Creagroparaberotha, Makarkin, Vladimir N., 2015

Makarkin, Vladimir N., 2015, A new genus of the mantispid-like Paraberothinae (Neuroptera: Berothidae) from Burmese amber, with special consideration of its probasitarsus spine-like setation, Zootaxa 4007 (3), pp. 327-342 : 329

Genus Creagroparaberotha gen. nov.

Type and only species. Creagroparaberotha groehni sp. nov.

Etymology. From the Greek kreagris [κρεαγρις], fork, and Paraberotha , a genus-group name of Berothidae , in reference to the majority of the forewing subcostal veinlets being forked. Gender feminine.

Diagnosis. May be distinguished from other similar genera, which bear spine-like curved seta on outer (dorsal) edge of two proximal protarsomeres, by a combination of the following character states: scapus long, ca. 5–6 times as long as wide [relatively short, maximum of ca. 2.5 times as long as maximum wide in Scoloberotha Engel et Grimaldi, 2008, Micromantispa Shi et al., 2015a]; protibia with numerous (>10) inner (ventral) spine-like setae for entire length [only three (Scoloberotha, Micromantispa) and four (Rhachibermissa Grimaldi, 2000) distal]; probasitarsus with six ventral spine-like setae [two in Micromantispa; one in Rhachibermissa]; forewing: dark maculation present [absent in Scoloberotha, Micromantispa]; costal space broad [moderately narrow in Rhachibermissa; Scoloberotha, Albertoberotha, Micromantispa]; most subcostal veinlets forked [all or most subcostal veinlets simple in Rhachibermissa; Scoloberotha, Albertoberotha McKellar et Engel, 2009]; CuP deeply forked [shallowly pectinate in Albertoberotha].

Comments. Creagroparaberotha gen. nov. belongs to Paraberothinae with certainty as it shares all paraberothine diagnostic characters with other genera (see below), including one synapomorphy of the subfamily (i.e., the presence of spine-like setae on the inner edge of the protibia). Its venation is in general similar to that of the other genera including those known from Burmese amber (i.e., Eorhachiberotha Engel, 2004, Scoloberotha and Micromantispa). However, in the new genus, almost all the distal subcostal veinlets in the forewing costal space are forked, whereas they are mainly or entirely simple in all the other genera.

The foreleg of the new genus is similar to that of all the Burmese genera, Rhachibermissa, and Albertoberotha, in that their two basal tarsomeres each bear one curved spine-like seta on the outer (dorsal) edge. It is noteworthy that the foreleg structure of Creagroparaberotha gen. nov. is almost identical to that of the Canadian amber Albertoberotha, i.e., in the shape of the femur and similar setation of the femur, tibia, and tarsus. However, these two genera strongly differ in the venation: Albertoberotha has a narrow forewing and costal space, all the subcostal veinlets are simple, and CuP is pectinately branched; these features in the new genus are fundamentally different.

Scoloberotha and Micromantispa appear to be the most similar to each other, compared to the other genera, although the former genus is incompletely described. These genera share the following character states: the protibia with three distal spine-like setae on inner edge; the scapus is relatively short; the forewing lacks dark spots; and RP has four branches. However, they differ in the shape and setation of the profemur (cf. Engel & Grimaldi 2008: Fig. 46 and Shi et al. 2015a: Figs 3 , 5 B).

The genus Micromantispa was initially assigned to Mantispidae ( Shi et al. 2015a). However, Makarkin (2015) argued that all available character states indicate a paraberothine affinity. This point was rebutted by Shi et al. (2015b); although the authors did not provide additional evidence of the mantispid affinity of the genus, they assumed that “further fossil findings might result in a different interpretation” (p. 426). Creagroparaberotha gen. nov. is such a “further fossil finding”. The similarity of Micromantispa with other Burmese representatives of Paraberothinae and dissimilarity with any mantispids is so great that there is no doubt on its paraberothine affinity.

The morphology of the Eorhachiberotha species is incompletely described. In particular, the seeming absence of spine-like setae in the protibia and the protarsus in this genus is most probably an artefact.

Figures

FIGURE 3. Creagroparaberotha groehni gen. et sp. nov., holotype GPIH Typ. Kat. Nr. 4568. Distal portions of abdomen (latero-ventral view) and left hind leg. Scale bar = 0.25 mm.

FIGURE 5. Creagroparaberotha groehni gen. et sp. nov., holotype GPIH Typ. Kat. Nr. 4568. Basal portion of the left forewing costal space. Scale bar = 0.2 mm.