Dermaptera
|
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.1080/00222930050144837 |
|
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/BF6487BB-FFD4-FF9E-6B1F-8FEA34736AAA |
|
treatment provided by |
Felipe |
|
scientific name |
Dermaptera |
| status |
|
Fossil Dermaptera View in CoL
Vishniakova’s (1980) discovery of several species of Semenoviola and other similar insects from Turkestam calls for comment. Much depends upon what is meant by the terms Dermaptera and For®culina. Terrestrial fossils are seldom so perfectly preserved that their relationships with other taxacan be easily determined. For example, Protodiplatys fortis Marytinov is frequently cited as being an early
2026 earwig, yet it has ®ve jointed tarsi and segmented cerci: features which are not typical of the Dermaptera . The present study is restricted to the main stem of the for®culine evolution and leaves it an open question as to whether or not the Asiatic fossils belong to the For®culina. Jhang Jun-feng’s (1996) description of the occurrence of a species of the Echinosomatinae from the Upper Jurassic of China, raises the question how this family reached this area. Here it is relevant to quote Smith al. (1981) who consider that parts of Eastern Eurasia may also have been attached
Gondwanaland (p. 61). Cretolabis cearae Popham from the Lower Cretaceous of the Amazon Basin is certainly a member of the For®culina, but its a nities with any of the existing subfamilies are obscure.
No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.