1038 Type genus.—Liassophlebia Tillyard, 1925.


Other genera.—Ferganophlebia Pritykina, 1970; Grimme- nopteron Ansorge, 1996; Bavarophlebia Nel and Petrulevičius, 2005; Rossiphlebia new genus.


Emended diagnosis.—Discoidal cell basally closed in hindw- ing, sometimes with incomplete veinlet between ‘hypertriangle’ and discoidal triangle; discoidal cell open in forewing; sub- discoidal cell closed in both; subdiscoidal cell widened in forewing, with convex posterior margin; MP+CuA with very strong posterior curve in discoidal cell, so that subdiscoidal space is rather transverse; hindwings with unicellular anal loop enlarged; few, if any, antefurcal crossveins between RP andMA from arculus to midfork; no secondary antenodal crossveins between C and ScP (first row).


Remarks.—A nearly straight, long secondary vein in the post- discoidal space slightly distal of the triangle is present in Lias- sophlebia and Rossiphlebia n. gen., but this vein is absent in Grimmenopteron, Ferganophlebia, and Caraphlebia.


Genus Liassophlebia Tillyard, 1925 Type species.—Liassophlebia magnifica Tillyard, 1925.


Emended diagnosis.—Cubito-anal area of hindwing large and broad, with 5 or 6 rows of cells between CuA and posterior wing margin; subdiscoidal space not divided into two large cells by anterior branch of AA that ends on CuA, but divided into small cells; wings very large.


Liassophlebia magnifica Tillyard, 1925


1925 Liassophlebia magnifica Tillyard, p. 15, pl. 1, fig. 3, pl. 2, fig. 4, text-figs. 3, 4.


1939 Liassophlebia magnifica; Handlirsch, p. 23. 1957 Liassophlebia magnifica; Asahina, p. 1, figs. 1, 3. 1962 Liassophlebia magnifica; Zeuner, p. 162, pl. 27, fig. 1. 1993 Liassophlebia magnifica; Nel et al., p. 139, fig. 107. 1995 Liassophlebia magnifica; Bechly, p. 16. 1996 Liassophlebia magnifica; Trueman, p. 69. 2003 Liassophlebia magnifica; Fleck et al., p. 56, 86. 2003 Liassophlebia magnifica; Rehn, p. 212.


Holotype.—NHMUK I.6648/I.10462 (Fig. 2), ‘Insect lime- stone’ of the Planorbis Chronozone (Lias Group, Blue Lias Formation, Wilmcote Limestone Member); Early Jurassic, Hettangian; Binton, Warwickshire. Female according to lack of anal angle and anal triangle.


Emended diagnosis.—Female hindwing, anal branch forks into subdiscoidal space forming distinct structure (also seen in Liassophlebia pseudomagnifica, but see below).


Remarks.—The specimen NHMUK I.11089 was also attrib- uted to this species (Tillyard, 1925) but only a partial abdomen is preserved and so it is impossible to link it with any species described from wings. Zeuner (1962) also


Journal of Paleontology


attributedNHMUKIn.64000, In.59106, and In.49213 to this species, but the first is the holotype of L. pseudomagnifica (see below); the second is the holotype of Hypsothemis fraseri Whalley, 1985, and the last is a fragment of the anterior margin of a wing and is not identifiable at the species level.


Liassophlebia withersi Tillyard, 1925


1925 Liassophlebia withersi Tillyard, p. 17, pl. 3, fig. 8. 1939 Liassophlebia Withersi; Handlirsch, p. 23. 1962 Liassophlebia withersi; Zeuner, p. 164. 1993 Liassophlebia withers; Nel et al., p. 142, fig. 106.


Holotype.—NHMUK I.10697 (Fig. 3), ‘Insect limestone’ of the Pseudomonotis beds (Penarth Group, Lilstock Formation); Late Triassic, Rhaetian; Strensham, Worcestershire.


Diagnosis.—Similar to Liassophlebia magnifica but smaller (distance from arculus to distal acute angle of discoidal cell = 5.6 mm, compare to >6mm in L. magnifica). Two anal cells, compared to three in L. magnifica.


Additional material.—NHMUK I.10528, from Strensham.


Remarks.—The two specimens discussed here are forewings, whereas the other described species are known mostly from hindwings, except for the partial forewing in Liassophlebia magnifica. The differences between this partial forewing and that of the holotype of L. withersi are few and better- preservedspecimens couldleadtothesynonimizationofthis species with L. magnifica, or with one of the other species currently only described from hindwings. NHMUK I.10528 is a forewing originally attributed to L. batheri (which is herein considered nomen dubium, see below). Upon exam- ination, it is clear that there are few differences between this specimen and the holotype of L. withersi except for the aberration in the anal vein of the holotype NHMUK I.10697 and an additional crossvein in the area immediately basal to the subdiscoidal cell. There is also a size difference;NHMUK I.10697 is 10.1 mm in width when measured level with the distal point of the discoidal triangle, and I.10528 is 11.3 mm. The distance from the distal point of the discoidal triangle to the point at which the arculus meets the radial vein in I.10697 is 5.1 mm and in I.10528 is 6.4 mm. Upon further material being described, they might be recognized as separate spe- cies, but there is little justification to split them with the evi- dence available.


Liassophlebia pseudomagnifica Whalley, 1985


1962 Liassophlebia magnifica Tillyard; Zeuner, p. 162, pl. 27, fig. 1.


1985 Liassophlebia pseudomagnifica Whalley, p. 120, fig. 5a, b.


1993 Liassophlebia pseudomagnifica; Nel et al., p. 139, figs. 104, 105.


2003 Liassophlebia pseudomagnifica; Fleck et al., p. 56.


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116  |  Page 117  |  Page 118  |  Page 119  |  Page 120  |  Page 121  |  Page 122  |  Page 123  |  Page 124  |  Page 125  |  Page 126  |  Page 127  |  Page 128  |  Page 129  |  Page 130  |  Page 131  |  Page 132  |  Page 133  |  Page 134  |  Page 135  |  Page 136  |  Page 137  |  Page 138  |  Page 139  |  Page 140  |  Page 141  |  Page 142  |  Page 143  |  Page 144  |  Page 145  |  Page 146  |  Page 147  |  Page 148  |  Page 149  |  Page 150  |  Page 151  |  Page 152  |  Page 153  |  Page 154  |  Page 155  |  Page 156  |  Page 157  |  Page 158  |  Page 159  |  Page 160  |  Page 161  |  Page 162  |  Page 163  |  Page 164  |  Page 165  |  Page 166  |  Page 167  |  Page 168  |  Page 169  |  Page 170  |  Page 171  |  Page 172  |  Page 173  |  Page 174  |  Page 175  |  Page 176  |  Page 177  |  Page 178  |  Page 179  |  Page 180  |  Page 181  |  Page 182  |  Page 183  |  Page 184  |  Page 185  |  Page 186  |  Page 187  |  Page 188  |  Page 189  |  Page 190