Enigmatic and little known Odonata (Insecta) from the Paleogene of Patagonia and Northwest Argentina

Abstract

Abstract. The fi ndings of new specimens of Latibasaliidae and Frengueliidae in Northwest and Patagonia Argentina are noteworthy for the knowledge of these little know families and the explanation of their systematic position. The new fi ndings confi rm the phylogenetic position of these families. The morphology of the discoidal cell in both fore and hind wings of Frenguelia corresponds to the most basal epiproctophoran damsel-dragonfl ies, implying a Triassic age for the particular lineage of this family. The absence of any fossil record between Triassic and Eocene could be related to a highly specialized biology for these animals, maybe related to mountain rainforests as for Epiophlebia, unique surviving damsel-dragonfl y.

Alaskan Palaeogene insects: a challenge for a better knowledge of the Beringian ‘route’ (Odonata: Aeshnidae, Dysagrionidae)

“…Affinities with the Epiproctophora are unlikely because the base of IR2 is opposite subnodus while it is generally basal to it in this clade, especially in the Eocene family Pseudostenolestidae (Garrouste & Nel 2015). The same character plus the absence of the oblique vein 'O' excludes affinities with the Sieblosiidae and the Latibasaliidae (Nel et al 2005a, Petrulevičius & Nel 2007. Affinities with the Caloptera Belyshev and Haritonov, 1983 are excluded because of the relatively distal position of the midfork (Bechly 1996).…”

A new genus and species of darner dragonfl y (Aeshnidae: Odonata) from the lower Eocene of Laguna del Hunco, Patagonia, Argentina

“…Same pattern is present in holotype specimen of Frenguellia patagonica (Petrulevičius & Nel 2003) and similar pattern in a second specimen of the same species fi gured in Petrulevičius & Nel (2007). It could be associated to the predation of vertebrates, with birds and mammals as possible candidates.…”

New beetles of the suborder Polyphaga from the Lowermost Eocene French amber (Insecta: Coleoptera)

“…Th e presence in the Eocene of Western Europe of this American family supports its possible great antiquity, at least in the Cretaceous. A similar distribution occurs for the Paleogene dragonfl y family Palaeomacromiidae Petrulevicius, Nel & Muzon, 1999, known from Argentina and Italy (Petrulevicius & Nel 2007 long, slightly wider than pronotum, with rather large eyes not reaching prothoracic segment, subfl attened; labrum apparently well exposed but boundary between it and frons invisible because a thick layer of amber; mandibles slightly exposed from under frons and labrum; antennae 11-segmented with three segmented loose club composing about 2/7 of total antennal length and consisting of antennomeres comparable in width and with ultimate one longest; scape about 2/3 as long as antennal club and somewhat narrower than the latter; antennomere 2 somewhat shorter and somewhat narrower than scape; antennomeres 3-5 comparable in length, somewhat narrower and shorter than antennomere 2; antennomeres 6-8 comparable in length and shortest in antennae; mentum rather large, about 3/4 as long as wide, with subrectilinearly narrowing sides and strongly excised anterior edge, its anterior angles pointed and projecting anteriorly; ultimate maxillary palpomere subconical, slightly narrowing apically, about three times as long as wide at its thickest place; labial palpi moderately small and its ultimate segment somewhat longer than wide at apex. Pronotum with subtruncate anterior and posterior edges, all angles rounded, widest in anterior 1/2, slightly and gradually narrowing anteriorly from base, posterior and lateral edges not bordered; its disk rather fl at and sides rather sloping; scutellum moderately large and subtriangular; prosternum slightly convex and its process in narrowest place extremely narrow, moderately projecting till the level of posterior edge of coxae, nearly subparallel-sided and subtruncate at apex; procoxae distinctly transverse and with exposed trochantin; mesoventrite slightly convex and with the same plane as metaventrite; distance beween mesocoxae nearly three times and that between metacoxae nearly four times as great as that between procoxae; metaventrite slightly longer than prosternum with process, slightly convex, without both median line and paracoxal line before metacoxae; submesocoxal lines following closely to posterior edge of cavities and along anterior half of metepisterna; submesocoxal line not expressed; metacoxae not very wide; ventrites 1 somewhat longer than ventrites 2-4 combined and slightly shorter than wide, hypopygidium convex in the middle of its posterior edge and sinuate at each sides before apex; epipleura well expressed; pygidium apparently as long as wide and widely subtruncate at apex; apex of anal sclerite distinctly exposed from under apex of pygidium.…”