FNZ 19 - Mantodea (Insecta) - Classification
Ramsay, GW 1990. Mantodea (Insecta), with a review of aspects of functional morphology and biology. Fauna of New Zealand 19, 96 pages.
(
ISSN 0111-5383 (print),
;
no.
19.
ISBN 0-477-02581-1 (print),
).
Published 13 Jun 1990
ZooBank: http://zoobank.org/References/9BB875C2-A2DF-4BCE-9CAF-985FFC0FCAB2
Classification
Knowledge of the Mantodea is insufficiently advanced as yet for a definitive classification to have been produced; the system is still developing (Roy 1987a). In 1839, when Audinet-Serville produced his monograph on the Orthoptera, the mantids were placed in one family and classified according to the size and shape of the prothorax. In 1869 Saussure proposed a classification using prothorax characters and the shape of the eyes. He subsequently refined this (1870b), but then (1872a) developed another classification comprising two divisions: the Nudipèdes, in which all genera lacking extensions or expansions on the head, abdomen, and legs were included; and the Lobipèdes for the genera in which such expansions were present. Within each of these he recognised two main groupings, based in one on the shape of the pronotum at the point where the coxae are attached, and in the other on the shape of the antennae. Stål (1873) regarded these characters as being of secondary significance, and suggested that the structure of the raptorial leg, especially the tibia, was of prime importance. In 1877 he proposed an alternative classification in which the mantid genera were arranged in six subfanilies based on the form and structure of the raptorial legs and of the eyes.
The English orthopterologists Westwood (1889) and Wood-Mason (1889) uncritically accepted Stål's system. Brunner von Wattenwyl (1893) examined both systems, pointed out various spurious generic associations that resulted, and proposed a new classification derived from the good points of both. He suggested that there are six main groups, distinguished firstly by characteristics of the raptorial legs and then by characters such as the shape of the pronotum, the form of the antennae, and whether or not the legs have lobes. This system was adopted by Sharp (1895) in his contribution to the 'Cambridge Natural History'. Kirby (1904), in the first volume of his 'Synonymic Catalogue of 0rthoptera', arranged the mantids in one family comprising eight subfamilies. Giglio-Tos (1914, 1917b, 1919) developed these concepts of mantid classification, his work culminating in the 1927 'Das Tierreich' review in which he recognised 32 subfamilies within the single family Mantidae. Then Beier commenced his researches, and the system was changed yet again (Beier 1934a-c, 1935a-c). The Giglio-Tos system was unsatisfactory in that it resulted in a superficial association of unrelated groups and genera. For example, the orthoderinids were grouped with the eremiaphilids. In Beier's system, in which eight families were recognised, many of the Giglio-Tos groups were downgraded or merged with others, new subfamilies were recognised, and the old system was revamped to give a more natural classification, better reflecting phylogenetic relationships. This is the system presented in Beier's 1964 and 1968 reviews and which has been accepted. by Richards & Davies (1977) and Brown (1982).
Chopard, in his 1949 'Traité de Zoologie' review, recognised thirteen families, with twelve subfamilies in the Mantidae. His system has not been adopted by more recent researchers. In the currently accepted system there are eight families, of which the Amorphoscelidae have two subfamilies, the Hymenopodidae three, the Mantidae twenty-one, and the Empusidae two. The bulk of the species are in subfamily Mantinae of the Mantidae. The large number of subfamilies is not satisfactory, and some - especially those with good diagnostic characters such as the Thespinae, Iridopteryginae, Sibyllinae, Orthoderinae, and Deroplatyinae - should be promoted to full family status (Roy 1987a). The New Zealand species belong in the family Mantidae, one in subfamily Orthoderinae, the other in Mantinae.
The cytology of praying mantids, especially their sex chromosome mechanism, may have some significance in the higher classification of the group (White 1951, 1965).
In general, mantid classification is based on the form of the raptorial forelegs and of the antennae, the shape of the pronotum and of the compound eyes, and colour. Male genital structure and details of wing venation are not used to any great extent, and female genital structure not at all.
Paulian (1957) illustrated the male genitalia of many of the Madagascan species he redescribed, and mentioned some wing characters, but did not use this information in identification keys or classification. Male genital characters were used by Beier (1955) to discriminate between the species of Miomantis in South Africa.
It is likely that the structure of both male and female genitalia - the shape of the hypophallus, pseudophallus, and so on; the shape of the ovipositor valves - will provide useful characters for higher categories of classification, as well as at the species level. The finer details of wing venation may be useful in this context as well. Regrettably such information is not available for most mantid species. In the present work all these structures are described and illustrated in detail, so that the information will be available for future reviews of mantid classification.