A revision of the late Eocene snakeflies (Raphidioptera) of the Florissant Formation, Colorado, with special reference to the wing venation of the Raphidiomorpha Author Makarkin, Vladimir N. Author Archibald, S. Bruce text Zootaxa 2014 3784 4 401 444 journal article 46097 10.11646/zootaxa.3784.4.4 16f488d9-eb77-4ff5-a7ce-99eeb7875371 1175-5326 252218 D5E03502-7BD3-41F4-A4CF-5537B1462A23 Megaraphidia elegans Cockerell, 1907 ( Fig. 5 ) Megaraphidia elegans Cockerell, 1907 : 607 , Fig. 3 ; Cockerell 1909b : 78 ; Rohwer 1909 : 534 ; Handlirsch 1910 : 103 , 104; Cockerell 1912 : 216 ; Handlirsch 1913 : 812 ; Cockerell & Custer 1925 : 295 ; Rodeck 1938 : 290 ; Aspöck et al. 1991 : 535 , 665, Fig. 3046. Raphidia elegans : Carpenter 1936 : 145 , 146; Oswald 1990 : 160 ; Engel 2003 : 125 ; Engel 2009 : 213 (Tabl. 1); Engel 2011 : 79 (Tabl. 2). “ Raphidia ” elegans : Engel 2002 : 22 . Diagnosis. May be distinguished from M. exhumata by AA1 touching AA2 [these connecting by crossvein in M. exhumata ]; by two branches of CuA before fusion with MP [one in M. exhumata ]. Revised description. Forewing 14.0 mm long, 4.5 mm wide (length/width ratio 3.1). Costal space broad, strongly dilated at proximal 1/4 of length; eight preserved subcostal veinlets simple, widely spaced. ScP relatively long, terminating on costal margin at ca. 1/3 of wing length, slightly distad crossvein 2ra-rp; length from termination of ScP to pterostigma shorter than length of pterostigma. Subcostal space broad, with one crossvein located in middle between origin of RP , divergence of M, CuA; crossvein closing pterostigma proximally straight, slightly inclined to wing base. Pterostigma rather long, weakly pigmented. Four RA branches: one incorporated in pterostigma proximally clearly visible; other at distal end of pterostigma; two distad pterostigma, one long, other short, very shallowly forked. Posterior trace of RA after pterostigma long, smoothly incurved; entering margin before wing apex. RA space with two crossveins forming two radial cells: 2ra-rp located well proximad pterostigma, slightly proximad termination of ScP; 3ra-rp located in distal part of pterostigma. RP originates at nearly half wing length, with six pectinate branches: RP 1, RP 2 deeply forked; RP 3, RP 4, RP 6 shallowly forked; RP 5 simple. One crossvein in radial space, between RP 1, RP 2. Three crossvein between RP , MA. M appears fused with R for considerable distance, and then fused with CuA for short distance; forked well proximad origin of RP . MA deeply dichotomously forked. MP zigzagged, anterior trace deeply forked distally; with three long pectinate branches: two deeply forked, one simple. Two intramedian crossveins form two doi . Cu basally not visible; dividing into CuA, CuP far from wing base. CuA crossvein-like before fusion with M and perpendicular to Cu; after fusion running parallel to CuP, then its anterior trace strongly zigzagged, shallowly forked, with two pectinate long simple branches. CuP simple, continuing Cu. Crossvein between CuA, CuP long. Crossvein cu-aa short. AA1 to AA3 simple. AA1, AA2 touching slightly proximad origin of CuP. FIGURE 5. Megaraphidia elegans Cockerell, 1907 , holotype. A, part UCM 8602. B, counterpart AMNH 35861 (converted to right). C, forewing venation. Scale bar = 4 mm. Type material. Holotype : Specimen No. 35861, deposited in AMNH (part), No. 8602, deposited in UCM (counterpart), collected by W.P. Cockerell in 1906. A well-preserved nearly complete forewing. The counterpart 8602: Verbatim label data [typed and hand written]: “R / B / UCM Paleontology TYPE Collection / Neuroptera : Raphidiidae / UCM #: 8602 / Locality #: 83013 Description: wing / ID: Megaraphidia elegans Cockerell / Age: Late Eocene Collector: WP Cockerell 1906 / Fm: FLFO [Florissant Formation] Citation: Toohey 55210”. The specimen has black ink writing on the rock that says “ Megaraphidia / elegans / Ckll / Reverse [counterpart] / TYPE / UCM 8602”, and “N 13”. Type locality. Florissant: Station 13 ( UCM locality No. 83013). Remarks. The species was described only from the part, in which the central portion of the forewing is missing. Our description and drawing are based on both the part and counterpart, allowing reconstruction of the complete forewing venation, with which we provide our revised genus diagnosis and species description.