identifier	taxonID	type	CVterm	format	language	title	description	additionalInformationURL	UsageTerms	rights	Owner	contributor	creator	bibliographicCitation
03BE171876038643FF5DFF61FD1EFCBC.text	03BE171876038643FF5DFF61FD1EFCBC.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Raptrix Terra 1995	<html xmlns:mods="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
    <body>
        <div>
            <p> Raptrix Terra, 1995</p>
            <p> Jantsch (1986) described  Aconthiothespis travassosi on the basis of a single female from Pará, Brazil, now deposited at the MPEG. Examination of the holotype (Fig. 1) reveals that it is clearly referable to  Raptrix Terra. Nonetheless, Terra (1995) transferred  travassosi to  Acontista , without reference to the type specimen. This may explain why Terra did not reassign  travassosi to  Raptrix when he originally described the latter in the same publication. We compared the holotype of  A. travassosi with other species of  Raptrix according to Lombardo &amp; Marletta (2004), concluding that the Jantsch’s species is a junior synonym of  Raptrix perspicua (F. 1787)—a widely distributed species in northeastern South America. The revised list of synonyms for this species follows:  Raptrix perspicua (Fabr., 1787) Mantis perspicua Fabr., 1787</p>
            <p> =  Mantis fusca Olivier,1792</p>
            <p> =  Mantis fuscata Stoll, 1813</p>
            <p> =  Mantis truncata Lichtenstein, 1802 =  Mantis multistriata , Serville, 1839 =  Acontista elegans Saussure, 1869 =  
Acontiothespis travassosi Jantsch, 1986 
n . syn. </p>
        </div>
    </body>
</html>
	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03BE171876038643FF5DFF61FD1EFCBC	Public Domain	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.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Agudelo, Antonio A.;Rivera, Julio	Agudelo, Antonio A., Rivera, Julio (2015): Some taxonomic and nomenclatural changes in American Mantodea (Insecta, Dictyoptera) — Part I. Zootaxa 3936 (3): 335-356, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3936.3.2
03BE171876028642FF5DFAAFFA0EF86D.text	03BE171876028642FF5DFAAFFA0EF86D.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Chloromiopteryx Giglio-Tos 1915	<html xmlns:mods="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
    <body>
        <div>
            <p> Chloromiopteryx Giglio-Tos, 1915</p>
            <p> =  Metathespis Piza, 1968</p>
            <p> =  Emboicy Terra, 1982 , n. syn. </p>
            <p> Chloromiopteryx mirim (Terra, 1982) ,  n. comb. Emboicy mirim Terra, 1982</p>
            <p> Chloromiopteryx modesta (Piza, 1968) ,  n. comb. &amp; stat. rev.  Metathespis modesta Piza, 1968</p>
            <p> Chloromiopteryx plurilobata (Mello-Leitão, 1937) ,  n. comb. Musoniola plurilobata Mello-Leitão, 1937</p>
            <p> Chloromiopteryx now includes four species:  C. mirim ,  C. modesta ,  C. plurilobata and  C. thalassina . Members of  Chloromiopteryx seem to be endemic to Atlantic Forest formations of southern Brazil, often occurring at high elevation. Label data indicate that both males and females are found on vegetation. </p>
            <p> We also take the opportunity to here designate the best-preserved specimen of  C. thalassina as lectotype (unfortunately both syntypes lack the abdomen). The proposed lectotype bears the following four labels: [1] red label “ Type!”; [2] small white label “617”; [3] green label “St. Cathar. Eschsch.”; [4] green label “  thalassina Burm. * (♂)”. </p>
        </div>
    </body>
</html>
	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03BE171876028642FF5DFAAFFA0EF86D	Public Domain	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.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Agudelo, Antonio A.;Rivera, Julio	Agudelo, Antonio A., Rivera, Julio (2015): Some taxonomic and nomenclatural changes in American Mantodea (Insecta, Dictyoptera) — Part I. Zootaxa 3936 (3): 335-356, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3936.3.2
03BE171876028642FF5DFED4FCA3FA9C.text	03BE171876028642FF5DFED4FCA3FA9C.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Chloromiopteryx Giglio-Tos 1915	<html xmlns:mods="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
    <body>
        <div>
            <p> Chloromiopteryx Giglio-Tos, 1915</p>
            <p> Giglio-Tos (1915) established  Chloromiopteryx to accommodate  Mantis thalassina Burmeister, 1838 , a species based on two male syntypes from Santa Catarina Island, Brazil (deposited at ZMB). Although long considered a monotypical genus, a number of species originally described in other genera clearly belonged to  Chloromiopteryx . One of these is  Metathespis modesta Piza 1968a . Terra (1995) subsumed  Metathespis in  Chloromiopteryx and further considered  M. modesta a synonym of  C. thalassina , although without providing justification. The type of  M. modesta (Fig. 2 d), confirms Terra’s synonymy of  Metathespis with  Chloromiopteryx , but not the synonymy of  M. modesta with  C. thalassina . As the genitalia are missing from the male syntypes of  C. thalasina , comparison was not possible, and thus we favor a more conservative approach and simply accept only the generic synonymy established by Terra (1995) at this time. Another species—  Musoniola plurilobata Mello-Leitão, 1937 —was described on the basis of a single female from Mont Caxambu, Petropolis, Rio de Janeiro state, Brazil. Comparative analysis of  M. plurilobata and accompanying figures with the type specimen of yet another species,  Emboicy mirim Terra, 1982 , revealed that both species are referable to  Chloromiopteryx . Mello-Leitão (1937) clearly misassigned  plurilobata to  Musoniola (a mainly Central American lineage), whereas Terra (1982) apparently used a combination of sexually dimorphic characters to justify recognition of the genus  Emboicy (Fig. 2 a–c). This is a common error in  Mantodea taxonomy, where many genus-group names have been proposed without reference to both sexes (Rivera 2010b). Analyses of specimens of both sexes of  C. mirim deposited at the MZUPS reveal an accentuated sexual chromatic dimorphism, where males are green (faded to pale green or greenish brown in preserved specimens) and females predominantly light to dark brown with multiple dark marking in body and limbs. Accordingly, the characteristic green coloration that Terra (1995) considered to be diagnostic of  Chloromiopteryx seems to apply only to males.  Musoniola plurilobata and  Metathespis modesta were both described from high-elevation localities in Petropolis (1200 m for  plurilobata , “alto da serra” for  modesta ), Rio de Janeiro state, Brazil. Therefore, both names may refer to the same species.  Musoniola plurilobata also seems to be close to, if not conspecific with,  E. mirim . Future studies of  Chloromiopteryx must rule out all these possible synonymies. Unfortunately, the type specimens of  M. plurilobata , ostensibly deposited at the Museu Nacional de Rio de Janeiro (Type No. 53786) according to the original description (Mello-Leitão 1937), could not be located (M. Monné, pers. comm.), and no topotypical specimens were available for study. Summarizing, the following nomenclatural changes apply to  Chloromiopteryx : </p>
        </div>
    </body>
</html>
	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03BE171876028642FF5DFED4FCA3FA9C	Public Domain	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.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Agudelo, Antonio A.;Rivera, Julio	Agudelo, Antonio A., Rivera, Julio (2015): Some taxonomic and nomenclatural changes in American Mantodea (Insecta, Dictyoptera) — Part I. Zootaxa 3936 (3): 335-356, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3936.3.2
03BE171876058644FF5DF8D2FCBFFD93.text	03BE171876058644FF5DF8D2FCBFFD93.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Miobantia Giglio-Tos 1917	<html xmlns:mods="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
    <body>
        <div>
            <p> Miobantia Giglio-Tos, 1917</p>
            <p> Terra (1995) considered  Metathespis precaria Piza (1968a) as a synonym of  Chloromiopteryx thalassina . Examination of the type specimen of  M. precaria (deposited at ESALQ) (Fig. 2 f, g, i) reveals that it is referable to the genus  Miobantia . Furthermore, comparison of the type’s genitalia with those of other  Miobantia species confirms that  M. precaria is a junior synonym of  Miobantia rustica (Fabricius, 1781) (cf. our Fig. 2 f and Fig. 22 in Scherrer 2014). Accordingly,  Metathespis precaria is removed from synonymy with  Chloromiopteryx thalassina and placed in synonymy with  Miobantia rustica . </p>
            <p> An updated list of synonyms for  M. rustica follows: </p>
            <p> Miobantia rustica (Fabr., 1781) Mantis rustica Fabr., 1781</p>
            <p> =  Miopteryx perloides Saussure, 1869 =  Miopteryx nebulosa Giglio-Tos, 1915 =  Metathespis precaria Piza, 1968 n. syn.</p>
            <p> Scherrer (2014) provided a detailed revision of  Miobantia . </p>
        </div>
    </body>
</html>
	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03BE171876058644FF5DF8D2FCBFFD93	Public Domain	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.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Agudelo, Antonio A.;Rivera, Julio	Agudelo, Antonio A., Rivera, Julio (2015): Some taxonomic and nomenclatural changes in American Mantodea (Insecta, Dictyoptera) — Part I. Zootaxa 3936 (3): 335-356, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3936.3.2
03BE171876048644FF5DFD37FE6BFBAE.text	03BE171876048644FF5DFD37FE6BFBAE.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Anamiopteryx Giglio-Tos 1915	<html xmlns:mods="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
    <body>
        <div>
            <p> Anamiopteryx Giglio-Tos, 1915</p>
            <p> Jantsch (1991) described  Eumiopteryx magna on the basis of two males from Serra Norte, Pará state, Brazil. Examination of the holotype and paratype (Fig. 3 a–c) reveals it to be a valid species, although referable instead to the closely related genus  Anamiopteryx (based on the presence of more robust pronotal tubercles). Accordingly, we here establish the following combination: </p>
            <p> Anamiopteryx magna (Jantsch, 1991) n. comb. Eumiopteryx magna Jantsch, 1991</p>
        </div>
    </body>
</html>
	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03BE171876048644FF5DFD37FE6BFBAE	Public Domain	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.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Agudelo, Antonio A.;Rivera, Julio	Agudelo, Antonio A., Rivera, Julio (2015): Some taxonomic and nomenclatural changes in American Mantodea (Insecta, Dictyoptera) — Part I. Zootaxa 3936 (3): 335-356, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3936.3.2
03BE171876048646FF5DF85BFD57FDE0.text	03BE171876048646FF5DF85BFD57FDE0.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Litaneutria Saussure 1892	<html xmlns:mods="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
    <body>
        <div>
            <p> Litaneutria Saussure, 1892</p>
            <p> Examination of the holotypes of  Tithrone corseuli Jantsch, 1986 (Fig. 4 a–c) and  Tithrone clauseni Jantsch, 1995 (Fig. 4 d–g), reveals them to be referable to  Litaneutria Saussure. The holotype of  corseuli exhibits a greenish coloration whereas those of  clauseni are more greyish brown. The metathoracic wings of both types exhibit a dark spot in the anal area but the same exhibits different degrees of pigmentation (  clauseni is darker). We also examined the genitalia of the holotype of  corseuli , and the holotype and one paratype of  clauseni from California, USA. The genitalia of  clauseni are glued to a cardboard; although this means of preservation is not done the most appropriate way, the genitalia were distinct enough to allow observation. We did not observe any significant differences in the conformation of the phallomeres among these specimens. Beier (1935), Ehrmann (2002) and Otte &amp; Spearman (2005) all listed seven species in  Litaneutria . However, Hebard (1935) had already considered  L. minor (Scudder, 1872) , the “agile ground  mantis ”, as the only valid species (see also Vickery &amp; Kevan, 1983), although exhibiting considerable morphological variation across its range.  Litaneutria minor is an open ground/low vegetation dweller (Gurney, 1950), occurring in dry habitats along most of western North America, from Southern British Columbia in Canada (Vickery &amp; Kevan 1983; Cannings, 1987) south to Baja California and San Luis Potosi in Central Mexico (Hebard 1932 [as  L. ocularis ] 1935; Battiston et al. 2005). Two color morphs (green and brown) occur (Cannings 1987). Hebard (1935) also suggested that some “races” (i.e. subspecies) could eventually be recognized, at least in southern California. This later question needs to be addressed in the future after the examination of representative populations to include the whole species’ range. The specimens studied by Jantsch, from Arizona and California, fall within the natural distribution of  L. minor as mentioned above. Therefore, we here consider both Jantsch’s species as new synonyms of  L. minor . Summarizing: </p>
            <p> Litaneutria minor (Scudder, 1872)</p>
            <p> =  Tithrone corseuli Jantsch, 1986 ,  n. syn. =  Tithrone clauseni Jantsch, 1995 ,  n. syn.</p>
            <p> The original description of  T. clauseni included 9 paratypes from USA localities whose particulars were not mentioned in the original description (localities given simply as Arizona and California). Label data of the two male paratypes examined is provided in the annex. </p>
        </div>
    </body>
</html>
	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03BE171876048646FF5DF85BFD57FDE0	Public Domain	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.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Agudelo, Antonio A.;Rivera, Julio	Agudelo, Antonio A., Rivera, Julio (2015): Some taxonomic and nomenclatural changes in American Mantodea (Insecta, Dictyoptera) — Part I. Zootaxa 3936 (3): 335-356, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3936.3.2
03BE171876068646FF5DFD5FFEC7FC55.text	03BE171876068646FF5DFD5FFEC7FC55.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Photininae	<html xmlns:mods="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
    <body>
        <div>
            <p> Subfamily  PHOTININAE Gilgio-Tos, 1915 </p>
            <p> Terra (1995) highlighted a case of family-group homonymy existing between  Photininae Olivier, 1907 (  Coleoptera ,  Lampyridae ) and  Photininae Giglio-Tos, 1915 (  Mantodea ,  Mantidae ). Svenson &amp; Branham (2007) proposed a resolution of this nomenclatural issue by changing the root Photin- to Photina- so that the subfamily name will be emended to “  Photinainae ” Giglio-Tos, 1915. Although some authors have already used “  Photinainae ” (e.g. Rivera 2010a; Roy &amp; Stiewe 2011), the case (No. 3402) is still under consideration and prevailing usage of names is to be maintained until the ruling of the Commission is published (ICZN, art 82). Accordingly, the name  Photininae is here used instead. </p>
        </div>
    </body>
</html>
	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03BE171876068646FF5DFD5FFEC7FC55	Public Domain	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.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Agudelo, Antonio A.;Rivera, Julio	Agudelo, Antonio A., Rivera, Julio (2015): Some taxonomic and nomenclatural changes in American Mantodea (Insecta, Dictyoptera) — Part I. Zootaxa 3936 (3): 335-356, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3936.3.2
03BE171876068649FF5DFB8FFD07F83B.text	03BE171876068649FF5DFB8FFD07F83B.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Coptopteryx Saussure 1869	<html xmlns:mods="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
    <body>
        <div>
            <p> Coptopteryx Saussure, 1869</p>
            <p> Piza (1973) described  Coptopteryx gigliotosi Piza, 1973 from Santa Maria, Rio Grande do Sul State, Brazil. The type series includes the holotype and one paratype, both males (deposited at ESALQ). However, Piza (1973) ignored the fact that Werner (1925) had already created the name  Coptopteryx gigliotosi Werner, 1925 for a species from northern  Argentina . Jantsch &amp; Corseuil (1988) detected this case of homonymy and proposed  Coptopteryx ermannoi Jantsch &amp; Corseuil, 1988 as a new replacement name for its primary homonym  Coptopteryx gigliotosi Piza, 1973 (non Werner, 1925). According to the ICZN Article 72.7, name-bearing types of nominal species-group taxa denoted by new replacement names (nomina nova) not only are objective synonyms but also share the same name-bearing type. Therefore, the original type specimen of  Coptopteryx gigliotosi Piza, 1973 is the same for  Coptopteryx ermannoi Jantsch &amp; Corseuil, 1988 . We had the opportunity of studying this type specimen; its strong resemblance to  Coptopteryx argentina (Burmeister, 1838) prompted us to perform comparative analyses of their male genitalia (Fig. 5 a–d). Accordingly, we contrasted this structure to that of a syntype of  C. argentina and found no relevant differences that justify the validity of  C. ermannoi , and thus we concluded that both names apply to the same species. Similarly, the analysis of the holotype of yet another species,  Paraphotina precaria Piza1966 (Fig. 5 e), which Terra (1995) subsequently transferred to  Coptopteryx , revealed it to be also conspecific to  C. argentina . Accordingly, we establish this additional new synonymy. The updated list of synonyms for  C. argentina is as follows: </p>
            <p> Coptopteryx argentina (Burmeister, 1838) Mantis argentina Burmeister, 1838</p>
            <p> =  Coptopteryx affinis Giglio-Tos, 1915</p>
            <p> =  Coptopteryx gigliotosi Piza, 1960 (non Werner, 1925) n. syn. =  Paraphotina precaria Piza, 1966 n. syn.</p>
            <p> =  
Coptopteryx ermannoi Jantsch &amp; Corseuil, 1988 
n . syn. </p>
            <p> We also examined the female types of  Brachypteromantis bonariensis Piza, 1960 (Fig. 5 f) described from Buenos Aires (  Argentina ), which Terra (1995) transferred to  Coptopteryx . We not only confirm the placement of this species within  Coptopteryx , as Terra correctly suggested, but also identified it as conspecific with  Coptopteryx gayi (Blanchard, 1851) . Consequently, we recognized the following new synonym: </p>
            <p> Coptopteryx gayi Blanchard, 1851 Mantis gayi Blanchard, 1851</p>
            <p> =  Mantis crenaticollis Blanchard, 1851 =  Mantis grisea Philippi, 1863</p>
            <p> =  Coptopteryx rehni Giglio-Tos, 1915 =  Coptopteryx minuta Giglio-Tos, 1915 =  Brachypteromantis bonariensis Piza, 1960 n. syn.</p>
        </div>
    </body>
</html>
	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03BE171876068649FF5DFB8FFD07F83B	Public Domain	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.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Agudelo, Antonio A.;Rivera, Julio	Agudelo, Antonio A., Rivera, Julio (2015): Some taxonomic and nomenclatural changes in American Mantodea (Insecta, Dictyoptera) — Part I. Zootaxa 3936 (3): 335-356, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3936.3.2
03BE171876088648FF5DFF2BFDEBFCF6.text	03BE171876088648FF5DFF2BFDEBFCF6.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Orthoderella Giglio-Tos 1897	<html xmlns:mods="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
    <body>
        <div>
            <p> Orthoderella Giglio-Tos, 1897</p>
            <p> Piza (1962) described  Tithrone major on the basis of six males and one female (Fig. 6 a–b), all with type locality in Piracicaba, São Paulo state, Brazil (all deposited at ESALQ). No holotype was designated; thus, they are all syntypes. At first glance, it resulted obvious that these specimens were attributable to  Orthoderella (Photininae) instead to  Tithrone (Acanthopidae-Acontistinae) , as originally classified by Piza (1962). Furthermore, a detailed comparative analysis of the external morphology of these individuals, including the male genitalia (Fig. 6 c–d), allowed their recognition as  Orthoderella brasiliensis Roy &amp; Stiewe, 2011 , recently described from southern Brazil (Roy &amp; Stiewe 2011). Both  T. major and  O. brasiliensis also exhibit similar distribution. Consequently, the following nomenclatural changes are introduced: </p>
            <p> Orthoderella major (Piza, 1962) ,  n. comb. Tithrone major Piza, 1962</p>
            <p> =  Orthoderella brasiliensis Roy &amp; Stiewe, 2011 ,  n. syn.</p>
            <p> Piza (1962) did not select any particular specimen from his type series as the holotype of  T. major . Therefore, we here designate as a lectotype one male specimen (Fig. 6 a) whose label contains the following information: Brasil, São Paulo, Piracicaba; abril-1951 (4/51), I0075. </p>
        </div>
    </body>
</html>
	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03BE171876088648FF5DFF2BFDEBFCF6	Public Domain	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.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Agudelo, Antonio A.;Rivera, Julio	Agudelo, Antonio A., Rivera, Julio (2015): Some taxonomic and nomenclatural changes in American Mantodea (Insecta, Dictyoptera) — Part I. Zootaxa 3936 (3): 335-356, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3936.3.2
03BE1718760B864BFF5DFF61FDDEFD5E.text	03BE1718760B864BFF5DFF61FDDEFD5E.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Photina Burmeister 1838	<html xmlns:mods="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
    <body>
        <div>
            <p> Photina Burmeister, 1838</p>
            <p> As in the previous  Tithrone species,  Tithrone catharinensis also was classified in the wrong genus (Piza, 1961). The female holotype (from Pinhal, Santa Catharina state, Brazil), also deposited at ESALQ, was found to be a member of  Photina Burmeister, 1838 (Fig. 7 a). Further analyses of this material and the holotype of  Photina laevis Giglio- Tos, 1915 (from the same locality) (Fig. 7 b), the latter recently recognized as the female of  P. vitrea by Agudelo (2014b), revealed  T. catharinensis also as conspecific to  P. vitrea . </p>
            <p>The complete list of synonyms known for this species is as follows:</p>
            <p> Photina vitrea (Burmeister, 1838)</p>
            <p> Mantis (Photina) vitrea Burmeister, 1838 =  Mantis pellucida Serville, 1839</p>
            <p> =  Mantis longicornis Charpentier, 1841</p>
            <p> =  Cardioptera translucida Saussure, 1869 =  Cardioptera [  Mantis (Photina) ]  vitrea (Burmeister, 1838) =  Photina gracilis Giglio-Tos, 1915</p>
            <p> =  Photina laevis Giglio-Tos, 1915</p>
            <p> =  
Tithrone catharinensis Piza,1961 
n . syn. </p>
        </div>
    </body>
</html>
	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03BE1718760B864BFF5DFF61FDDEFD5E	Public Domain	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.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Agudelo, Antonio A.;Rivera, Julio	Agudelo, Antonio A., Rivera, Julio (2015): Some taxonomic and nomenclatural changes in American Mantodea (Insecta, Dictyoptera) — Part I. Zootaxa 3936 (3): 335-356, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3936.3.2
03BE1718760B864BFF5DFCCAFC56F8AA.text	03BE1718760B864BFF5DFCCAFC56F8AA.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Photiomantis Piza 1968	<html xmlns:mods="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
    <body>
        <div>
            <p> Photiomantis Piza, 1968 stat. rev. </p>
            <p> The taxonomic history of this genus is much complicated due to a number of nomenclatural procedures applied at various times, and by different authors, on multiple other genera. Lombardo (1999) recognized distinct morphological characters in  Metriomantis planicephala , species that Rehn (1916) described from Gravatá, Ceará-  Mirim , Rio Grande do Norte State (Brazil) (Fig. 8 a) and created a new genus to accommodate this species,  Rehniella Lombardo, 1999 ; however, this name was not available as it was preoccupied by  Rehniella , a genus of  Gryllidae (Orthoptera) previosuly erected by Hebard (1928). This case of homonymy prompted Koçak &amp; Kemal (2008) and Özdikmen (2008) to propose, almost simultaneously, two replacement names, Colombiella Koçak &amp; Kemal 2008 and Lombardoa Özdikmen, 2008, with the former name having priority over the latter by just a few weeks of antecedence, thus making  Colombiella planicephala (Rehn, 1916) the new valid name. Rivera (2010a) discussed all the resulting historical nomenclatural issues upon rediscovering the “lost” publication where Piza (1982) described  Margaromantis margaritaria Piza, 1982 . After a detailed analysis of this publication, including the holotype of  M. margaritaria, Rivera (2010a) concluded that the combination  Margaromantis planicephala (Piza, 1982) should be the valid name for this species, placing  Rehniella (sensu Lombardo, 1999; non Hebard, 1928), Colombiella and Lombardoa under synonymy of  Margaromantis and  M. margaritaria as a synonym of  M. planicephala . </p>
            <p> During the course of our investigations, we had the opportunity to study the type material corresponding to  Photiomantis silvai described by Piza (1968b), a species later transferred to  Photinella by Terra (1995). Our analysis of this type (Fig. 8 b) and additional material made necessary a closer reexamination of the type of  M. margaritaria (Fig. 8 c) in addition to topotypical material of  Metriomantis planicephala (Fig. 9 a–d), as they all seemed to correspond to one single species. Indeed, we could not detect any relevant difference in the constitution of the male genitalia that cannot be attributed to intraspecific geographic variation (Fig. 9 c–d). Consequently, the name  Photiomantis is here resurrected from synonymy and, in accordance to the “Principle of Priority”,  Photiomantis planicephala (Rehn, 1916) is now the valid name for this species. </p>
            <p> More recently, Menezes &amp; Bravo (2015) described  Margaromantis nigrolineata from northeastern Brazil. This is a valid species, but referable instead to  Photiomantis . </p>
            <p>The summary of the taxonomy of this genus and species is a follows:</p>
        </div>
    </body>
</html>
	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03BE1718760B864BFF5DFCCAFC56F8AA	Public Domain	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.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Agudelo, Antonio A.;Rivera, Julio	Agudelo, Antonio A., Rivera, Julio (2015): Some taxonomic and nomenclatural changes in American Mantodea (Insecta, Dictyoptera) — Part I. Zootaxa 3936 (3): 335-356, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3936.3.2
03BE1718760D864CFF5DFD1CFBB3F861.text	03BE1718760D864CFF5DFD1CFBB3F861.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Chopardiella Giglio-Tos 1914	<html xmlns:mods="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
    <body>
        <div>
            <p> Chopardiella Giglio-Tos, 1914</p>
            <p> Uromantis amazonica and  Uromantis paraensis were both simultaneously described by Jantsch (1985). However, at the time of their description, Jantsch ignored the fact that  Uromantis , as well as other similar genera created by Giglio-Tos (1917), were all already placed under synonymy with  Stagmomantis Saussure, 1869 by Hebard (1923), an action that Rehn (1935) and subsequent authors later followed. Accordingly, Terra (1995) formally transferred both  amazonica and  paraensis to  Stagmomantis , a procedure he likely undertook under the “safe” assumption that Jantsch had correctly assigned his two new species to  Uromantis . We examined the holotypes of both of Jantsch’s species deposited at INPA and recognized that those characters Jantsch used to justify both individuals as separated species, such as relative body length, relative density of the minute denticles on the pronotal edges, and wideness of the costal area of the mesothoracic wings, are all of no use. Fortunately, both specimens have their genitalia intact and they proved to be virtually identical upon close examination (Fig. 10 a–b, d–e). Therefore, we regard  U. amazonica and  U. paraensis as conspecifics (Fig. 10 c–f). Furthermore, we compared the external morphology and male genitalia of Jantsch’s species to that of  Chopardiella latipennis (Chopard, 1911) (Fig. 11a –b) and could not find any relevant difference that may justify the validity of all these names, as they are all clearly conspecifics. Thus, we establish both  U. amazonica and  U. paraensis as synonyms of  C. latipennis . The following taxonomic changes now apply: </p>
            <p> Chopardiella latipennis (Chopard, 1911) =  
Uromantis amazonica Jantsch, 1985 
n . syn. =  
Uromantis paraensis Jantsch, 1985 
n . syn. </p>
            <p> Chopard (1911) described his new species  Pseudoxyops latipennis based on a single female from Nouveau- Chantier, in French Guiana. However, Giglio-Tos (1914) considered that this species should be included in its own genus and thus created  Chopardiella Giglio-Tos, 1914 to accommodate it, using simply Chopard’s illustration to justify his new taxon while acknowledging the fact that he had not seen specimens of  P. latipennis . We consider that those characters used by Giglio-Tos to justify  Chopardiella represent interspecific rather than intergeneric differences, particularly in regard to the small distal lobes on the mid- and hind femora, which are absent in  Pseudoxyops . It was not until Lombardo (1994) described the male of  P. latipennis that sexual differences in the degree of lobe development became notorious; whereas the female does exhibit a conspicuous distal lobe on both mid and hind femora, such a lobe is almost nonexistent in males, in which it is barely indicated by a slight undulation of the cuticle. We have observed this same feature in various male specimens from museums and in material obtained from French Guiana. Another feature that Giglio-Tos used to separate  Chopardiella from  Pseudoxyops was the shape of the compound eyes, which are spherical in  Chopardiella but conical in  Pseudoxyops . We also regard this character as invalid for making such distinction because eye shape and other ocular modifications (e.g. apical spurs and non-visual elongations) are known for exhibiting wide variation among congeners and even intraspecifically, as observed in representatives of various genera, such as  Ameles ,  Heterochaeta ,  Compsothespis , among many others (Wieland 2013). On the other hand, the shape of both the pronotum and the mesothoracic wings of the female, and similarities in the shape of male genitalia (see Lombardo 1994, Lombardo &amp; Agabiti 2001, Battiston &amp; Picciau 2008 for comparison), suggest that  C. latipennis (Fig. 11a),  C. poulaini Lombardo &amp; Agabiti, 2001 and  Pseudoxyops are all closely related, most likely representing a single evolutionary line.  Pseudoxyops includes five species from which very little is known, except perhaps for the Amazonian  Pseudoxyops perpulchra (Westwood, 1889) (Fig. 11 b), the most commonly cited and collected species. Battiston &amp; Picciau (2008) recently identified and described the miniaturized male of this highly dimorphic species. We suggest that the two species currently included in  Chopardiella should be transferred to  Pseudoxyops and the former put under synonymy with the latter. Unfortunately, all other species of  Pseudoxyops (  P. diluta ,  P. boliviana ,  P. minuta ,  P. borelli ) are mostly known only from their original descriptions, and even though their morphology differs in many respects from that of  P. perpulchra , we refrain from establishing such synonymy, since  Pseudoxyops , as currently conceived, is in need of re-evaluation to verify the taxonomic status of its less-known species. We will leave this question open to consideration, pending future studies. </p>
        </div>
    </body>
</html>
	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03BE1718760D864CFF5DFD1CFBB3F861	Public Domain	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.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Agudelo, Antonio A.;Rivera, Julio	Agudelo, Antonio A., Rivera, Julio (2015): Some taxonomic and nomenclatural changes in American Mantodea (Insecta, Dictyoptera) — Part I. Zootaxa 3936 (3): 335-356, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3936.3.2
03BE1718760D864DFF5DFF61FD14FDE0.text	03BE1718760D864DFF5DFF61FD14FDE0.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Photiomantis Piza 1968	<html xmlns:mods="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
    <body>
        <div>
            <p> Photiomantis Piza, 1968</p>
            <p> =  Margaromantis Piza, 1982 n . syn. </p>
            <p> =  Rehniella Lombardo, 1999 (non Hebard, 1928) n. syn. =Colombiella Koçak &amp; Kemal, 2008 n. syn. =Lombardoa Özdikmen, 2008 n. syn. </p>
            <p> Photiomantis nigrolineata (Menezes &amp; Bravo, 2015) n. comb. Margaromantis nigrolineata Menezes &amp; Bravo, 2015</p>
            <p> Photiomantis planicephala (Rehn, 1916) n. comb. Metriomantis planicephala Rehn, 1916</p>
            <p> =  
Photiomantis silvai Piza, 1968 
n . syn. </p>
            <p> =  
Margaromantis margaritaria Piza, 1982 
n . syn. </p>
        </div>
    </body>
</html>
	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03BE1718760D864DFF5DFF61FD14FDE0	Public Domain	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.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Agudelo, Antonio A.;Rivera, Julio	Agudelo, Antonio A., Rivera, Julio (2015): Some taxonomic and nomenclatural changes in American Mantodea (Insecta, Dictyoptera) — Part I. Zootaxa 3936 (3): 335-356, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3936.3.2
03BE1718760F864EFF5DF88FFD1AF952.text	03BE1718760F864EFF5DF88FFD1AF952.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Vates Burmeister 1838	<html xmlns:mods="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
    <body>
        <div>
            <p> Vates Burmeister, 1838</p>
            <p> Mello-Leitão (1937) described  Pseudovates hyalostigma Mello-Leitão, 1937 , from a unique specimen from Pará, Brazil. According to the original source, the type specimen is deposited at the Museu Nacional de Rio de Janeiro (Type No. 17612); however, this specimen could not be located. Fortunately, the original description and its accompanying figures are detailed enough to recognize the actual identity of this specimen as  Vates biplagiata Sjöstedt, 1930 . Mello-Leitão wrongly assumed his type specimen to be a male; however, it is clearly a female. On the other hand, Piza (1983) described  Vates obscura on the basis of a single male specimen, currently deposited at ESALQ (Fig. 12). A closer examination also revealed it to be conspecific to  V. biplagiata . We also found out that Piza’s specimen was not a male, as originally reported, but a female instead. Interestingly, the ID label bears a “female” symbol, as it can also be confirmed based on the photo included along the original description; the publication however clearly states “male”. We establish the following new synonymies: </p>
            <p> Vates biplagiata Sjöstedt, 1930</p>
            <p> =  Pseudovates hyalostigma Mello-Leitão, 1937 n. syn. =  
Vates obscura Toledo Piza, 1983 
n . syn. </p>
            <p> Vates biplagiata is one of the most distinctive members of  Vates , as it exhibits a particular combination of characters not seen in other known species, such as the strong denticulation of the pronotal edges, the distinctive bicolored pattern of the costal area of the mesothoracic wings (mostly green with a longitudinal yellow strip along the costal vein) and the brown marking along the distal edge of the discoidal area of the same in the females. This is a rather common species with a typical Amazonian distribution, currently known for Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador, French Guiana, Peru and Venezuela (Lombardo &amp; Agabiti 2001; Ehrmann 2002; Agudelo et al. 2007). Medellin &amp; Salazar (2011) described the male genitalia. </p>
        </div>
    </body>
</html>
	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03BE1718760F864EFF5DF88FFD1AF952	Public Domain	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.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Agudelo, Antonio A.;Rivera, Julio	Agudelo, Antonio A., Rivera, Julio (2015): Some taxonomic and nomenclatural changes in American Mantodea (Insecta, Dictyoptera) — Part I. Zootaxa 3936 (3): 335-356, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3936.3.2
