus.
From my studies of the photographs, I consider that Lameere's conclusions are correct: not only fore wing venation and cross vena- tion but also all basal structures of the wing seem to be very similar in both Peromaptera and Dictyoptilus. The hind wing, on the other hand, is very different from that of both Eugereon and Dictyoptilus, being shorter and broader with a modified venation. But since we do not know the amount of individual and specific variation of the hind wing among the Eugereonidae and since the fore wing is almost indistinguishable from that of Eugereon, I do not consider it practical at this time to put Peromaptera in a separate family. Fore wing narrow, broadening at the middle part. MP with few
branches, CUP forked. Cross veins dense. Hind wing much broader than fore wing, extending almost to 2/3 of the fore wing length, with broad apical part. Sc probably long; sc-r area broad; Rl ending relatively far before apex; Rs originating very basally, rs area being very small; M probably dividing beyond midwing, giving rise to simple MA and forked MP; CuA simple, CUP forked; anal area probably large, extending beyond midwing. Cross venation as in fore wings, in sc-r and r-rs areas much Less dense than on the rest of the wing.
Peromaptera differs from Eugereon and Dictyoptilus in the shape of the hind wing. From all other genera of Eugereonidae the hind wing differs in the extreme modification of the hind wing venation. Species included in Commentry shales: Peronzaptera filholi Brongniart.
================================================================================
Psyche
[December
================================================================================
Perovzaptera filholi Brongniart
Figure 44
Peromaptera filholi Brongniart, 1883: 393, pi. 22, fig. 15; Handlirsch, 1906: 80, pi. 10, fig. 8; Lameere, 1917: 160. This species is monotypic, based by Brongniart upon specimen 22-15, which was represented by a fore and a hind wing. For the drawing given here only the photograph was at my disposal. The base shows almost surely the stems of R and A1 touching as in Dictyoptilus. The precostal area being only fragmentary in the fossil is not so distinct. The hind wing venation unfortunately does not show convexities and concavities and has been interpreted ac- cording to Lameere ( I 91 7, p. I 60).
Fore wing: length about 60 mm, width about 13 mm (according to Brongniart, 1893). Anterior margin unknown, posterior margin concave in the middle part of the wing. Subcostal area broad basally; Rs with about 7 branches, first of them forked; MA approaching the stem of Rs but not touching it; MP with two short branches; CuA independent from the stem of M but approaching it to some extent. Six anal veins.
Hind wing: length about 40 mm, width about 16 mm. Anterior margin straight; apical part shortened, apex obtusely rounded, located at about the wing axis. Rs very long, with short single branch; MP with a short fork at the end. Cu dividing proximally from M, occupying a narrow area. Anal veins far distant from each other, probably pectinate. Cross venation in hind wing with irregular thickening in the apical part.
The fore wing of Peromaptera filholi differs from that of all other species of Eugereonidae in the much less developed MP. The branch of CuA is probably an individual variation only, formed by the thickened reticulation which is frequently noted in the related family Dictyoneuridae. Also, CuA is simple in the hind wing. The shape of shortened hind wing recalls that of Valdeaniu medeirosi Teixeira, 1941 but the venation is completely different from that of the fore wing.
Family Archaemegaptilidae Handlirsch
Archaernegaptilidae Handlirsch, 1919: 13. Type genus : Ar~hacme~aptilus Meunier, 1908 This family, being based on a wing fragment, was erected by Handlirsch with some uncertainty as to its affinities. Lameere ( 1918,
================================================================================
476 Psyche [December
p. 160) however, considered Archaen~e~aptilus related to Dicty- optilus ( Eugereonidae ) .
Archaemegaptilus is known by a hind wing, which is not shortened and which has a venation similar to that of the fore wing of Dicty- optilus. In all genera of Eugereonidae, so far as we know, the hind wing is shortened and its venation is modified. The cross venation Archaemegapt'llus is much coarser than in Dictyoptilus and forms intercalary sectors along the posterior margin, as in another related family, Calvertiellidae. Sc is almost as long as in Eugereonidae but terminates in a fork, forming thus an intermediate stage leading to an Sc which is short and which ends on R, as in Calvertiellidae. The stems of R and M are touching near the base as in Eugereonidae. The precostal area is very narrow and the wing venation less specialized than in both Eugereonidae and Calvertiellidae. In this way, Archaemegaptilus represents to some extent a combination of morphological features of both families being at the same time more primitive than any of them. I believe, therefore, that Handlirsch was probably correct in establishing a separate family for hchaemeg- aptilus. Dictyoneurella perfecta Laurentiaux, 1949 (Westphalian of France), should be referred to the same family, in my opinion; it is a fore wing with a long narrow precostal area, intercalary sectors and a venation and cross venation very similar to those of Archae- m egaptilus.
The following account is based on Dictyoneurella (fore wing) and the completed figure of Archaemegaptilus (hind wing). Wings probably equal in length, hind pair broader. Venation in fore and hind wings alike. Wing membrane thin, with darker venation or dark with small light spots. Precostal area narrow, postcostal area completely missing. Sc more or less shortened. Stems of R and M close together or touching for some distance near base. Rs area small with few branches.
MA simple, MP branched
several times. CuA simple, CUP with several branches. Anal area with pectinate series of branches. Cross veins strong but not dense, forming a loose reticulation and convex intercalary sectors. The family Archaemegaptilidae is closely related to the Eugere- onidae, Calvertiellidae and Protagrionidae, from all of which it differs in its more primitive venation with independent branches and many-branched CUP.
Genus included in Commentary shales: Archaemegaptilus Meunier, I 908.
Genus from other locality : Dicty oneurella Lauren tiaux, I 949 (Westphalian, France).
================================================================================
Figure 45. Dictyoptilus renaulti Brongniart ; fore wing. Holotype. Figure 46. Archaemegaptilus kiefferi Meunier ; hind wing. Holotype. Figure 47. Megaptilus blanchardi Brongniart; fore wing. Holotype.
================================================================================
478 Psyche [December
Genus Archae?negaptilus Meunier
Archaemegaptilus Meunier, 1908: 155 ; Meunier, 1908: 175 ; Meunier, 1909: 138; Handlirsch, 1919: 13; Lameere, 1917: 103; Lameere, 1917: 160. Type species :
Arachaemegaptilus kiefferi Meunier, I 908 ( OD). This genus is monotypic, based by Meunier on the reverse of a hind wing. As Lameere ( 191 7, p. 160) correctly noted, the obverse specimen, which was apparently not seen by Meunier, is more nearly complete; it is figured here for the first time. The following ac- count is based on both parts of the type specimen. Hind wing: long, broadening basally. Precostal strip pronounced, broadened at the base to form a narrow precostal area; Sc slightly shortened, terminating by a fork on C and R; stems of R and M touching for a long distance just beyond the base; CuA simple, curved, not approaching the stem of M; CUP with several branches occupying a large area. Cross venation coarse, consising of cross veins connected by anastomoses, becoming a network. Intercalary sectors short.
Ar~haeme~aptilus differs from Dictyoneurella by its longer Sc and denser cross venation.
Species included in the Commentry shales : Archaemegaptilus kiefferi Meunier, 1908.
Archaemegaptilus kieferi Meunier
Figure 46
Archaemegaptilus kiefferi Meunier, 1908: 155; Meunier, 1908: 175, fig. 3; Meunier, 1909: 138, pi. 2 fig. 2; Handlirsch, 1919: 13, fig. 15. Although this species was erected by Meunier on a fragment of the reverse of a hind wing, the following account is based on the obverse as well.
Hind wing: length 105 mm, width 27 mm. Anterior margin straight, slightly concave near the base, separating off a narrow precostal area. Wing broadened in the middle part of its length, narrowing behind the CuA area. Apex directed backward, rounded ; C, Sc and CU covered by long hairs near the base. M touching the stem of R, near the base, but diverging from it again; r-rs area somewhat broadened, with oblique cross veins; Rs with 3 branches, first of them forking twice; MA originating near the first fork of MP; MP forked 5 times; CUP with 4 branches. Color marking in the form of small light spots.
Ar~hame~aptilus kiefferi shows very similar color patterns 'to Dictyoptilus sepultus (Eugereonidae) and to Moravia convergens Kukalovi (hind wing, Calvertiellidae). Dictyoneurella perfecta
================================================================================
19691 Kukalovd - Palaeodictyoptera 479
has dark veins very similar to those of Calvertiella pernziana and Moraviptera reticulata Kukalovii (Calvertiellidae) . Family Megaptilidae Handlirsch
Megaptilidae Handlirsch, 1906: 80 ; Lameere, 1917 : 102; Handlirsch, 1921 : 130.
Anaxionidae Handlirsch, 1919 :19.
Lithfoptilidae Handlirsch, 1922 : 44.
Type genus : Megaptilus Brongniart, I 885. The family was based by Handlirsch on a fragment of a large fore wing of spectacular character, showing extremely dense cross venation and a large rs area, with curved Rs branches. Professor Carpenter has kindly given me for study another (undescribed) specimen of Megaptilus from the Westphalian of Rhode Island, represented by a hind wing. Surprisingly enough, this hind wing turns out to be extremely shortened, reaching about only half of the fore wing length. This unexpected discovery throws more light on the obscure relationships of the Megaptilidae. The peculiar type of reduction of the hind wing venation, suggestive of some Euge're- onidae (e.g., Peromaptera), together with a general pattern of venation and cross venation, brings this family close to the Eugere- onidae - Archaemegaptilidae - Dictyoneuridae - Protagrionidae - Cal- vertiellidae group.
The finding of 'this wing of Megaptilus enables us to solve the systematic position of another ~uzzling fossil - Lithoptilus Lameere, from Commentry. It probably represents a shortened hind wing of the same family Megaptilidae. The following account is based on Mepptilus (fore and hind wings) and Lithoptilus (hind wing). Wings very unequal.
Fore wings large and broad, hind wing
somewhat narrow, reaching only about half of the fore wing length. Branches of Rs, M and Cu in fore wing curve posteriorly. Rs area very large; MA simple, MP forked several times; CuA simple; CUP and anal area with several branches. Hind wing with a very
reduced rs and mp area, with curved branches of M and Cu. Cross veins in both pairs of wings extremely dense, connected by numerous anastomoses.
The family Alegaptilidae is related to the Eugereonidae, as indi- cated by the shortened hind wings, curved branches of the main veins, nature of the branching of and the presence of extremely dense cross veins with numerous anastomoses.
Genera included in the Commentry shales: Megaptzlus Brongni-
================================================================================
480 Psyche
[December
art, I 893 ; Lithoptilus Lameere, I g I 7. No other genera are known except for an undescribed specimen of Megaptilus in the Museum of Comparative Zoology from the Westphalian of Rhode Island. Megaptilus Brongniart
Megaptilus Brongniart, 1885 : 61 ; Brongniart, 1893 : 373 ; Handlirsch, 1906: 80; Lameere, 1917: 156.
Type species : Megaptilus blanchardi Brongniart, I 885 ( SD Handlirsch, 1906).
This genus was established by Brongniart for three species, Megaptilus blanchardi, brodiei and scudderi. Handlirsch ( I 906, p. 98) referred brodiei to a new genus, Megaptiloides, and placed it in the family Breyeriidae ; he referred scudderi ( I 906, p. I I 8) to another new genus, Parumeguptilus, and transferred it to the Palaeodictyoptera incertae familiae; and he erected a new family, Megaptilidae, for blanchardi.
The following account is based on the type species (fore wing) and a hind wing of Megaptilus species (Westphalian of Rhode Island).
Wing membrane usually dark, sometimes with light oval spots arranged in longitudinal rows. Fore wings broad and short, broadest at about the middle. Sc long, remote from C in the apical third; first branch of Rs originating before the middle of the wing, forked several times; m area much larger than cu area. Anal area rela- tively small, with several branches. Hind wing with obtuse apical part and with very narrowed rs and mp areas. Cross venation equally dense in both wings.
Meguptilus (hind wing) differs from Lithoptilus Lameere ( hind wing) by Sc, R, and stem of Rs being parallel and curved, with the more dense cross venation with more anastomoses. Species included in the Commentry shales: Megaptilus blanchardi Brongniart, I 885. Occurrence elsewhere : Megaptilus species (West- phalian, Rhode Island).
Megaptilus blanchardi Brongniart
Figure 47
Megaptilus blanchardi Brongniart, 1885 : 61 ; Brongniart, 1893 : 374; pi. 21, fig. 3; Handlirsch, 1906: 80, pi. 10, fig. 9; Handlirsch, 1921: 130, fig. 56; Handlirsch, 1919: 13.
This species was erected by Brongniart upon specimen 21-3, a large fore wing fragment. Using glycerin, I was able to work out
================================================================================
Ku kalok - Palat odicty optera
Figure 48. M'egaptilus sp.; hind wing; Westphalian, Rhode Island. a larger part of the anal area than shown in Brongniart's original figure.
At first, Brongniart believed that the wing of blanchardi belonged to the large insect's body described by him ( 1882) as Titanophasma fayoli but in 1893 (p. 374) he expressed doubt about that. Lameere (1917, p. 156) considered the small wing fragment designated as Titanoptera maculata Brongniart, 1893, as part of the anal area of M. blanchardi. Unfortunately, he did not find this fragment in the collections at the Paris Museum.
Fore wing fragment: length 144 mm, width 51 mm. Color markings light, oval, distributed along the stem of Rs between the branches and forming an irregular row in the posterior third of the wing. Wing broadest at the end of CuA, narrowing towards the base. Posterior margin concave at CuA and MA. Apex directed backwards. Subcostal area and sc-r area equally broad in the apical third; Sc, R and stem of Rs parallel and curved in the distal half; Rs with a long row of about 5 curved branches, widely distant from each other. First branch of Rs forked three times; MP forked 5
================================================================================
482 Psyche
[December
times, with widely separated branches; CUP with only one, wide fork. Branches of main veins near posterior margin S-shaped. Anal area with about 7 relatively densely arranged branches, some of them with short forks. Cross veins in sc-r area dense but simple, not connected by anastomoses.
hfegaptilus blanchardi recalls Dictyoptilus sepultus (Eugere- onidae) by its posteriorly curved veins with S-shaped tips along the posterior margin, by the fore wing broadening at the end of CuA and by the wide fork of MP. Also, the cross venation, though denser, is not very different from that of sepultus, either. The hind wing of Lithoptilus boulei (Meunier, 1908) shows the same S-shaped tips of M and Cu branches along the posterior margin as the fore wing of blanchardi.
Genus Lithoptilus Lameere
Lithoptilus Lameere, 1917 : 157 ; Demoulin, 1958 : 3. Anaxion Handlirsch, 1919 : 19.
Type species : Lithoptilus boulei ( Meunier, 1908) (OD) This genus was erected by Lameere ( 191 7, p. 157) for Archae- optilus boulei Meunier, 1908. Lameere noted that this genus seemed closely related to Homoioptera, differing only in the shorter and broader wings but he could not determine to which pair of wings the type specimen belonged. Handlirsch, noting the broad subcostal area, assumed the type specimen to be a fore wing and, having overlooked Lameere's paper, erected a new genus for boulei, Anaxion (Anaxionidae) , which he associated with the Breyeriidae. Finally, Demoulin
( I 958) without seeing any of the specimens, concluded that Lithoptilus was based on a hind wing, vestigial as in most recent Ephemeroptera. As the closest related genus he suggested Rhabdoptilus and referred both genera to the Rhabdoptilidae Hand- lirsch. Demoulin's statement about the vestigial hind wing character of the type specimen of Lithoptilus is correct but there is no indica- tion of relationship to Rhabdoptilus.
The systematic position of Lithoptilus becomes much clearer after the shortened hind wings of Eugereonidae and Megaptilidae are studied. Although Lithoptilus recalls some Eugereonidae by the shape of the hind wing (e.g., Peromaptera), the venational pattern and cross veins are most like those of Megaptilus. The range of varia- tion of the hind wing shape seems to have been wide in the Eugere- onidae and it probabaly was also in the Megaptilidae. The following account is based upon the hind wing of Lithoptilus boulei (Meunier) ,
================================================================================
19691 Kukalovd - Palaeodictyoptera
Figure 49. Lithoftilus b,oulei (Meunier) ; hind wing. Holotype. Hind wing very shortened and broad, especially in the apical part. Anterior and posterior margins almo,st parallel. Sc long, subcostal area broad; Rs originating at about midwing; Rs area extremely small; M dividing at the level of the origin of Rs, MA simple, MP forking; Cu dividing within the first third of the wing length; CuA simple; CUP with several branches. Cross veins coarse and very dense, connected by numerous anastomoses, sometimes turning into a network.
Lithopfilm Lameere differs from Megaptilus by the broad subcostal area, straight Sc, R and more distally; and by the somewhat less dense Species included in Commentry shales:
(Meunier, 1908).
(in the hind wing)
Rs; by M dividing
cross venation.
Lithoptilus boulei
Lithoptilus boule'i (Meunier)
Figure 49
Archaeoptilus boulei Meunier, 1908: 153 ; Meunier, 1908: 35, fig. 1; Meunier, 1909: 131, pi.
I, fig. 1.
Lithoptilus boulei Lameere, 1917 : 157 ; Demoulin, 1958 : 1-5. Anaxion boulei Handlirsch, 1919: 19, fig. 21. This species is monotypic, based by Meunier on a vestigial hind wing of a large palaeodictyopteron. Following the weak imprint of the veins on the matrix, I was able to work out some of the more proximal part of the type specimen.
Hind wing fragment: length 66 mm, width 40 mm. Anterior
================================================================================
484 Psyche [December
margin abruptly curved towards the apex. Posterior margin convex at the end of the anal area. Apex rounded, directed somewhat anteriorly. Subcostal and sc-r areas broad; Rl straight, Rs sending off 4 very short oblique branches, the first of them being forked. MP twice forked; CUP with a series of four branches. Anal area relatively large with long branches, perpendicular to posterior margin. Branches of M and Cu with S-shaped ends. Cross veins forming a network along the posterior part of the wing. The broad subcostal and sc-r areas, together with straight course of Sc and R are very unusual for a hind wing. Nevertheless, the same straightening of Sc and R and broadening of sc-r area are present in the very shortened hind wing of Peromaptera filholi Brongniart, also.
[This list does not include references which have already been cited in Part I.]
AGNUS, A. N.
1902. Description d'un Nkvropt6re fossile nouveau. Homoioptma g.:gantea. Bull. SOC. Ent. Fr. 1902: 259-261. BORRE, A. P.
1875. Note sur des empreintes d'insectes fossiles, dkcouvertes dam les schistes houillers des environs de Mons. C. R. SOC. Ent. Belg., (2) 12 : 4-7.
1875. Complkment de la note sur des empreintes d'insectes fossiles. C. R. SOC. Ent. Belg., (2) 18: 7-11.
BRONGNIART, C.
1883. Note sur les insectes fossiles de Commentry. C. R. SOC. Geol. Fr., 1883: 15-16.
1883. Apercu sur les insectes fossiles en g6nGraI et observations sur quelques insectes des terrains houiller de Commentry. Le Natura- he, 5: 266-268.
CARPENTER, F. M.
1944. Carboniferous Insects from the Vicinity of Mazon Creek, Illinois. Ill. State Mus. Sci. Papers, 3 (1) : 1-20. 1964. Studies on Carboniferous Insects of Commentry France. Part 6. The genus Dictyo~tilus (Palaeodictyo~tera). Psyche, 71 (2) : 104-116.
DEMOULIN, G.
1958. Nouvelles observations sur l'aile de Lithoptilus boulei (Meunier) (Insecte PaI60dict~optire). Bull, Inst. Roy. Sci. Nat, Belg., 34 (39) : 1-5.
1958, Nouvelles recherches sur Patteiskya bouckaerti Laurentiaux (In- secte Pa160dict~optire). Bull. Soc. Roy. Ent. Belg., 94 (11-12) : 357-365.
================================================================================
19691 Kukalovd - Palaeodictyoptera 48 5
1960. Quelques remarques sur un insecte fossile abracadabrant: Lyco- cercus goldenbergi (Brongniart, 1885). Bull. Inst, Roy. Sci. Nat. Belg., 36: 1-4.
DOHRN, A.
1868. Eugereon Boeckingi] eine neue Insektenform aus dem Todtlie- genden. Palaeontographica, 13 : 333-340, GUTHORL, P.
1934. Die Arthropoden aus dem Carbon und, Perm des S,aar-Nahe- Pfalz-Gebietes. Abh. Preuss. Geol. Landesanst., NF, 164: 1-219. HANDLIRSCH, A.
1904. Les insectes houillers de la Belgique. Mem. Mus. Roy. Hist. Nat. Belg., 3 : 1-20.
1906. Revision of American Paleozoic insects. Proc. U. S. Nat. MUS. 29: 661-820.
HAUPT, H.
1949. Rekonstruktionen permokarbonischer Insekten. Beitr. taxon, Zool., 1: 23-43.
KUKALOV~, J.
1959. Breyeria barborae n. sp. (Insects) Palaeodictyoptera) of Upper Silesi,an Coal Basin (Westphalian). Vestnik UUG, 34: 310-313. 1964. Review of the Calvertiellidae, with Description of a New Genus from Permian Strata of Moravia (Palaeodictyoptera). Psyche, 71 (4) : 153-168.
1969. Permian Mayfly Nymphs. Psyche, 75 (4) : 310-327. LAMEERE, A.
1917. Etude sur L'~v01ution des Ephkm6res. Bull, Soc. 2001. France, 42: 41-81.
LAURENTIAUX, D.
1949. Description de trois nouveaux palkodictyopt&res du terrain houiller du Nord de la Frace. Ann. SOC. Gkol. Nord., 59: 206-223. 1950. Les insectes des bassins houillers du Gard et de la Loire. Ann. Palkont., 3 6: 63-84.
1958. Pattei~kya bouckaerti, nov. gen. et sp., Insekt aus dem Namur des Ruhrkarbons. N. J,ahrb. Geol. U. Paleont., 7: 302-306. LAURENTIAUX-VIEIRA, F.? and D. LAURENTIAUX. 1951. Observations sur les Palkodictyopt6res Breyriidae. Bull. SOC. Gkol. Fr., (6) 1: 585-596.
1963. Nouvelle rkcolte d'un Breyeriide (Insecte paliodictyopt6re) dans le Westphalien du Nord de la France. Ann. SOC. Geol. Nord, 82: 173-178.
1964. Diagramme ptironologique du genre westphalien Breyeria De Borre (Insectes Palkodictyopt6res). C. R, Acad. Sci. Paris, 258 (9) : 1282-1284.
MEUNIER, F.
1908. Un P1,atyptkride et un Stinodictyoptkride du Stiphanien de Commentry. Ann. SOC. Sci. Brux., 32 (2) : 153-154. 1908. Nouveaux Paliodictyopt6res du Stkphanien de Commentry. Bull. Mus. Hist. NatmY 14: 34-36.
================================================================================
486 Psyche [December
1910. Nouveau Pal~odictyoptc!res du houiller de Commentry. Bull. Mus. Hist. Nat., 16: 233-237.
1911. Nouveaux insectes du houiller de Commentry. Bull, Mus. Hist. Nat., 17: 117-128.
1912. Nouvelles recherches sur quelques insectes du terrain houiller de Commentry. Deuxieme part. Ann. paleont. Paris, 7: 1-19. STRAND, E.
1929. Zoological and palaeontological nomencl,atorial notes. Acta Univ. L,atviensis, 20 : 1-29.
TEIXEIRA, C.
1941. Nouveaux insectes du Stkphanien portugais. Bol. SOC. Geol. Portugal, 1 (1): 1-21.
WOODWARD, H.
1906. A fossil Insect from the Coal Measures of Lougton, N. Staffordsh. Geol. Mag. (5) 3: 25-29.
================================================================================
Volume 76 table of contents