identifier	taxonID	type	CVterm	format	language	title	description	additionalInformationURL	UsageTerms	rights	Owner	contributor	creator	bibliographicCitation
03AA87DBFF83FF935599C5CFFB614A21.text	03AA87DBFF83FF935599C5CFFB614A21.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Drepanosticta carmichaeli (Laidlaw 1915)	<div><p>The Drepanosticta carmichaeli -group</p> <p>In this study it was found that the subbasal spur on the paraprocts is only variably present in D. jurzitzai and is not present in D. annandalei and D. wildermuthi sp. nov. Since these species (especially D. wildermuthi sp. nov. and D. jurzitzai) are clearly very similar to the other species in the group it is necessary to slightly modify the definition of the D. carmichaeli -group to include them. Additionally, all species in the group share a simple prothorax structure, which separates them from some other species of Drepanosticta from Sundaland. Here we define the D. carmichaeli -group as follows:</p> <p>Species of Drepanosticta from west of Huxley’s line (which differs from Wallace’s line in its northern part, separating Borneo and the Palawan region of the Philippines from the rest of the Philippines, but merges with Wallace’s line between Borneo and Sulawesi, continuing southward through the Lombok strait) lacking horns or long processes on the anterior and posterior pronotal lobes of either sex. Cerci and paraprocts of similar length. The male with paraprocts of simple form, with at most a subbasal interior spine or spur, and lacking any spines or other protuberances, expansions, abrupt turns or twists in the apical half, and almost equally simple cerci, with either no dorsal modifications or only weakly developed interior-dorsal projections, and lacking clumps of long setae or any well-defined spines or spurs.</p> <p>With this definition two additional species Drepanosticta sumatrana Sasamoto &amp; Karube, 2007 and D. tenella Lieftinck, 1935, both from Sumatra, are included, this is discussed further below. We have excluded species from east of Huxley’s line from consideration because although some are morphologically similar with D. carmichaeli and its allies (for instance at least some species of the D. moluccana -group defined by van Tol 2007), they are very unlikely to have any genuinely close relationship with them.</p> <p>Within the D. carmichaeli -group most species have the dorsal surfaces of the head and synthorax entirely dark. Drepanosticta carmichaeli itself is the exception, with a pale bluish transverse band across the head and pale antehumeral markings as well as a (typically) brown dorsum to the synthorax (Fig. 3a). In D. annandalei, although there is no pale band across the head, some pale markings can be present dorsally on the synthorax (see Fig. 1a where a faint poorly defined paler area can be seen above the mesopleural suture near the wing bases), but these are poorly defined and never approach the antehumeral markings present in D. carmichaeli. In males of D. annandalei examined for this study, the subtriangular area defined by and including the bifurcated section of the middorsal carina behind the mesostigmal plates is pale (Fig. 1a). The prothorax is always simple in both sexes in this group, with at most slight lateral expansions to the rear at the dorsolateral margin of the posterior pronotal lobe (Fig. 1c).</p> <p>The genital ligula of the species in the D. carmichaeli -group, where it has been studied, is rather simple, with a broad internal fold and a terminal segment narrower than the internal fold, divided into a pair of apical arms (concave between the arms) which themselves expand to some degree apically in most included species (Figs 3e, 5c, 7e, 8e, 12d).</p> <p>The cerci of the species in the D. carmichaeli -group, as implied by the definition above, are mostly rather similar to each other, in dorsal view relatively broad at base with either no interior-dorsal projections (as in D. annandalei) or a weak, flap or corner like interior-dorsal projection around the point where the cerci turn downwards in lateral view (as in D. carmichaeli). In lateral view the cerci are usually directed slightly upward and taper from base, reaching a minimum (giving a rather pinched or petiolate appearance) at around half-length where they turn downwards and expand ventrally at least slightly, in most species this expansion is abrupt (the exceptions are D. wildermuthi sp. nov. and D. tenella, where the cerci only expand gently), sometimes with a distinct heel at the start of the expanded part (for instance in D. emtrai and D. vietnamica) which often has a slightly blade-like appearance (for instance in D. hongkongensis) when a distinct heel is absent. The Sumatran D. sumatrana has relatively straight cerci and a slight dorsal apical expansion but otherwise conforms to the above description. The subbasal spur on the paraprocts (referred to as basal by Fraser (1931b, 1933 but it is not actually at the base of the paraprocts), when present, can be from interiorly to dorsally directed and varies from a narrow spine to a fairly broad based, almost rounded structure; when not strongly dorsally directed (so easily visible in lateral view) it can be difficult to see. In almost all species included in the group the paraprocts, viewed ventrally, taper rather evenly after the base to a sharp or at least narrow apex. The exception is D. annandalei where in ventral view the paraprocts are of fairly even width and relatively robust in their apical half and have a rounded apex with a slight subapical interior hook. Because of its paraproct structure we consider D. annandalei to only provisionally belong to the D. carmichaeli -group and also retain some reservations about the inclusion of D. sumatrana.</p> <p>Measurements of the species of the D. carmichaeli -group are summarized in Table 1.</p> </div>	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/03AA87DBFF83FF935599C5CFFB614A21	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	Phan, Quoc Toan;Yokoi, Naoto;Makbun, Noppadon;Joshi, Shantanu;Subramanian, K. A.;Ngo, Quoc Phu;Dow, Rory A.	Phan, Quoc Toan, Yokoi, Naoto, Makbun, Noppadon, Joshi, Shantanu, Subramanian, K. A., Ngo, Quoc Phu, Dow, Rory A. (2021): A review of the Drepanosticta carmichaeli-group, with the description of D. wildermuthi sp. nov. from the Central Highlands of Vietnam (Odonata: Zygoptera: Platystictidae). Zootaxa 5067 (2): 187-210, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5067.2.2
03AA87DBFF81FF955599C147FD0E49FB.text	03AA87DBFF81FF955599C147FD0E49FB.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Drepanosticta annandalei : Fraser 1924	<div><p>Drepanosticta annandalei Fraser, 1924</p> <p>(Figure 1a–j)</p> <p>Drepanosticta annandalei: Fraser (1924): Original description, pp. 412–413, Fig. 12 (terminal segments of abdomen including appendages); Fraser (1931b): Fig. 4 (appendages in lateral view), Plate 1; Fraser (1933): pp. 148–149, Fig. 70 (appendages in lateral view).</p> <p>Drepanosticta? annandalei: Chhotani et al. (1983): Record of two females from South Andamans, p. 474, Figs 1–2 (wings venation).</p> <p>Specimens examined. 2 ♂♂, <a href="http://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=92.96802&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=12.5523" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 92.96802/lat 12.5523)">Moriss Dera</a> (12.5523 N, 92.96802 E, altitude 32 m), Middle Andaman Island, India, 09.ix.2017, Pichai Santhakumar leg. (NZC); 2 ♂♂, same location and collector, 13.iv.2018; 1 ♂, 2 ♀♀, <a href="http://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=92.656&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=11.72" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 92.656/lat 11.72)">Bamboo Teri</a> (11.720 N, 92.656 E, altitude 28 m), Ferrargunj, South Andaman Island, India, 12.xii.2013, Gurusamy Srinivasan leg. (NZC); all specimens have been examined by K.A. Subramanian.</p> <p>Notes. Fraser (1924) described D. annandalei from one adult male and a teneral male and female from Mount Harriet, South Andaman Island. An illustration (Fig. 12 in plate 24) of the male anal appendages in lateral view was provided. On the separation of D. annandalei from D. carmichaeli Fraser (1924: 413) merely states that it is distinguished by “its simple black and white colouring”. However it is clear from the description in Fraser (1924) that the male lacks antehumeral stripes and that abdominal S9–10 are entirely black, which also separates the two species. Moreover it is implicit in Fraser’s description that the pale markings on S8 are white (or whitish), not blue as in D. carmichaeli. The holotype of D. annandalei may no longer exist, according to Kimmins (1966) it was in the Indian Museum. However according to a footnote in the appendix to Kimmins (1966: 223) the entomological collections of the Indian Museum were later transferred to the Zoological Survey of India “but enquiry revealed that most of these types could not be traced, possibly lost by flood damage during wartime storage.” Sheela et al. (2016) do not list the species in their catalogue of the types in the National Zoological Collection of India. The recently collected material from South and Middle Andaman Island reported here generally agrees with Fraser’s description, although the sides of the synthorax are darker than it suggests (presumably this is due to variation) the markings of the terminal abdominal segments are in good agreement.</p> <p>Although Fraser’s illustration of the male anal appendages may not inspire much confidence, when compared against Fig. 1g –i here it is actually fairly accurate. The anal appendages provide additional characters to separate D. annandalei from D. carmichaeli, the cerci viewed laterally have a more robust build than those of D. carmichaeli and have a strongly petiolate appearance at the midpoint with the apical part broadly expanded ventrally and lacking a distinct ventral heel, while the paraprocts are more robust, lack subbasal spurs and have rounded apices with a slight inward hook in ventral view (Fig. 1g –i).</p> <p>Drepanosticta annandalei is also distinguished easily from all other species in the D. carmichaeli -group excepted D. sumatrana by S9–10 largely black as opposed to having at least some pale coloration dorsally on one or both of these segments in the remaining species of the group. Fraser (1924) notes for the synthorax that in the type “the middorsal carina and upper part of humeral suture” were paler than the rest, as noted above the paler area at the mesopleural suture is visible in the recently collected material and the subtriangular area defined by and including the bifurcated section of the middorsal carina behind the mesostigmal plates is pale; this later is an unusual character in the group.</p> <p>It is worthwhile to note here, in order to prevent any future confusion, that in the type collection of NHMUK there is a specimen labelled as Drepanosticta annandalei. However this specimen is not Fraser’s D. annandalei, it originates from Jalor in Peninsular Thailand and the name on the labels is an unrealized manuscript name of Laidlaw’s. Laidlaw wrote about this specimen on two occasions, in 1907 (Laidlaw &amp; Förster 1907) as Platysticta quadrata and later (Laidlaw 1931) as Drepanosticta sp., stating that “I do not care to name this species …”. The specimen concerned is actually allied to D. hamadryas Laidlaw, 1931, possessing a “distinct beard-like brush” on the cerci (Laidlaw 1931: 188), although at some point after Laidlaw wrote the terminal part of the abdomen including the anal appendages was lost.</p> <p>Distribution. India (Andaman Islands) (Fig. 13).</p></div> 	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/03AA87DBFF81FF955599C147FD0E49FB	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	Phan, Quoc Toan;Yokoi, Naoto;Makbun, Noppadon;Joshi, Shantanu;Subramanian, K. A.;Ngo, Quoc Phu;Dow, Rory A.	Phan, Quoc Toan, Yokoi, Naoto, Makbun, Noppadon, Joshi, Shantanu, Subramanian, K. A., Ngo, Quoc Phu, Dow, Rory A. (2021): A review of the Drepanosticta carmichaeli-group, with the description of D. wildermuthi sp. nov. from the Central Highlands of Vietnam (Odonata: Zygoptera: Platystictidae). Zootaxa 5067 (2): 187-210, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5067.2.2
03AA87DBFF87FF955599C13DFC234F89.text	03AA87DBFF87FF955599C13DFC234F89.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Drepanosticta brownelli : Tinkham 1938	<div><p>Drepanosticta brownelli Tinkham, 1938</p> <p>(Figures 2a–e)</p> <p>Drepanosticta brownelli: Tinkham (1938): original description from Guangdong, South China, Figs 1–2 (appendages in dorsal &amp; dorso-lateral view); Wilson (1997): Guangdong, pp. 59–61, Figs 26–27 (appendages, rearranged from Tinkham 1938), Figs 30–31 (genital ligula in lateral &amp; dorsal view); Wilson &amp; Reels (2003): Guangxi, pp. 271; Dow et al. (2018): p. 274, examined specimens from Guangdong, China; Zhang (2019): brief notes and photographs of both sexes, pp. 1373–1374.</p> <p>Specimens examined. 2 ♂♂, Nankushan Mountain, Guangdong Province, South China, 28.v.2009, Zhang Haomiao leg. (KPMNH); 1 ♂, Sanyatung Forest Park, Conghua City, Guangdong, China, 15.v.2010, same collector, in coll. Dow.</p> <p>Notes. This species is only known from Guangdong and Guangxi Provinces in South China (Tinkham 1938, Wilson 1997, Wilson &amp; Reels 2003, Dow et al. 2018, Zhang 2019). It is closely allied to D. hongkongensis from Hong Kong, which was treated as D. brownelli by Asahina (1987). The synthorax is mostly dark in both species and their anal appendages are very similar to each other. In describing D. hongkongensis Wilson (1997) noted differences between the males of the two in size (D. brownelli larger), the color of the anterior pronotal lobe (white in D. brownelli, entirely dark in D. hongkongensis), the color of the terminal abdominal segments and the genital ligula (the differences in the genital ligula are reproduced in our key below). Interestingly Tinkham (1938: pp. 17–18) mentions “a dull white cuneiform marking, with the point down, about centrally placed on the metepimeron [presumably referring to the metepisternum in modern terminology]” but Wilson (1997) does not mention this marking. A pale centrally placed marking on the metepisternum is present in the specimens examined in this study, although its size and exact shape are variable (visible but faded in Fig. 2a) and a white marking in this position is visible in the photograph of male D. brownelli in Zhang (2019: 1373) and this marking is mentioned as a diagnostic character in the text on the following page. We do not know if the pale metepisternum marking was absent in Wilson’s specimens or if he overlooked it or did not consider it diagnostic, but no such marking is present in any specimen of D. hongkongensis seen by us. Of the other characters mentioned by Wilson (1997), the size character holds when D. brownelli is compared with D. hongkongensis specimens from Hong Kong but as noted in Dow et al. (2018) specimens from Vietnam are larger, overlapping with D. brownelli. Similarly (and again as noted in Dow et al. 2018) the anterior pronotal lobe of specimens of D. hongkongensis from Ba Vi National Park in Vietnam have large yellow marks laterally on the anterior pronotal lobe, so this character is not generally diagnostic either. The other characters listed by Wilson (1997) do appear to hold generally (although the genital ligula has not been examined for variation in multiple specimens), in particular the pale dorsal coloration of the terminal abdominal segments is always paler than those of D. hongkongensis, although slightly contrary to one comment in Wilson’s paper this color is very pale greyish blue in the male from Sanyatung Forest Park, even viewed under strong light. It is worth remarking here that Asahina’s (1987: Fig. 39) illustration (reproduced as Fig. 17 in Wilson 2017) of D. hongkongensis shows two pale marks low on the metepimeron, but these markings are not present on most D. hongkongensis material examined by us and do not provide a diagnostic character. Although Wilson (1997) provided a brief description of the female of D. brownelli he did not provide any illustrations; unfortunately no female specimen of D. brownelli was available for our study.</p> <p>Distribution. China (Guangdong and Guangxi Provinces) (Fig. 13).</p></div> 	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/03AA87DBFF87FF955599C13DFC234F89	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	Phan, Quoc Toan;Yokoi, Naoto;Makbun, Noppadon;Joshi, Shantanu;Subramanian, K. A.;Ngo, Quoc Phu;Dow, Rory A.	Phan, Quoc Toan, Yokoi, Naoto, Makbun, Noppadon, Joshi, Shantanu, Subramanian, K. A., Ngo, Quoc Phu, Dow, Rory A. (2021): A review of the Drepanosticta carmichaeli-group, with the description of D. wildermuthi sp. nov. from the Central Highlands of Vietnam (Odonata: Zygoptera: Platystictidae). Zootaxa 5067 (2): 187-210, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5067.2.2
03AA87DBFF85FF9B5599C389FF234AAF.text	03AA87DBFF85FF9B5599C389FF234AAF.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Drepanosticta carmichaeli (Laidlaw 1915)	<div><p>Drepanosticta carmichaeli (Laidlaw, 1915)</p> <p>(Figures 3–4)</p> <p>Drepanosticta polychromatica Fraser, 1931 Synonym Nov.</p> <p>Protosticta carmichaeli: Laidlaw (1915): Original description, pp. 390–391, Fig. 3 (appendages in lateral view) from “Singla, Darjiling Dist., 1.500 ft. ”, West Bengal, India.</p> <p>Drepanosticta carmichaeli: Laidlaw (1917): pp. 341–342, Fig. 1 (head &amp; thorax), Fig. 4 (terminal segments of male abdomen in dorsal &amp; lateral view), Fig. 5 (wings), plates 14–15; Fraser (1931a): p. 67, Fig. 2d (genital ligula in lateral view); Fraser (1931b): Figs 3, 4, Plate 2 (appendages in lateral and dorsal lateral views), pp. 337–338 (description of male and female specimens); Fraser (1933): Fig. 67 (wings), Fig. 68 (appendages in lateral &amp; dorsal view), pp. 142–143; Bhasin (1953): Records from Dehradun and Almora, Uttarakhand, pp. 66; Prasad (1974): Records from Garwhal Hills, Uttarakhand, remarks on variation, pp. 41; Prasad &amp; Singh (1976): Records from Dehradun, notes on variation, pp. 121; Prasad &amp; Singh (1994): Records from Rajaji National Park, Uttarakhand, pp. 195, 202. Kalkman et al. (2020): Distribution in South Asia: Bhutan, India, Nepal, Pakistan, pp. 10; Anonymous (2021): Records and photographs from India.</p> <p>Drepanosticta polychromatica: Fraser (1931b): Original description, p. 8; Fraser (1933): pp. 144–145 (description of male specimens); Kalkman et al. (2020): pp. 10, 61.</p> <p>Specimens examined. 2 ♂♂, 1 ♀, Tarbere river (probably <a href="http://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=89.0&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=26.23433" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 89.0/lat 26.23433)">Teesta river</a>, 26.23433 N, 89.0000 E, 1000m), Sakka, Darjeeling, India, 3.vii.1963, Syoziro Asahina leg. (NMNS); 3 ♂♂, 1 ♀, India, Arunachal Pradesh, East Kameng District, <a href="http://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=93.011&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=26.9585" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 93.011/lat 26.9585)">Seijosa</a> (26.9585 N, 93.011 E), 28.iv.2003, Krushnamegh Kunte leg. (NCBS).</p> <p>Notes. Kalkman et al. (2020: Note 7 on p. 61) already commented on the probable synonymy of Drepanosticta polychromatica with D. carmichaeli. After examining the type specimen of the former via photographs we can confirm this synonymy as discussed below.</p> <p>Laidlaw (1915) described Protosticta carmichaeli from two males from Singla in Darjeeling (within present day Darjeeling district in West Bengal), also listing two female specimens from the same location but noting that the “condition of the female specimens is such as to make description impossible” Laidlaw (1915: 390). He stated that the terminal segments of the abdomen are entirely black and also that the dorsal surface of the head and the entire thorax is black (bronzy black dorsally, “underneath dull black”), however the description was made from “spirit specimens, all in poor condition”, pale markings are often difficult or impossible to discern in such specimens. Fig. 3 in Laidlaw (1915) shows cerci with a distinct ventral heel in their apical part in lateral view, no subbasal spur on the paraprocts is mentioned and no such spur is visible in the illustration, but this is just as likely to be an accidental omission of a detail. We do not know the current whereabouts of any part of the type series of D. carmichaeli, from Laidlaw (1915) it is implicit that it was in the Indian Museum. Sheela et al. (2016) do not list the species in their catalogue of the types in the National Zoological Collection of India and it is not listed in the current type database of the NHMUK or by Kimmins (1970). Laidlaw (1917: 340) states that “with a fair number of specimens at hand I have been able to deposit a paratype in the British Museum and in my own collection”, however he had additional material in 1917 (see below) it seems that the “ paratypes ” he refers to were not actually part of the type series and therefore not paratypes in the currently accepted sense. Similarly although Fraser (1933) mentions that he had “ paratypes ” in his collection it is highly doubtful that these specimens were actually paratypes (in fact since the type series only consists of four specimens, since Fraser (1933) uses the plural, it is impossible for all specimens mentioned by Laidlaw (1917) and Fraser (1933) as “ paratypes ” to actually be paratypes). There are three specimens (all male) of D. carmichaeli in NHMUK that clearly came from the Indian Museum (from photographs showing the specimens and labels provided by Benjamin Price on 15.x.2021). Two of these are from the series treated by Laidlaw (1917) and therefore not part of the type series. The third specimen has labels stating “Peshoke Spur, Darjiling Dist”, “H.S. Lister” and “Ind. Mus.” Despite having been in the Indian Museum and originating from Darjeeling the other information does not agree with that given for the type series in Laidlaw (1915). Other specimens in NHMUK of D. carmichaeli have different information. Unfortunately it is likely that the actual type series no longer exists.</p> <p>Laidlaw (1917) erected the genus Drepanosticta for carmichaeli and, partly working from fresh material in better condition from Kalimpong (collected in 1916) and Pashok (collected in 1915), both in present day West Bengal, close to the type locality (Singla), gave a description and illustrations based on two males with blue bands across the vertex, synthorax “golden-brown” at the sides and becoming “brown-black” ventrally, blue antehumeral stripes, a “pale, silvery blue” stripe on the metepisternum and S8–9 blue dorsally with a blue basal mark dorsally on S10 (see Fig. 4 in plate 14 in Laidlaw 1917). As shown in Laidlaw’s Fig. 1 in plate 14 the pale stripe on the metepisternum runs from the wing bases, where it is broad, and tapers toward the spiracle, just reaching the metakatepisternum. The caption to the same figure states “Unshaded parts of [syn]thorax and prothorax bright blue, doted parts olive-brown” which compared with the figure implies that the pronotum of the specimen illustrated was olive-brown centrally with blue bands to either side (on all three lobes) and the dorsum of the synthorax was olive-brown. This is rather contradictory to what is written in the main text in the same publication, where it is stated that the prothorax “is olive-green dorsally …” rather than olive-brown as in the figure caption. The antehumeral stripes are well defined and complete, but narrower centrally than at either end, in the male illustrated in Fig. 1 in plate 14 in Laidlaw (1917). Although difficult to see, Fig. 4a in plate 14 in Laidlaw (1917) also shows a distinct ventral heel on the cerci in lateral view, but again no subbasal spur is visible on the paraprocts or mentioned in the text. Laidlaw (1917) notes in the captions to plate 14 that Fig. 1 was ”Drawn from spirit specimen in collection of Indian Museum” but no such comment is made on Fig. 4, so that might have been made from a different specimen.</p> <p>Fraser (1931b) listed D. carmichaeli from the same locations given by Laidlaw (1917), giving a description and illustrations of the anal appendages. It is not clear if Fraser had additional material from the these to that listed by Laidlaw but the months he lists (April to July) are not identical to those given by Laidlaw (1917: April to June) and the measurements that he gives for the male are also not identical (abdomen 36–37 mm, Hw 23–24 mm but abdomen 36 mm, Hw 24 mm in Laidlaw 1917). Interestingly Fraser (1931b) does not include Darjeeling in the distribution of D. carmichaeli, this omission was presumably accidental but unfortunate, especially given that he described D. polychromatica from Darjeeling in the same paper. Fraser (1931b: 337) states that the antehumeral stripes of the male are “ill-defined” and that S8–10 are blue dorsally and describes “a broad, slightly oblique pale blue stripe traversing the whole length of mesepimeron”. It should be noted that Fraser used mesepimeron to denote what would now be referred to as the mesepimeron plus metepisternum (see Fig. 3 in Fraser 1933) so that the stripe on the mesepimeron he mentions is presumably on the metepisternum with modern terminology (otherwise his description is at odds with any specimen or image purporting to be this species seen by us). Fraser’s (1931b) illustration of the anal appendages of the male does not show a distinct heel on the cerci in lateral view (Fig. III in Plate II), although a weak, rounded heel is visible in the dorsal-lateral view (Fig. IV in Plate II), however many of Fraser’s illustrations from this period are over simplified and cannot be relied upon to accurately show diagnostic characters. The subbasal spur on the paraprocts is mentioned for the first time in Fraser (1931b) but is not visible in the illustrations. Fraser (1933) merely reproduces the text and illustration of the anal appendages of D. carmichaeli from Fraser (1931b), the only addition is Fig. 67 showing a forewing (this is not stated but follows from the counts of Px in the description). We are not aware of anything published after Fraser (1933) that includes information that would add to this discussion except in Prasad &amp; Singh (1976) who report variation in size and wing venation in specimens from Dehradun.</p> <p>Fraser (1931b) described the male of D. polychromatica from Gopaldhara in Darjeeling, India and noted that it is closely allied with D. carmichaeli. Gopaldhara is about 27 km south of the type locality of D. carmichaeli. The number of specimens available to Fraser is not stated, he does state that the type is in his collection (and therefore should now be in NHMUK) and only gives single measurements rather than ranges for the abdomen and Hw, suggesting that he only had one specimen, however this is not definitive. There is a specimen labelled as D. polychromatica in the type collection at NHMUK, with a label by D.E. Kimmins stating “I believe this to be the type” and a holotype label (Fig. 4a–c) but no label by Fraser indicating that it is actually the type, however given the lack of any evidence to the contrary we assume that it is the type and it agrees well in details of wing venation with Fraser’s description.</p> <p>In the key in Fraser (1931b: 337) D. carmichaeli is distinguished from D. polychromatica by “Pterostigma slightly longer than broad; thorax with ill-defined blue stripes, blackish brown beneath” (D. carmichaeli) compared with “Pterostigma squared; thorax with well-defined blue stripes, pale beneath” (D. polychromatica). Under D. carmichaeli Fraser (1931b: 338) states that D. carmichaeli is distinguished from D. polychromatica by “its larger size, different character of the thoracic markings, different shape of pterostigma, distal origin of Riv + v [R 4, arising at the subnodus in D. polychromatica but proximal to the subnodus in Fraser’s material of D. carmichaeli] and longer Cuii [CuP].” Under D. polychromatica Fraser (1931b: 338) states “The sharply defined blue and dark brown stripes on the sides form the best medium for separating these two closely-allied species but in addition it is to be noted that whilst the thorax of D. carmichaeli is lighter than that of D. polychromatica, the abdomen is strikingly darker; the 10 th abdominal segment is blue in the former, unmarked in the latter.” On the anal appendages of D. polychromatica Fraser wrote “shaped similarly to those of D. carmichaeli but the inferiors stouter and the basal spine less pronounced.” No additional information is given in Fraser (1933) and D. polychromatica does not appear to have been recorded since.</p> <p>As far as the wing venation characters Fraser uses to separate the two species go, R 4 arises at the subnodus in all males in the series from Arunachal Pradesh (which are D. carmichaeli by the characters of color and pattern used by Fraser) examined by us, so this is clearly a variable character. In the same series from Arunachal Pradesh the length of CuP is actually longer than in D. polychromatica, so again this character is non-diagnostic.As noted above Prasad &amp; Singh (1976) already commented on some variation in wing venation. The shape of the pterostigma is variable even in single specimens in the series from Arunachal Pradesh and includes the condition seen in D. polychromatica so this character is also non-diagnostic. This leaves only the coloration of the synthorax and S10. In the series from Arunachal Pradesh the venter of the synthorax is pale near the abdomen but darkens towards the legs, so this character is also variable. The exact length of the pale lateral marking on the synthorax is somewhat variable even in the series from Arunachal Pradesh and variation can be seen in the extent of these stripes in the males identified as D. carmichaeli on Anonymous (2021), the degree of definition of this stripe also appears variable, as does the ground color of the synthorax. The male D. carmichaeli specimen from Darjeeling in Asahina’s collection agrees well in the coloration of the synthorax with the D. polychromatica holotype.</p> <p>The subbasal spurs on the paraprocts are variably visible in individual specimens of D. carmichaeli, so that the apparent difference noted by Fraser also seem to be merely variation. Fraser does not mention any other differences in the anal appendages of D. polychromatica and D. carmichaeli but of course this does not mean that there are no other differences. The anal appendages of the holotype of D. polychromatica are shown in lateral view in Fig. 4c, those of D. carmichaeli in Fig. 3b, d. Although at first sight there appears to be a difference in the length of the apical downturned part of the cerci between the two, the cerci of the D. polychromatica holotype are crossed over each other, making the apical parts look shorter in lateral view (Fig. 4c). Moreover the heel on the cerci is variably developed and even the length of the downturned part of the cerci relative to the rest appears somewhat variable in the series from Arunachal Pradesh, so again these characters are non-diagnostic. This leaves only the color of S10 to separate the two taxa and although S10 is blue dorsally in all specimens of D. carmichaeli seen by us (Fig. 3b), there is some variation in its extent and there is no reason to suppose that it is not entirely absent on some individuals. In conclusion there do not appear to be any genuinely diagnostic differences between D. carmichaeli and D. polychromatica and we consider that the latter is a junior synonym of the former.</p> <p>Distribution. India (Arunachal Pradesh; Sikkim; Uttarakhand; West Bengal), Bhutan, Pakistan and Nepal (Fig. 13).</p></div> 	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/03AA87DBFF85FF9B5599C389FF234AAF	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	Phan, Quoc Toan;Yokoi, Naoto;Makbun, Noppadon;Joshi, Shantanu;Subramanian, K. A.;Ngo, Quoc Phu;Dow, Rory A.	Phan, Quoc Toan, Yokoi, Naoto, Makbun, Noppadon, Joshi, Shantanu, Subramanian, K. A., Ngo, Quoc Phu, Dow, Rory A. (2021): A review of the Drepanosticta carmichaeli-group, with the description of D. wildermuthi sp. nov. from the Central Highlands of Vietnam (Odonata: Zygoptera: Platystictidae). Zootaxa 5067 (2): 187-210, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5067.2.2
03AA87DBFF89FF9C5599C1C9FE9F4ADB.text	03AA87DBFF89FF9C5599C1C9FE9F4ADB.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Drepanosticta emtrai Dow, Kompier & Phan 2018	<div><p>Drepanosticta emtrai Dow, Kompier &amp; Phan, 2018</p> <p>(Figure 5a–d)</p> <p>Drepanosticta emtrai: Dow et al. (2018): Original description, Figs 1 –16, 21, holotype from Huong Son of Ha Tinh Province, Vietnam, paratypes from Nghe An and Hanoi Provinces, Vietnam and Bolikhamsai, Laos.</p> <p>Drepanosticta sp.1: Yokoi &amp; Souphanthong (2014): Plate 2, p. 25 (habitus photo male); Fig. 9, p. 53 (appendages in lateral view).</p> <p>Specimens examined. 2 ♂♂, Khe Kem (18.9729 N, 104.8168 E, altitude 273 m), <a href="http://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=104.8168&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=18.9729" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 104.8168/lat 18.9729)">Pu Mat National Park</a>, Nghe An Province, Vietnam, 14.v.2019, Q. T. Phan leg. (ZCDTU); 1 ♀, Khe O (18.9118 N, 104.9242 E, altitude 66 m), <a href="http://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=104.9242&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=18.9118" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 104.9242/lat 18.9118)">Pu Mat National Park</a>, Nghe An Province, Vietnam 12.v.2019, Q. T. Phan leg. (ZCDTU); 2♂, Son Kim 2 Commune (18.4387 N, 105.2146 E, altitude 127 m), <a href="http://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=105.2146&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=18.4387" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 105.2146/lat 18.4387)">Huong Son District</a>, Ha Tinh Province, Vietnam, 09.v.2015, Q. T. Phan leg. (ZCDTU); 3 ♀♀, same location, 05.vii.2018, Q. T. Phan leg. (ZCDTU); 4 ♂♂, <a href="http://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=103.595&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=19.0329" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 103.595/lat 19.0329)">Ta Thom Village</a> (19.0329 N, 103.5950 E, altitude 355 m), Muangngan District, Xieng Khuoang Province, Laos, 27.v.2017, Naoto Yokoi leg. (ZCDTU).</p> <p>Notes. The Laotian D. emtrai differs from the type series (from Dow et al. 2018) by the pale yellow lateral stripe on the male synthorax (Fig. 5a) and the apices of the arms of the genital ligula more expanded (Fig. 5c) compared to a bluish lateral stripe and less expanded in the D. emtrai description. Although not noted in Dow et al. (2018) at least one of the paratypes of D. emtrai has more expanded apices of the arms of the genital ligula. It is noted in Dow et al. (2018) that some of the paratypes have the metepisternum completely dark. Although there is clearly considerable variation in the presence, color and extent of the marking on the metepisternum in this species, as well as the extent of pale color on S8, the abdominal pattern and structure of appendages of specimens from Laos (Fig. 5b) agree well with D. emtrai.</p> <p>Distribution. Vietnam (Hanoi City, Nghe An &amp; Ha Tinh Provinces); Laos (Bolikhamsai &amp; Xieng Khuoang Provinces) (Fig. 13).</p></div> 	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/03AA87DBFF89FF9C5599C1C9FE9F4ADB	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	Phan, Quoc Toan;Yokoi, Naoto;Makbun, Noppadon;Joshi, Shantanu;Subramanian, K. A.;Ngo, Quoc Phu;Dow, Rory A.	Phan, Quoc Toan, Yokoi, Naoto, Makbun, Noppadon, Joshi, Shantanu, Subramanian, K. A., Ngo, Quoc Phu, Dow, Rory A. (2021): A review of the Drepanosticta carmichaeli-group, with the description of D. wildermuthi sp. nov. from the Central Highlands of Vietnam (Odonata: Zygoptera: Platystictidae). Zootaxa 5067 (2): 187-210, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5067.2.2
03AA87DBFF8EFF9C5599C05DFA994D3C.text	03AA87DBFF8EFF9C5599C05DFA994D3C.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Drepanosticta hongkongensis : Wilson 1997	<div><p>Drepanosticta hongkongensis Wilson, 1997</p> <p>Drepanosticta brownelli: Asahina (1987): Full description of material from Hong Kong, pp. 15–16, Figs 30–47.</p> <p>Drepanosticta hongkongensis: Wilson (1997): Shown to be distinct from D. brownelli, named, pp. 60–63, Figs 17–25, 28–29 (all reproduced from Asahina (1987), holotype from Tai Mo Shan, Hong Kong; Dow et al. (2018): p. 279, notes on specimens from Guangdong and Hong Kong, China and Tay Thien and Ba Vi, Vietnam; Zhang (2019): Distribution, brief notes, photographs of both sexes, p. 1376.</p> <p>Specimens examined. As listed in Dow et al. (2018: 279).</p> <p>Notes. As noted in Dow et al. (2018: 279, 281) the paraprocts of male D. hongkongensis possess short, blunt subbasal spurs. Also as noted in Dow et al. (2018: 279) specimens from Hong Kong and South China are very constant in their markings but some variation occurs in the markings of the prothorax and metepisternum of Vietnamese material, which is also larger. Also see the remarks under D. brownelli above.</p> <p>Distribution. China (Fujian, Guangdong, Guangxi, Hong Kong) and Vietnam (Ba Vi, Tay Thien) (Fig. 13).</p></div> 	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/03AA87DBFF8EFF9C5599C05DFA994D3C	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	Phan, Quoc Toan;Yokoi, Naoto;Makbun, Noppadon;Joshi, Shantanu;Subramanian, K. A.;Ngo, Quoc Phu;Dow, Rory A.	Phan, Quoc Toan, Yokoi, Naoto, Makbun, Noppadon, Joshi, Shantanu, Subramanian, K. A., Ngo, Quoc Phu, Dow, Rory A. (2021): A review of the Drepanosticta carmichaeli-group, with the description of D. wildermuthi sp. nov. from the Central Highlands of Vietnam (Odonata: Zygoptera: Platystictidae). Zootaxa 5067 (2): 187-210, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5067.2.2
03AA87DBFF8EFF9E5599C676FCA94E24.text	03AA87DBFF8EFF9E5599C676FCA94E24.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Drepanosticta jurzitzai : Hamalainen 1999	<div><p>Drepanosticta jurzitzai Hämäläinen, 1999</p> <p>(Figures 6–7)</p> <p>Drepanosticta jurzitzai: Hämäläinen (1999): Original described based on male specimens from Chanthaburi Province, Thailand, Fig. 1 (prothorax in dorsal view), Figs 2–3 (appendages in lateral and dorsal view); Hämäläinen &amp; Pinratana (2000): Record of females from the Khao Soi Dao Wildlife Sanctuary, Chanthaburi Province, Thailand, p. 157.</p> <p>Specimens examined. 1 ♂, 1 ♀, <a href="http://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=102.1221&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=12.83811" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 102.1221/lat 12.83811)">Krating</a> waterfall (12.83811 N, 102.1221 E, altitude 78 m), Chantaburi, Thailand, 29.iv.2019, Noppadon Makbun leg. (ZCDTU).</p> <p>Notes. Hämäläinen (1999) stated that D. jurzitzai differs from D. brownelli, D. hongkongensis and D. vietnamica by its pale colored pterostigma. In the holotype of D. jurzitzai the pterostigma is indeed pale colored. However, in the specimens examined in this study, from the type location of D. jurzitzai, the pterostigma is dark. It appears that the color of the pterostigma is variable (probably related to maturity) in D. jurzitzai and is therefore not a reliable diagnostic character. The anal appendages of the male of D. juritzai (Fig. 7b–d) are very similar to those of D. brownelli (Fig. 2c–e) and D. hongkongensis (Wilson 1997: Fig. 21) except that the subbasal spur on the paraprocts is only variably present, it also shares pale dorsal markings on each of S8–10 with these species. It can easily be separated from D. carmichaeli by the lack of antehumeral stripes or a pale band across the dorsum of the head (Fig. 6a) and from all of the remaining species in the D. carmichaeli- group based on the form of the cerci in lateral view (Fig. 7c). At least among the species occurring in mainland Southeast Asia, a pale stripe on the metepisternum that is connected to the metakatepisternum (see Fig. 6a) is shared only with D. wildermuthi sp. nov. (Fig. 10a), and this character will serve to distinguish it from D. brownelli and D. hongkongensis in which either no pale mark is present on the metepisternum or only a small mark disconnected from the metakatepisternum is present. Additionally, the genital ligula of D. jurzitzai (Fig. 7e) appears to have a broader terminal segment with the arms more expanded apically than in either D. brownelli or D. hongkongensis (compare with the figures in Wilson 1997).</p> <p>First description of the female. Head (Fig. 6e–f). Basal half labrum black, anterior half labrum, anteclypeus, mandible and genae whitish-blue. Postclypeus and frons shining black. Antenna dark brown except the second segment which is dark yellowish. Vertex and occiput entirely black. Ocelli pale orange-brown.</p> <p>Thorax. Prothorax. Anterior pronotal lobe largely yellowish; middle and posterior pronotal lobe yellowish with a large oval pale yellow marking dorsally on the middle pronotal lobe (Fig. 6e); posterior pronotal lobe well developed, posterior margin slightly curved upward in lateral view (Fig. 6g), slightly produced to rear at corners in dorsal view (Fig. 6h). Propleuron entirely black. Synthorax (Fig. 6e). Mesepisternum black with long yellowish antehumeral stripes, broad at base, narrower posteriorly; mesepimeron entirely black. Metepisternum black with a yellowish stripe, covering the spiracle and connected to metakatepisternum. Metepimeron black with a blue mark in the upper corner near the wing bases, lower half yellow. Legs (Fig. 6e). Coxa and trochanter entirely yellow; femur yellow, flexor and extensor surfaces brownish; tibia black; tarsus and claws dark yellow. Wings hyaline, 16–17 Px in both wings. Pterostigma dark reddish, covering one underlying cell (Fig. 7h).</p> <p>Abdomen. S1–2 brown, ventrally yellowish; S3 mostly brown, anterior margin yellowish; S4–6 dark brown, broad pale basal annulus, black apically. S7 black dorsally and ventrally, with a large white spot basally; S8 black dorsally with large yellow lateral-basal spot; S9 dark reddish brown, apical 1/3 with blue dorso-lateral marking, posterior margin black; basal half of S10 blue, apical half whitish, the sides dark reddish brown (Fig. 7f–g). Anal appendages. Cerci same length as S10, dark yellowish. Ovipositor mostly dark brown basally and black apically (Fig. 7f–g).</p> <p>Measurements (in mm). Abdomen with anal appendages 34, Hindwings 26.</p> <p>Distribution. Thailand (Chanthaburi Province) (Fig. 13).</p></div> 	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/03AA87DBFF8EFF9E5599C676FCA94E24	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	Phan, Quoc Toan;Yokoi, Naoto;Makbun, Noppadon;Joshi, Shantanu;Subramanian, K. A.;Ngo, Quoc Phu;Dow, Rory A.	Phan, Quoc Toan, Yokoi, Naoto, Makbun, Noppadon, Joshi, Shantanu, Subramanian, K. A., Ngo, Quoc Phu, Dow, Rory A. (2021): A review of the Drepanosticta carmichaeli-group, with the description of D. wildermuthi sp. nov. from the Central Highlands of Vietnam (Odonata: Zygoptera: Platystictidae). Zootaxa 5067 (2): 187-210, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5067.2.2
03AA87DBFF8CFF9F5599C57EFD54496B.text	03AA87DBFF8CFF9F5599C57EFD54496B.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Drepanosticta sumatrana : Sasamoto & Karube 2007	<div><p>Drepanosticta sumatrana Sasamoto &amp; Karube, 2007</p> <p>Drepanosticta sumatrana: Sasamoto &amp; Karube (2007): Original description, holotype male only, Bandar Baru, North Sumatra, Indonesia, pp. 55–57, Figs 5–8.</p> <p>Notes. Sasamoto &amp; Karube (2007) described D. sumatrana from a single male (collected in 1992) from North Sumatra, we are not aware of any subsequent record of this species. From the description and illustrations in Sasamoto &amp; Karube (2007) the species must at least provisionally (awaiting the discovery of the female) be included in the D. carmichaeli -group since its posterior pronotal lobe and paraprocts meet the definition, as do the cerci although they are atypical in that they run almost straight along their dorsal surface viewed laterally and possess a slight apical dorsal expansion (Fig. 7a in Sasamoto &amp; Karube 2007). Judging from the description and illustrations there is no subbasal spur on the paraprocts in this species. The species is also somewhat atypical in that the arms of the terminal segment of the genital ligula not expanded apically but tapered, and the dorsal surfaces of the terminal abdominal segments are apparently without pale markings: Sasamoto &amp; Karube (2017: 57) mentioned that there was only a large “baso-ventral yellow marking” on S8, a “small comma-shaped marking baso-laterally” on S9, and S10 is entirely black.</p> <p>Distribution. Indonesia (Sumatra) (Fig. 13)</p></div> 	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/03AA87DBFF8CFF9F5599C57EFD54496B	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	Phan, Quoc Toan;Yokoi, Naoto;Makbun, Noppadon;Joshi, Shantanu;Subramanian, K. A.;Ngo, Quoc Phu;Dow, Rory A.	Phan, Quoc Toan, Yokoi, Naoto, Makbun, Noppadon, Joshi, Shantanu, Subramanian, K. A., Ngo, Quoc Phu, Dow, Rory A. (2021): A review of the Drepanosticta carmichaeli-group, with the description of D. wildermuthi sp. nov. from the Central Highlands of Vietnam (Odonata: Zygoptera: Platystictidae). Zootaxa 5067 (2): 187-210, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5067.2.2
03AA87DBFF8DFF9F5599C28DFD544C64.text	03AA87DBFF8DFF9F5599C28DFD544C64.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Drepanosticta tenella : Lieftinck 1935	<div><p>Drepanosticta tenella Lieftinck, 1935</p> <p>Drepanosticta tenella: Lieftinck (1935): Original description of both sexes, “Gisting and environs”, Mount Tanggamus, Lampung, Sumatra, p. 7, Fig. 1; Lieftinck (1954): Distribution (western Sumatra added without details), habitat, p 37.</p> <p>Notes. Lieftinck (1935) described D. tenella from the south of Sumatra, giving illustrations of the male anal appendages in dorsal and lateral view. Unfortunately Lieftinck’s description is made largely by comparison to the earlier published description (Lieftinck 1929) of D. gazella Lieftinck, 1929 from Java (which does not belong in the D. carmichaeli -group based on the structure of its posterior pronotal lobe, also see the discussion here). Later Lieftinck (1954) added the west of Sumatra to the distribution of D. tenella without giving any details. The illustrations of the anal appendages of D. tenella in Lieftinck (1935) show cerci conforming to our definition of the D. carmichaeli - group (in fact resembling those of D. wildermuthi sp. nov., in lateral view) and also paraprocts conforming to the group, with a clear subbasal spur visible in both dorsal and lateral views. Although parts of the paraprocts are not visible in Lieftinck’s illustrations he states that they are “shaped much as in gazella ” and the paraprocts of D. gazella lack any character to distinguish it from the species of the D. carmichaeli -group. The prothorax of both sexes of D. tenella also conforms to the definition of the D. carmichaeli -group and we therefore include it in that group. The genital ligula of D. tenella has not been illustrated. Based on the measurements provided by Lieftinck (1935) this is the smallest member of the D. carmichaeli -group. However these measurements are from a single population and it is very likely that greater variation would be found if additional specimens were measured.</p> <p>Distribution. Indonesia (Sumatra) (Fig. 13)</p></div> 	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/03AA87DBFF8DFF9F5599C28DFD544C64	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	Phan, Quoc Toan;Yokoi, Naoto;Makbun, Noppadon;Joshi, Shantanu;Subramanian, K. A.;Ngo, Quoc Phu;Dow, Rory A.	Phan, Quoc Toan, Yokoi, Naoto, Makbun, Noppadon, Joshi, Shantanu, Subramanian, K. A., Ngo, Quoc Phu, Dow, Rory A. (2021): A review of the Drepanosticta carmichaeli-group, with the description of D. wildermuthi sp. nov. from the Central Highlands of Vietnam (Odonata: Zygoptera: Platystictidae). Zootaxa 5067 (2): 187-210, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5067.2.2
03AA87DBFF8DFF9F5599C7BEFABD4FE8.text	03AA87DBFF8DFF9F5599C7BEFABD4FE8.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Drepanosticta vietnamica : Asahina 1997	<div><p>Drepanosticta vietnamica Asahina, 1997</p> <p>(Figure 8a–f)</p> <p>Drepanosticta vietnamica: Asahina (1997): Original description from Lai Chau Province, North Vietnam, pp. 107–108, Figs 1–2 (head &amp; thorax and appendages); Dow et al. (2018): pp. 279–280, Figs 17–20 (figures of head, thorax and appendages based on paratype).</p> <p>Specimens examined. 3 ♂♂, <a href="http://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=103.595&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=19.0329" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 103.595/lat 19.0329)">Ta Thom Village</a> (19.0329 N, 103.5950 E, altitude 355 m), Muangngan District, Xiang Khuoang Province, Laos, 29.v.2017, Naoki Yokoi leg. (ZCDTU); 1 ♂, 11km southeast <a href="http://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=102.054&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=20.6079" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 102.054/lat 20.6079)">Muang Xay</a> (20.6079 N, 102.0540 E, altitude 1053 m), Oudomxay Province, Laos, 11.v.2004, Naoki Yokoi leg. (ZCDTU).</p> <p>Notes. Drepanosticta vietnamica is a new addition to the Laotian fauna. This species was originally described from northern Vietnam by Asahina (1997) based on two male specimens with one figure of the head and thorax (in lateral view) and one figure of the anal appendages (Figs 1–2 in Asahina 1997). Recently Dow et al. (2018) provided figures of D. vietnamica based on the paratype male (with the same collection date and location as the holotype). The body coloration and structure of the Laotian specimens match well with the original description of D. vietnamica (Asahina 1997). This species differs from all other species in the D. carmichaeli –group by the yellowish markings dorsally on S9–10 (Fig. 8c), as opposed to these segments black or with blue markings in other members of the group. However this difference may well not be reliable since the yellow marking in dorsal S9–10 of male D. vietnamica might be due to the preservation (for instance, see the case of the paratype males of D. wildermuthi sp. nov.). Within the D. carmichaeli -group the structure of the anal appendages of D. vietnamica is most similar to D. carmichaeli and D. emtrai with a distinct ventral heel on the cerci (compare Figs 3d, 5b) (Fig. 8d). The female of D. vietnamica remains unknown.</p> <p>Distribution. Vietnam (Lai Chau Province) &amp; Laos (Oudomxay &amp; Xiang Khuoang Provinces) (Fig. 13).</p></div> 	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/03AA87DBFF8DFF9F5599C7BEFABD4FE8	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	Phan, Quoc Toan;Yokoi, Naoto;Makbun, Noppadon;Joshi, Shantanu;Subramanian, K. A.;Ngo, Quoc Phu;Dow, Rory A.	Phan, Quoc Toan, Yokoi, Naoto, Makbun, Noppadon, Joshi, Shantanu, Subramanian, K. A., Ngo, Quoc Phu, Dow, Rory A. (2021): A review of the Drepanosticta carmichaeli-group, with the description of D. wildermuthi sp. nov. from the Central Highlands of Vietnam (Odonata: Zygoptera: Platystictidae). Zootaxa 5067 (2): 187-210, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5067.2.2
03AA87DBFF92FF825599C76DFBB54E84.text	03AA87DBFF92FF825599C76DFBB54E84.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Drepanosticta wildermuthi Phan & Yokoi & Makbun & Joshi & Subramanian & Ngo & Dow 2021	<div><p>Drepanosticta wildermuthi sp. nov. Phan</p> <p>(Figures 9–12)</p> <p>Holotype. 1 ♂, Doi Cao, <a href="http://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=107.6889&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=11.64306" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 107.6889/lat 11.64306)">Bao Loc District</a>, Lam Dong Province (11.64306 N, 107.6889 E, altitude 746 m), 15.iv.2017, Quoc Toan Phan leg.</p> <p>Paratypes. 1 ♀, same data as holotype; 4 ♂♂, 2 ♀♀, same location, 12.xii.2016, Dang Ngoc Van leg.; 1 ♂, Dong Tien Commune (11.29833 N, 107.9906 E, altitude 776 m), <a href="http://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=107.9906&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=11.29833" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 107.9906/lat 11.29833)">Ham Thuan Bac District</a>, Binh Thuan Prov., 1.x.2015, Dang Ngoc Van leg.; 1 ♂, Hoa Phong Commune (12.47806° N, 108.4617° E, altitude 749 m), <a href="http://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=108.4617&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=12.47806" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 108.4617/lat 12.47806)">K’Rong Bong District</a>, Dak Lak Prov., 10.iv.2017, Dang Ngoc Van leg.</p> <p>Type deposition. All type specimens of the new species are deposited in the ZCDTU, Danang city, Vietnam.</p> <p>Etymology. Wildermuthi, a noun in the genitive case, after Hansruedi Wildermuth (born in 1941) from Switzerland, in appreciation of his support of the first author’s odonatological research in Vietnam via the International Dragonfly Fund.</p> <p>Description of holotype. Head (Fig. 10a). Labrum pale yellow, black along free margin. Genae and anteclypeus pale yellow. Mandible bases dark reddish. Postclypeus, vertex, frons, occiput and underside of head black entirely black. Ocelli yellowish. Antenna dark yellowish, basal segment black.</p> <p>Thorax (Fig. 10a–c). Prothorax. Propleuron almost entirely dark brown and black. Anterior pronotal lobe dark yellowish; middle pronotal lobe mostly dark. Posterior pronotal lobe black, free margin rounded in lateral view (Fig. 10b). Synthorax (Fig. 10a). Mesepisternum, mesepimeron entirely black. Metepisternum black with a yellowish stripe, covering the spiracle and connected to metakatepisternum, not reaching the wing bases. Metepimeron entirely yellow. Legs (Fig. 10a). Coxa and trochanter entirely yellow; femur yellow, darker distally; tibia pale brown with narrow, faint, irregular dark stripe along much of extensor surface; tarsus and claw dark yellow. Wings. 14–15 Px in both wings. Pterostigma (Fig. 11c) dark brown centrally, irregularly yellowish around this, covering slightly more than one underlying cell.</p> <p>Abdomen (Figs 9a, 11a–b). S1–2 dark brown above, yellowish below. S3–8 dark brown, black apically with broad pale basal annulus, poorly delineated pale areas laterally, these large on S3–4, becoming smaller on successive segments except S8 where there is a large yellowish area laterally. S9 blue dorsally, dark brown and black below, dark yellow at margin of tergite, sternite dark yellow. S10 black with a blue mark dorsally, ventrally dark yellow (Fig. 11a–b).</p> <p>Anal appendages (Fig. 12a–c). Cerci dark brown and paraprocts yellowish with brown areas dorsally and apically, both are ca. 3 times length of S10. In lateral view cerci strongly arched, broad at base, narrower at middle point and then downturned and gradually expanding to rounded apices; in dorsal view narrowing from base and expanding slightly at apices where somewhat hollowed interiorly, converging strongly at apices, which overlap. Paraprocts broad at base and narrower to the tip, simple structurally without subbasal spurs, in dorsal view converging at apices, in lateral view directed slightly upward so that apices are obscured by the cerci. Genital ligula (Fig. 12d) of typical form for the genus with two short flagella that are slightly expanded distally so approximately spoonshaped.</p> <p>Measurements (in mm). Abdomen with anal appendages 35, Hindwings 24.</p> <p>Description of female paratype. As male except as noted: middle pronotal lobe of prothorax largely brownish; latero-distal margin of posterior pronotal lobe with short triangular-shaped processes at the corners of the free margin (Fig. 10d–f). Px 16 in both wings. S7–10 including appendages brownish; ovipositor dirty yellowish, extending beyond cerci (Fig. 11d).</p> <p>Measurements (in mm). Abdomen with anal appendages 32, Hindwings 24.</p> <p>Variation in paratype males. In two paratype males from Bao Loc the pale markings on the terminal segments of the abdomen are yellow, not blue as in the holotype. This difference might be due to imperfect preservation by the collector. Px: 14–16 Px in both wings; Measurement (in mm): Abdomen with anal appendages 35–38; Hindwings 23–25.</p> <p>Variation in paratype female. Body color pattern, Px count and the measurements of the paratype female not different from the paratype used for the description of the female.</p> <p>Differential diagnosis. The male of D. wildermuthi sp. nov. is easily distinguished from all other species in the D. carmichaeli -group except D. tenella by the form of its anal appendages, with the cerci seen in lateral view (Fig. 12b) only gradually expanding from the downturn to rounded apices. It is distinguished from D. tenella by having S8 without pale coloration dorsally but such coloration present on S9–10 (Fig. 11a–b), the opposite condition is seen in D. tenella.</p> <p>Remarks. Judging from the illustrations in Lieftinck (1935) D. wildermuthi sp. nov. is also distinguished from D. tenella by the lack of subbasal spurs on the paraprocts, this character is not mentioned in the diagnosis above only because insufficient material of D. tenella has been checked to be sure that the subbasal spurs are always present.</p> <p>Distribution. Vietnam (Dak Lak, Lam Dong &amp; Binh Thuan Provinces) (Fig. 13).</p></div> 	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/03AA87DBFF92FF825599C76DFBB54E84	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	Phan, Quoc Toan;Yokoi, Naoto;Makbun, Noppadon;Joshi, Shantanu;Subramanian, K. A.;Ngo, Quoc Phu;Dow, Rory A.	Phan, Quoc Toan, Yokoi, Naoto, Makbun, Noppadon, Joshi, Shantanu, Subramanian, K. A., Ngo, Quoc Phu, Dow, Rory A. (2021): A review of the Drepanosticta carmichaeli-group, with the description of D. wildermuthi sp. nov. from the Central Highlands of Vietnam (Odonata: Zygoptera: Platystictidae). Zootaxa 5067 (2): 187-210, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5067.2.2
03AA87DBFF90FF835599C5EBFA7C4ADD.text	03AA87DBFF90FF835599C5EBFA7C4ADD.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Drepanosticta Laidlaw 1917	<div><p>Provisional key to mature males of Drepanosticta carmichaeli- group</p> <p>The characters of the genital ligula used in the last couplet of the key are taken from Wilson (1997) and the reader is referred to the figures in that paper.</p> <p>1 A blue band present on the dorsum of the head between the compound eyes and blue antehumeral stripes at least partially present on the synthorax (Fig. 4a)................................................................... carmichaeli</p> <p>- No blue band present on the dorsum of the head between the compound eyes and no antehumeral stripes present......... 2</p> <p>2 Cerci in lateral view only gradually expanding from their narrowest point to the apices.............................. 3</p> <p>- Cerci in lateral view immediately expanding after their narrowest point …........................................ 4</p> <p>3 Abdominal S8 without pale dorsal markings, S9–10 with pale dorsal markings (Fig. 11a)................... wildermuthi</p> <p>- Abdominal S8 with some pale dorsal markings, S9–10 without pale dorsal markings...................... tenella</p> <p>4 Cerci running almost straight along their upper margin. Abdominal S8–S10 lacking pale dorsal markings........ sumatrana</p> <p>- Cerci downturned around half the length. At least one of abdominal S8–10 with some pale markings dorsally............ 5</p> <p>5 Cerci with a distinct, well-developed ventral heel immediately after their narrowest point............................ 6</p> <p>- Cerci with no distinct ventral heel or at most a slight, rounded ventral heel immediately after their narrowest point........ 7</p> <p>6 Ventral heel on cerci well defined but small, no pale color dorsally on S8, pale dorsal marks on S9–10 yellowish-white (Fig. 1c)........................................................................................ vietnamica</p> <p>- Ventral heel on cerci larger, at least some blue dorsally on S8, pale dorsal marks on S9–10 blue (Fig. 6b)........... emtrai</p> <p>7 Pale dorsal markings on the terminal abdominal segments confined to S8 (Fig. 2c)......................... annandalei</p> <p>- At least some pale dorsal markings on all of S8–10.......................................................... 8</p> <p>8 A well-defined pale stripe, running from the metakatepisternum most of the length of the metepisternum present (Fig. 7a)................................................................................................. jurzitzai</p> <p>- Metepisternum either entirely dark or with a most a small pale mark or stripe disconnected from the metakatepisternum... 9</p> <p>9 Metepisternum entirely dark, S8–10 with bright blue dorsal markings. Arms of terminal segment of genital ligula smoothly curved with slightly angled apices..................................................................... hongkongensis</p> <p>- Metepisternum typically with a small centrally positioned pale mark, S8–10 with greyish white to very pale blue dorsal markings. Arms of terminal segment of genital ligula sharply reflexed (almost at a right angle) near their origin and with acutely curved apices.................................................................................. brownelli</p></div> 	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/03AA87DBFF90FF835599C5EBFA7C4ADD	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	Phan, Quoc Toan;Yokoi, Naoto;Makbun, Noppadon;Joshi, Shantanu;Subramanian, K. A.;Ngo, Quoc Phu;Dow, Rory A.	Phan, Quoc Toan, Yokoi, Naoto, Makbun, Noppadon, Joshi, Shantanu, Subramanian, K. A., Ngo, Quoc Phu, Dow, Rory A. (2021): A review of the Drepanosticta carmichaeli-group, with the description of D. wildermuthi sp. nov. from the Central Highlands of Vietnam (Odonata: Zygoptera: Platystictidae). Zootaxa 5067 (2): 187-210, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5067.2.2
