Stephanacridini Günther, 1953

Tribe Stephanacridini Günther, 1953 View in CoL

Type genus: Stephanacris Redtenbacher, 1908: 441 View in CoL .

Stephanacridini Günther, 1953: 555 View in CoL .

Bradley & Galil, 1977: 194.

Hennemann & Conle, 2004: 48.

Otte & Brock, 2005: 33.

Hennemann & Conle, 2008: 54, Figs. 37, 43, 60-61, 80-82. Pharnaciini Günther, 1953: 555 (in part).

Bradley & Galil, 1977: 193 (in part).

Otte & Brock, 2005: 32 (in part).

Comments. Stephanacridini was established by Günther (1953: 555) as a tribe of the subfamily Phasminae (= Phasmatinae Bradley & Galil, 1977 ) and originally only contained the type-genus Stephanacris Redtenbacher, 1908 . The fundamental differences of the morphology of the terminalia and eggs of Stephanacridini and Phasmatinae genera, that suggest the tribe cannot be a member of Phasmatidae s. str. (= Lanceocercata), were summarized and illustrated by Hennemann & Conle (2008: 55), who transferred several misplaced genera from Pharnaciini Günther, 1953 ( Phasmatidae : Clitumninae ) and provided a list of genera included in Stephanacridini . The five main morphological characters that readily separate Stephanacridini from Pharnaciini as well the whole of Clituminae and Phasmatidae s. str. (= Lanceocercata) are 1) the simple anal segment (abdominal tergum X) of ♂♂ that is not longitudinally tectate and split to consist of two movable hemi-terga that form a clasping apparatus to grasp the ♀ during copulation, 2) the presence of a well-developed and sclerotised vomer in ♂♂, 3) the often enormously elongated gonapophyses VIII in ♀♀, 4) the rather indistinct medioventral carina of the profemora that runs midways on the ventral surface of the profemur in both sexes, and 5) the closed internal micropylar plate of the eggs, which lacks a median line ( Hennemann & Conle, 2008: 55). While Hennemann & Conle (2008: 57) already estimated close relation to the genus Platycrana Gray, 1835 , Hennemann (2020: 174) supported this hypothesis based on morphological traits and attributed Stephanacridini to the newly established subfamily Platycraninae Hennemann, 2020 , which in addition to Stephanacridini comprises the Platycranini . Presently, Platycraninae is considered as the sister taxon of Phasmatidae s. str. (= Lanceocercata), which is supported by molecular ( Buckley et al., 2009; Robertson et al., 2018, Bank & Bradler, 2022; Forni et al., 2023) and morphological data ( Buckley et al., 2009). While all of the abovementioned subsequent molecular studies support the splitting of Pharnaciini and Stephanacridini introduced by Hennemann & Conle (2008), the relationships and phylogenetic position of Stephanacridini has experienced somewhat contrary results throughout the different approaches. While Buckley et al. (2009) and Robertson et al. (2018) recovered Stephanacridini as sister to Phasmatidae s. str. (= Lanceocercata), Bank & Bradler (2022) hypothesized that Stephanacridini either is the sister taxon of Phasmatidae s. str. (= Lanceocercata) + Xenophasmina , or the sister taxon of Xenophasmina alone. Forni et al. (2022) in contrast revealed Stephanacridini as sister to the New World Haplopodinae . Yet, it appears that still more research is needed to finally clarify the exact placement of Stephanacridini with certainty.

As for now and considering the synonymy recovered herein, Stephanacridini now comprises seven valid genera. The two New Guinean genera Stephanacris and Macrophasma Hennemann & Conle, 2006 have been revised by Hennemann & Conle (2006). A revision of Phasmotaenia Návas, 1907 at the species level was presented by Hennemann & Conle (2009) and a taxonomic review of Nesiophasma Günther, 1934 was provided by Hennemann (2021). The genus Sadyattes Stål, 1875 (= Eucarcharus Brunner v. Wattenwyl, 1907 syn. nov.) is reviewed herein. From the two remaining genera of the tribe Diagoras Stål, 1877 is monotypical and as for now only known from the ♀. For a taxonomic review of Hermarchus Stål, 1875 , a more comprehensive integrative approach that includes broad molecular sampling to cope with the wide distributional range and numerous island populations seen within the genus is necessary and needs to be addressed by future studies.

Distribution. Taiwan, Peninsular Malaysia, Nicobar Islands, Sumatra, Java, Borneo, Philippines, Wallacea, New Guinea, Solomon Islands, NE-Australia, Micronesia and Melanesia ( Fiji, Tonga, Samoa, Vanuatu, New Caledonia & Western French Polynesia).

Genera included:

1. Diagoras Stål, 1877: 66 . Type species: Diagoras ephialtes Stål, 1877: 66 , by original monotypy.

= Eustygera Brunner View in CoL v. Wattenwyl, 1907: 186. Type species Eustygera godeffroyi Brunner View in CoL v. Wattenwyl, 1907: 186, pl. 7: 2, by original monotypy. [Synonymised by Günther, 1932b: 756]

Distribution: NW-Pacific ( Caroline Islands, Palau).

2. Hermarchus Stål, 1875: 45 . Type species: Phibalosoma pythonius Westwood, 1859: 73 , pl. 12: 1 & 35: 3, by subsequent designation of Kirby, 1904: 361.

Distribution: Melanesia ( Fiji, Tonga, Vanuatu, New Hebrides, New Caledonia, Western French Polynesia and NE-Australia).

3. Macrophasma Hennemann & Conle, 2006: 3 . Type species: Hermarchus biroi Redtenbacher, 1908: 445 , by original designation.

Distribution: New Guinea.

4. Nesiophasma Günther, 1934: 5 . Type species: Nesiophasma eremothocus Günther, 1934: 6 , fig. 1, by original designation.

= Mylothrus Günther, 1935a: 18 View in CoL . Type species: Mylothrus oligarches Günther, 1935a: 18 View in CoL , pl. 2: 12, by original designation. [Synonymised by Günther, 1935b: 29]

Distribution: Wallacea (Sulawesi, Selayar Island, Sangir Islands and Lesser Sunda Islands).

5. Phasmotaenia Návas, 1907: 10 . Type species: Taeniosoma sanchezi Bolívar, 1897: 31 , fig. 1, by indication. [replacement name for the preoccupied Taenionema Bolivar, 1906 ]

= Taeniosoma Bolivar, 1897: 31 . Type species: Taeniosoma sanchezi Bolívar, 1897: 31 , fig. 1, by monotypy. [Praeoccupied by Taeniosoma Stimpson, 1857 (Nematoda)]

= Taenionema Bolivar, 1906: 393 . Type species: Taeniosoma sanchezi Bolívar, 1897: 31 , fig. 1, by indication. [Replacement name for preoccupied Taeniosoma Bolivar, 1897 - preoccupied by Taenionema Banks, 1905 ( Plecoptera )]

= Taeniophasma Uvarov, 1940: 379 . Type species: Taeniosoma sanchezi Bolívar, 1897: 31 , fig. 1, by indication. [Homonym of Phasmotaenia Návas, 1907 & unnecessary replacement name for Taenionema Bolivar, 1906 ]

= Phasmotaenionema, Günther, 1933: 155 . [Misspelling of Phasmotaenia Návas, 1907 ]

= Phasmatotaenionema, Bradley & Galil, 1977: 193 View in CoL . [Misspelling of Phasmotaenia Návas, 1907 View in CoL ]

Distribution: Lanyuh Island SE of Taiwan, Philippines, Micronesia, Solomon Islands, New Guinea and Fiji.

6. Sadyattes Stål, 1875: 44 , 88. Type species: Sadyattes borrii Stål, 1875: 88 , by original monotypy.

= Eucarcharus Brunner View in CoL v. Wattenwyl, 1907: 185. Type species: Lonchodes feruloides Westwood, 1859: 45 , pl. 6: 5a-b, by subsequent designation of Günther, 1935a: 138. syn. nov.

Distribution: Sundaland (Java, Sumatra, Peninsular Malaysia, Borneo and Nicobar Islands) and Philippines.

7. Stephanacris Redtenbacher, 1908: 441 . Type species: Stephanacris brevipes Redtenbacher, 1908: 441 , pl. 21: 4a-b, by subsequent designation of Bradley & Galil, 1977: 194.

Distribution: New Guinea.