Turanophlebia mongolica, Fleck & Bechly & Martínez-Delclòs & Jarzembowski & Nel, 2004

Fleck, Günther, Bechly, Günter, Martínez-Delclòs, Xavier, Jarzembowski, Edmund A. & Nel, André, 2004, A revision of the Upper Jurassic-Lower Cretaceous dragonfly family Tarsophlebiidae, with a discussion on the phylogenetic positions of the Tarsophlebiidae and Sieblosiidae (Insecta, Odonatoptera, Panodonata), Geodiversitas 26 (1), pp. 33-60 : 45-46

Turanophlebia mongolica n. sp. ( Fig. 6 )

HOLOTYPE. — Specimen No. 3559/69 ( PIN).

ETYMOLOGY. — Named after the country of Mongolia. GEOLOGICAL SETTING. — Lower Cretaceous, Barremian-Aptian (Mostovski & Martínez-Delclòs 2000), Bon-Tsagaan series, Bon-Tsagaan, Bayanhongor Aimak, Central Mongolia.

DIAGNOSIS. — T. mongolica n. sp. differs from all other Turanophlebia species as follows: 1) presence of a complete secondary antenodal cross-vein between Ax1 and Ax2; 2) vein “O” not oblique, visible because of an angle of RP2; and 3) postdiscoidal area not distinctly narrowed in its mid part. It differs from T. martynovi and T. anglicana n. sp. in its base of vein IR1 only three cells distal of base of RP2, instead of more than 10 cells and the presence of only 15 rows of cells between MP and CuA along posterior wing margin, instead of more than 25 in T. martynovi and T. anglicana n. sp. It differs from? T. sibirica in its cells of the cubito-anal area distinctly transverse. It differs from T. neckini n. comb. in the presence of two to three rows of cells in the anal area instead of one to two rows in T. neckini n. comb. The veins “antero-CuA” and “postero-CuA” are less well defined than in other Turanophlebia species.

DESCRIPTION

Imprint of a hind wing with the apical third missing and the region of discoidal cell partly destroyed. Wing probably hyaline; preserved part of wing 29.5 mm long; wing probably about 41.0 mm long; 9.7 mm wide; distance from base to arculus, 5.7 mm; from arculus to nodus, 12.0 mm; median and submedian areas free of cross-veins; CuP strongly curved, just distal of Ax2, basally closing subdiscoidal space; primary antenodal braces Ax1 and Ax2 2.9 mm apart, stronger than secondary antenodal cross-veins, with a complete secondary antenodal cross-vein between them; Ax1 is 2.0 mm from wing base; arculus distinctly distal of Ax2 (0.5 mm); 11 secondary antenodal cross-veins distal from Ax2, not aligned with the cross-veins of second rank between ScP and RA; 12 cross-veins in the area between RA and RP, between arculus and nodus; a long “gap” without cross-veins between arculus and RP3/ 4 in the area between RP and MA; MP + CuA strongly curved just before its fusion with MAb; a sharp angle between MP + CuA and MAb; presence of a long fusion between MAb and MP + CuA before CuA separates from MP, about 1.5 mm long, characteristic of the Tarsophlebiidae ; MP + CuA + MAb and basal free part of CuA well aligned in arculus, as in other Tarsophlebiidae ; discoidal space basally opened; presence of the two-celled “tarsophlebiid pseudo-discoidal space” just distal of MAb in the postdiscoidal area; subdiscoidal area divided into two cells by a cross-vein; AA without any strong posterior branches; anal area with three rows of elongate transverse cells; posterior wing margin rounded; a short petiole, about 1.5 mm long; AA reaching free part of CuA at sharp angle; no CuAb (sensu Fleck et al. 2003); CuA with no strong posterior branches; seven rows of small cells between CuA and posterior wing margin; “antero-CuA” and “postero-CuA” veins present, relatively long but weakly zigzagged; CuA reaching posterior wing margin just distal of nodus level; area between MP and CuA with one row of cells in its basal part but rapidly greatly widened in its distal part, with about 15 rows of cells along posterior wing margin; postdiscoidal area with two rows of cells in its basal half, not distinctly narrowed in its mid part, and slightly widened distally, with a distal secondary longitudinal straight vein closely parallel to MA and six rows of cells between MA and MP near posterior wing margin; bases of RP3/4 and IR2 midway between arculus and nodus, 6.0 mm from nodus; base of IR2 apparently on RP3/4; nodal Cr and subnodus strongly oblique; base of RP2 aligned with subnodus; vein “O” not oblique, visible because of an angle of RP2, two cells distal of base of RP2; numerous Bq cross-veins, but no cross-vein in basal part of area between RA, RP, RP3/4 and IR2; numerous postnodal cross-veins between C and RA (12 of them being preserved), not aligned with the numerous postsubnodal cross-veins; base of IR1 only three cells distal of that of RP2; IR1 well defined, basally zigzagged but straighter distally; area between RP2 and IR2 widened distally; area between IR2 and RP3/4 distally widened; “antero-IR2 vein” not preserved; “postero-IR2 vein” elongate; area between RP3/4 and MA distally widened; “antero-MA” and “postero- MA” veins elongate.

DISCUSSION

This fossil is clearly a tarsophlebiid hind wing, because of the structures of the anal area, the basally opened discoidal space, the strongly curved MP + Cu, the long common stem MAb + MP + CuA, the sharp angle between MP + Cu and MAb and the presence of a “tarsophlebiid pseudo-discoidal space”. It can be attributed to the genus Turanophlebia rather than to Tarsophlebia , because of its broad cubito-anal area, long IR1, and numerous postnodal and antenodal cross-veins.

Figures

FIG. 6. — Turanophlebia mongolica n. sp.; A, holotype (PIN 3559/69); B, holotype, reconstruction of hind wing. Scale bar: A, 10 mm; B, 5 mm.