Grandelmoa jingqii Xu, Yang, Oyama, Ren & Béthoux, 2025

Xu, Zi Q., Yang, Nan, Oyama, Nozomu, Xu, Yanqi, Dong, Liyang, Ren, Dong & Béthoux, Olivier, 2025, A new, large Permian Parelmoidae (Insecta, Megasecopteromorpha, Diaphanopterodea) found in Shanxi Province (China), Geodiversitas 47 (18), pp. 705-712 : 708-710

Grandelmoa jingqii Xu, Yang, Oyama, Ren & Béthoux , n. gen., n. sp.

( Fig. 2)

urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act:

TYPE MATERIAL. — Holotype (by monotypy): China • North China, Shanxi Province, Shuozhou City, Shuocheng District , Zhiyu Village , Zhiyu locality; 39°24’11”N, 112°21’46”E; 26.III.2023; Jingqi Zhang leg.; CNU-DIA-SS-2024001.

DIAGNOSIS. — ScP long, ending beyond the second fork of RP; MA/ MP split distal of the RA/RP split, itself located in a very basal position; cua-cup cross-vein located distally (distal to the RA/RP split) and basal to MA/MP split; CuP forked; anal area well-developed, with 10 terminal branches; two gradate rows of cross-veins, subparallel to the posterior wing margin.

ETYMOLOGY. — Named after Jingqi Zhang, the collector of type specimen. The specific epithet is to be treated as a noun in genitive case.

TYPE LOCALITY AND STRATIGRAPHY. — Zhiyu locality, between coal seam layers no. 3 and 4-1 (following numbering by Kong et al. 1996); Shanxi Formation; Permian, Cisuralian, Asselian ( Kong et al. 1996; Shen et al. 2020; Shen et al. 2022).

MEASUREMENTS. — Wing length 22.7 mm, width 7.6 mm.

DESCRIPTION

Positive and negative imprints of a complete right wing, possibly a forewing; veins elevation sharply contrasted in the basal half, and attenuated more distally; near wing base, ScP long, ending on RA beyond the second RP fork; stem of R+M convex, with a conspicuous inflexion opposite the point of separation of R and M (located about 4.0 mm distal from wing base); RA convex, simple and strong, almost parallel to anterior wing margin; RP with 6 terminal branches, with the two first posterior ones simple; MA/MP split located behind the RA/RP split; MA diverging somewhat obliquely (i.e. M and MP are aligned); rp-ma cross-vein long and oblique, located just distal of the MA/MP split; MA simple; MP forked distally, with 4 branches, 2 of them successively arising from CuA (under the ‘translocated MP branch’ interpretation; see Fig. 2C and Remarks section); short Cu stem, distinct from (R+)M, distinguishable; CuA diverging obliquely from Cu, then running close and parallel to R+M stem for some distance, suddenly diverging posteriorly, very close to the R/M split; CuA simple (under the ‘translocated MP branch’ interpretation; see Fig. 2C and Remarks section); CuP forked distally (distal to first point of emergence of MP branches translocated onto CuA); CuA–CuP area narrow until the first cross-vein occurring in this area, which is short and strong, located slightly distal to RA/RP split and basal to MA/MP split; anal area very well-developed, with a total of ten terminal branches (AA with 3 terminal branches; AP(?) with 7 terminal branches); 12 oblique, sigmoidal veinlets evenly dispersed in the area between anterior margin and ScP/RA; two gradate rows of cross-veins paralleled with each other.

REMARKS

A seemingly branched CuA is present in the new specimen (‘branched CuA’ interpretation; see Fig. 2A). However, a branched CuA is extremely rare in Megasecopteromorpha. Based on our literature search, the only known cases are two isolated wings belonging to the Parelmoidae species Stenodiapha moravica Kukalová-Peck, 1974 (see original description). However, a translocation of a branch of MP onto CuA, coupled with a pectinate fusion, is an alternative, plausible interpretation. Vein translocation has been documented in many different taxa of Neoptera, and in particular in orthopterans ( Béthoux 2007, 2012) and grylloblattodeans ( Cui et al. 2015). Translocation can also lead to a ‘pectinate fusion’, and one of the best examples is the organisation of the radial system in dictyopterans ( Guo et al. 2013). Such transformation is also known in Hemerobiidae Leach, 1815 (neuropterans; among others, see Carpenter [1940], Aspöck et al. [1980]) and some orthopterans ( Béthoux 2012). Such transformations are apparently less common among palaeopteran taxa, but it can be considered established in Spilapteridae Brongniart, 1893 (Rostropalaeoptera; Liu et al. 2015; Sinitshenkova 2025). Bearing this in mind, a translocation of a posterior branch of MP, with a partial fusion of its posterior branch with CuA, is a plausible explanation for the morphology observed in the specimen CNU-DIA-SS-2024001 (‘translocated MP branch’ interpretation; Fig. 2C). Moreover, in known Parelmoidae, MP usually has two or three branches, and rarely four. Under the ‘branched CuA’ interpretation ( Fig. 2A), the specimen would then have a two-branched MP, which is incongruous, given its large size (relative to other Parelmoidae ), very generally implying a relatively higher number of vein branches. Conversely, if the first two anterior branches of the seemingly branched CuA are assigned to MP (assuming translocation and pectinate fusion), the latter vein then has a total of four branches, more consistent with its size. It must be noted that veins elevation in this area of the wing is homogeneous, and therefore does not provide insights on the nature of the corresponding veins. In summary, the ‘translocated MP branch’ interpretation provides a plausible answer to the peculiar configuration observed in the specimen CNU-DIA-SS-2024001. It remains unclear whether a translocation of a MP branch is an unusual or a usual feature of the corresponding species.