Cratocorydalopsis, Jepson, James E. & Heads, Sam W., 2016

Jepson, James E. & Heads, Sam W., 2016, Fossil Megaloptera (Insecta: Neuropterida) from the Lower Cretaceous Crato Formation of Brazil, Zootaxa 4098 (1), pp. 134-144 : 136

Genus: Cratocorydalopsis gen. nov.

Etymology. Genus-group name formed from a combination of Crato, after the Crato Formation, corydal from Corydalus an extant genus of Corydalidae , and —opsis (from ὄψις) which means appearance.

Type species. Cratocorydalopsis brasiliensis gen. et sp. nov.

Diagnosis. Cratocorydalopsis gen. nov. differs from other genera of Corydalidae by a combination of the following characters: elongate forewing: length 26 mm; wing colouration: dark apex and base, pale centre; broad hind wing; free branch of MA in hind wing, long, forming a long cell between it and R; crossveins within Rs and M regularly spaced forming two gradate series; MA forked near wing margin; MP1 forked; CuA deeply forked at midpoint; long sinuous cua-cup crossvein; No tibial spur.

Comparison. The absence of a bilobed 4th tarsomere in Cratocorydalopsis gen. nov. separates it from taxa in Sialidae and Corydasialidae . Cratocorydalopsis gen. nov. can be separated from Parasialidae and further separated from Sialidae by its general wing venation. Cratocorydalopsis gen. nov. has a medium length forewing, which is larger than Cretochaulus: 10 mm, Lithocorydalus gen. nov.: 17 mm, but smaller than Eochauliodes: 30 mm, and Jurachauliodes: 35 mm. Its wing coloration differs from Cretochaulus (which is dark), Lithocorydalus gen. nov, (which is very dark), Eochauliodes, which is hyaline with dark stripes, and Jurachauliodes, which has a possible wing colouration pattern of hyaline with some dark patches. Cratocorydalopsis gen. nov. has the majority of Rs branches simple, the posterior branch of Rs in the forewing is not fully preserved (all branches are simple in hind wing), Lithocorydalus gen. nov. has Rs branches all poorly preserved in forewing (terminations not preserved) and all simple in hind wing, Cretochaulus and Eochauliodes have Rs branches that are all forked, and Jurachauliodes has Rs branches that are all forked in the forewing, and in the hind wing all but one is forked. The broad hind wing in Cratocorydalopsis gen. nov. is shared with all other fossil genera except Lithocorydalus gen. nov., which has a more elongate hind wing. The free branch of MA is present in the other fossil genera except Eochauliodes (possibly not preserved), which appears absent. The crossveins are numerous and irregularly spaced in Eochauliodes and Jurachauliodes, in Cretochaulus they are poorly preserved. The forking of MA near the wing margin in Cratocorydalopsis gen. nov. differs from Cretochaulus and Lithocorydalus gen. nov., which have a simple MA. MP 1 in Lithocorydalus gen. nov. is simple, in Cretochaulus and Eochauliodes it is forked, and Jurachauliodes differs by its MP1 forking twice. The structure of CuA is similar to Cretochaulus and Jurachauliodes, but differs from Eochauliodes, which forks more distally. The cua-cup crossvein in Cretochaulus and Lithocorydalus gen. nov. is unknown, and in Eochauliodes it is absent, Jurachauliodes has two cua-cup crossveins, with one of the cua-cup crossveins being sinuous. The absence of a tibial spur in Cratocorydalopsis gen. nov. is also observed in Lithocorydalus gen. nov., in Cretochaulus it is unknown, in Eochauliodes and Jurachauliodes it is present.