Talk:Dinopanorpa

Monophyly
This last bit doesn't make sense to me: The genus is still monotypic, though an undescribed new species has been reported. Dr. V. Zherikhin reported but never figured the new specomen from the Paleocene Tadushi Fromation, also in Primorsky Krai in a 1978 publication but no further study of the specimen has happened. Millifolium (talk) 08:20, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
 * How about this wording:
 * "Though the genus is considered monophyletic at this time, an undescribed new species has been reported. In a 1978 publication Dr. V. Zherikhin reported, but did not illustrate or figure, a scorpionfly specimen which belongs to a new species of Dinopanorpa from the Paleocene Tadushi Fromation in Primorsky Krai.  However since the 1978 reference no further study of the specimen has occurred and the species remains unnamed."--Kevmin (talk) 20:55, 10 March 2010 (UTC)