4.1 Article

The 'Megasecoptera-Diaphanopterodea' twilight zone epitomized by a new insect from Xiaheyan (Early Pennsylvanian; China)

期刊

ALCHERINGA
卷 44, 期 2, 页码 273-278

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/03115518.2020.1737228

关键词

Late Carboniferous; Xiaheyan; Palaeoptera; neoptery

资金

  1. Academy for Multidisciplinary Studies, Capital Normal University
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [31730087, 41688103]
  3. Program for Changjiang Scholars and Innovative Research Team in University [IRT-17R75]
  4. Support Project of High-level Teachers in Beijing Municipal Universities in the Period of 13th Five-year Plan [IDHT20180518]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A new species of 'Megasecoptera-like' insect, Sinodiapha ramosa gen. and sp. nov., is described based on two specimens from the Xiaheyan locality (early Pennsylvanian) of China, one of which displays a wing pair in the neopterous resting position. This unusual combination of venational features and neoptery indicates that the species belongs to the Diaphanopterodea, and that this order derived from the Megasecoptera. We establish the family Sinodiaphidae fam. nov. for the new genus, and the taxon Megasecopteromorpha for the two orders, the latter being most likely paraphyletic. The Diaphanopterodea are highly derived insects and therefore are of no particular relevance to elucidate the ancestral conditions of Pterygota. Nan Yang [yangnan0504@qq.com], Key Laboratory of Insect Evolution and Environmental Changes, Capital Normal University, Beijing 100048, PR China; Dong Ren [rendong@mail.cnu.edu.cn], College of Life Sciences, Capital Normal University, 105 Xisanhuanbeilu, Haidian District, Beijing 100048, PR China, and Academy for Multidisciplinary Studies, Capital Normal University, 105 Xisanhuanbeilu, Haidian District, Beijing 100048, PR China; Olivier Bethoux [obethoux@mnhn.fr], CR2P (Centre de Recherche en Paleontologie - Paris), MNHN - CNRS - Sorbonne Universite, 57 rue Cuvier, CP38, F-75005, Paris, France.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据