Luzarini Hebard, 1928, 1921

Cadena-Castañeda, Oscar J. & Quintana-Arias, Ronald Fernando, 2024, Studies on Neotropical crickets: A new Tusked Cricket genus (Orthoptera: Phalangopsidae) from Colombia, Zootaxa 5424 (2), pp. 234-242 : 235

Tribe Luzarini Hebard, 1928

Comments. As mentioned in the introduction of this contribution, this taxon began as the Luzarae group ( Hebard 1928), which included most of the taxa of the subfamily known up to that time. Later, Chopard (1968), in his catalog of crickets, treats it as the tribe Luzarini , within the subfamily Phalangopsinae , including the genera studied by Hebard (1928) and other additional ones from the Old World such as Agnotecous Saussure, 1878 (currently in Eneopterinae: Lebinthini), Larandeicus Chopard, 1937 and Zaora Walker, 1869 (now in Phalangopsinae , without tribal location), Luzaropsis Chopard, 1925 , and Larandopsis Chopard, 1924 (in Phalangopsinae : Luzaropsini) ( Cigliano et al. 2024).

Desutter-Grandcolas (1987, 1988), keeps the tribal status of Luzarini , and divides it into the groups Lernecae and Luzarae, including only American taxa. The same author elevates it to subfamily status and divides it into three assemblages, A, B, and C ( Desutter-Grandcolas 1990), based on her cladogram resulting from a phylogenetic analysis, which was never published, and the three assemblages, which were not formally described as taxonomic categories either.

Recently, Gorochov (2014) proposed a classification for the Phalangopsinae subfamily group (Gorochov does not consider that group as the family Phalangopsidae ), discussing the Desutter-Grandcolas classification, and proposes Luzarinae /ini, as a junior synonym of Phalangopsinae . Gorochov also subdivides the subfamily into five tribes: Phalangopsini (= Luzarini ), Paragryllini , Endacustini, Luzaropsini, and Otteini.

The status of Luzarinae /ini/inae is currently difficult to define, since the proposals of the two authors are different, and each one keeps their respective line of cricket classification. Gorochov classifies the group into lower levels as subtribes and genera, sometimes with several subgenera. Unlike Desutter-Grandcolas who organizes the group at higher taxonomic levels as family (for her, Phalangopsidae is a family, not a group of subfamilies), subfamilies, and the tribes proposed by Desutter-Grandcolas, in many groups, they are usually treated as subtribes by Gorochov ( Cadena-Castañeda & García García 2020, Cadena-Castañeda et al. 2021b). For example, Gorochov (2019), in his study of Peruvian phalangopsids, keeps his 2014 classification, with some adjustments made by him in other contributions. Desutter-Grandcolas, in her study of the phalangopsids of French Guiana, continues using the subfamily status for Phalangopsinae , Luzarinae , and Paragryllinae (Desutter-Grandcolas & Faberon 2020) .