Eotetrix Gorochov, 2012

Kasalo, Niko, Buzzetti, Filippo Maria, Stancher, Gionata, Cambra, Roberto A. & Skejo, Josip, 2023, Contribution to the knowledge of Batrachideini (Orthoptera: Tetrigidae): description of two new flightless genera, Naskreckiana and Procellator, and revision of the status of Eotetrix, Acta Entomologica Musei Nationalis Pragae 63 (2), pp. 279-292 : 285-287

† Eotetrix Gorochov, 2012 , stat. restit.

Type species. † Eotetrix unicornis Gorochov, 2012 , comb. restit., original designation.

Composition and distribution. Composed of the type species only, extinct, known from Wyoming, USA; Green River Formation (Middle Eocene).

Justification of taxonomic acts. THOMAS et al. (2019) noted that the genus † Eotetrix is similar to Scaria and Rehnidium and is likely related to them. In the same publication, Tettigidea and its relatives are noted as a genus group that is distinct from the Scaria - Rehnidium group. SILVA et al. (2021) synonymized † Eotetrix with Tettigidea , claiming that the structure of the head and the pronotum fit more with the latter genus. They then assigned † Eotetrix unicornis comb. restit. to Tettigidea (armata) species group, noting that the species is not “affiliated” with the Tettigidea ( lateralis ) species group. This reasoning is problematic, since the authors indicate † Eotetrix and Tettigidea as synonyms, but include the species from the synonymized genus in a group that is not morphologically close to the type species of Tettigidea , T. lateralis ( Say, 1824) , and which may be an entirely separate genus. The definitions of Tettigidea and its species groups are not sorted out ( KASALO et al. 2023) and are only getting more complicated by taxonomic acts that handle neither type species nor generic diagnoses. † Eotetrix unicornis does appear similar to the species of Tettigidea (armata) complex, but it also appears similar to the species of Batrachidea in the shape of the pronotum, the anterior spine, and the head, and somewhat to the species of Paurotarsus in the shape of the head and the elongation of the pronotum. This example illustrates how synonymization can be arbitrarily conducted in the absence of well-defined taxa, especially when one of the included type specimens is a fossil that is not particularly well preserved. SILVA et al. (2021) correctly note that † Eotetrix unicornis was found much further North than today’s distribution ranges of Scaria and Rehnidium , which warrants an examination of potential relatedness with the North American taxa. It cannot be excluded that there are extant close relatives of this species in North America. They may even be currently classified under Tettigidea , but that by itself does not mean anything if Tettigidea comprises many morphologies that significantly differ from its type species. Thus, the status of † Eotetrix stat. restit. is reverted to its original state, as a monotypic genus in the tribe Batrachideini . Only when the entire tribe is revised, it may be possible to correctly determine potential evolutionary relationships between the genera. The features discussed here are all difficult to see in the fossilized remains so the complete identity of the species may remain unresolved, which is another reason not to assign it to extant taxa; it is much clearer to group the extinct and the extant genera in higher taxonomic categories, such as genera groups.

Discussion

In recent years, some research was conducted on Batrachideini , focusing mostly on the specious genera Tettigidea and Scaria (CADENA- CASTANEDA et al. 2019, SILVA et al. 2021, ITRAC- BRUNEAU & DOUCET 2022). Although the recent revisions (CADENA- CASTANEDA et al. 2019, SILVA et al. 2021) represent valuable steps toward the understanding of Batrachideini taxonomy, a lot of questions still persist, especially regarding Tettigidea ( KASALO et al. 2023) . One such question was the status of † Eotetrix stat. restit., which was synonymized with Tettigidea based on the reasoning that circumvented dealing with the type species of Tettigidea ( SILVA et al. 2021) , which is essential for such an act. The papers that dealt with this issue ( THOMAS et al. 2019, SILVA et al. 2021) did so only briefly, without an exhaustive examination of all relevant material. Here, we take a conservative stance on the issue and resurrect † Eotetrix stat. restit. as a separate monotypic genus and leave the discussion on its placement within the systematics of Batrachideini for the future. Batrachideini , and Batrachideinae as a whole, need revision ( STOROZHENKO 2019, KASALO et al. 2023), and this is apparent from the key provided in this paper - many genera have no clear diagnostic characters and most have not been reviewed since they were first described ( CIGLIANO et al. 2023).

In stark contrast to the Scaria species that was discovered but could not be described due to the lack of physical type specimens ( KASALO et al. 2021), with Procellator kai gen. & sp. nov. we managed to immediately get in contact with the person who observed it and consequently obtained physical specimens. This is an example of how regular monitoring of citizen science portals, iNaturalist in this case, can allow quick and effective cooperation across the world ( MESAGLIO et al. 2021). The benefits of using social media go beyond mere discovery of new species; they allow scientists to track species across a wide area and gather a wealth of data about various aspects of their biologies ( CONNORS et al. 2022, MO & MO 2022). Of course, the data from social media cannot be taken at face value, it should be evaluated by experts first, but social media are nonetheless a powerful tool for modern research ( HOCHMAIR et al. 2020).