Research Article Journal of Orthoptera Research 2021, 30(1): 87-94 Revision of the tusked bush-crickets (Tettigonioidea: Pseudophyllinae: Dicranostomus) with description of the hitherto unknown sexes KLAUS-GERHARD HELLerR!, MATTHIAS HELB2 1 Grillenstieg 18, 39120 Magdeburg, Germany. 2 Spessartstr. 101, 63457 Hanau, Germany. Corresponding author: Klaus-Gerhard Heller (heller.volleth @t-online.de) Academic editor: Ming Kai Tan | Received 17 December 2020 | Accepted 3 February 2021 | Published 3 June 2021 http://zoobank.org/4BE14BC8-A200-42AA-BC49-6DE823F62085 Citation: Heller K-G, Helb M (2021) Revision of the tusked bush-crickets (Tettigonioidea: Pseudophyllinae: Dicranostomus) with description of the hitherto unknown sexes. Journal of Orthoptera Research 30(1): 87-94. https://doi.org/10.3897/jor.30.62170 Abstract The genus Dicranostomus belongs to the very few Orthoptera with elon- gated mandibular processes, here called tusks. However, it is also one of the least studied genera from whose two species only one female and two males have been known so far. We present additional material from both species and sexes that confirms that the males have the relatively longest (2-2.8 times pronotal length) tusks of all Orthoptera. Surprisingly, the fe- males of both species differ in this character: females of D. monoceros have tusks and those of D. nitidus do not. Based on a comparison with other species, we hypothesize that the species use holes that males can defend and use to monopolize the females. Keywords Eucocconotini, mandible, Peru, South America, taxonomy, weapon Introduction In many species of animals, males possess elaborate structures used mainly in intraspecific fights over access to females (Emlen 2008). Among mammals, well-known examples include antlers in deers, horns in bovids, and tusks in elephants. In many, but not all, of these species, the weapons are also found in a reduced ver- sion in females. In insects, impressive examples of such structures are observed, e.g., in Lucanidae (stag beetles; see Emlen 2008 for other species). Such weapons are relatively rare among Orthoptera. There are some species where the mandibles are enlarged only in males (see review in Field and Deans 2001, Gorochov 2012), but only in very few species are these special structures found to be used (or, with good reasons, assumed to be used) in the context of antagonistic intraspecific contacts. Males with tusks are found in five species of the family Anostostomatidae [see Field and Deans 2001; in the New Zealand tusked wetas, a monophyletic group of three species in two genera (Trewick and Morgan-Richards 2004) and in two South African species, in Libanasidus vittatus (Kirby, 1899) and in Libanasa capicola (Péringuey, 1916)]. In the super- family Tettigonioidea, there are two genera with tusks. Three spe- cies of the Neotropical genus Listroscelis Serville, 1831 (Listroce- lidinae) have one asymmetrical tusk on the left mandible only (Fialho et al. 2014), while the two known species of the Neotrop- ical genus Dicranostomus Dohrn, 1888 (Pseudophyllinae) have a tusk on both mandibles. Dicranostomus nitidus Brunner von Wat- tenwyl, 1895, so far known only from two males, has the relative- ly longest tusks of all Orthoptera, ranging from 2 to 2.7 times the pronotal length (Brunner von Wattenwyl 1895, Gurney 1950). The second species was, until recently, known from a single fe- male that, interestingly, also bears tusks, but which are distinctly shorter than that of male D. nitidus. Having obtained some more specimens of this fascinating genus, including the missing sexes of both species, we herein revise the genus and provide a review of all available data. Methods All specimens were dried, pinned, and photographed using a CANON EOS 1200D. Photos of cerci and mirrors were taken us- ing a dissecting microscope (OLYMPUS SZ Binocular Stereo Zoom Microscope) and a digital camera (SONY Cyber-shot DSC-P120). The inter-tooth distances were measured as the mean between every eleven teeth (ten intervals), starting at the anal end, using ADOBE PHOTOSHOP Elements 6. The specimens, collected between 2013 and 2018, were obtained from a trader with an export license (http://gerfor.regionloreto.gob. pe/dublincore/biblioteca/descargar/4269/4500000100020_7.PDF). Depositories.— CH Private collection of K.-G. Heller; C_Helb Private collection of M. Helb; ISNB Institut Royal des Sciences Naturelles de Belgique, Brussels, Belgium; MZPW Polish Academy of Science, Museum of the Institute of Zoology Warszawa, Poland. JOURNAL OF ORTHOPTERA RESEARCH 2021, 30(1) 88 Results Taxonomy Family Tettigoniidae Krauss, 1902 Subfamily Pseudophyllinae Burmeister, 1838 Tribe Eucocconotini Beier, 1960 Genus Dicranostomus Dohrn, 1888 Type species: Dicranostomus monoceros Dohrn, by original monotypy Redescription.—|based on Dohrn 1888 (in Latin), Beier 1960 (in German)]. Medium sized (body length 2.5-4.0 cm), yellowish-brown animals (habitus; Fig. 1). Head as broad as pronotum or broad- er. Frons shiny, smooth. Fastigium frontis elongated, curved or straight. Fastigium verticis compressed, narrow, with longitudi- nal furrow. Antennae very long, scapus unarmed. Male mandi- ble at base with a very long, horizontally directed tusk (Fig. 2). Pronotum smooth or slightly granulated, with delicate anterior and medially deeply incised posterior sulcus; metazona flat, only slightly longer than mesozona, laterally no edges, humeral sinus very weak; side lobes longer than high, ventrally nearly straight K.-G. HELLER AND M. HELB and finely edged, caudally weakly ascending, anterior edges even more broadly rounded than the also broadly rounded posterior edges. Openings of the tympanic organ in the fore tibia direct- ing dorsally, slit-like. Auditory prothoracal spiracle quite small, just below the respiratory spiracle. Tegmina just surpassing abdo- men, gradually becoming narrow, costal area with wide-meshed veins, Sc (subcosta) and R veins separated. The male mirror on both the left and right wing is translucent (Fig. 3). Teeth in strid- ulatory file regularly spaced (Fig. 4). Rs (radius sector) arising at the beginning of the apical quarter, media (M) and Sc stalked. Alae roundish, shorter than tegmina. Prosternum with two close spines between prothoracic legs. Mesosternal lobes pointed. Metafurcal pit deep. Middle coxae two-pronged. All femora ven- trally armed. Inner genicular lobes of mid and hind femora with spine. Fore tibiae dorsally at the inner edge with a series of small humps. Mid tibiae dorsally with one to three spines internally. Supraanal plate triangular or rounded. Male cerci thick, nearly straight, with subapical spine and apical process (Fig. 5). Male subgenital plate distally narrowed, styli rod-like. Female subgen- ital plate transverse, slightly incised. Ovipositor short, relatively broad and slightly up-curved, at the upper edge very delicately crenulated (Fig. 6). Distribution.—South America, Peru (Fig. 7). Fig. 1. Male habitus of A. Dicranostomus monoceros and B. D. nitidus (same scale for both figures). JOURNAL OF ORTHOPTERA RESEARCH 2021, 30(1) K.-G. HELLER AND M. HELB 89 Fig. 2. Morphological details of Dicranostomus monoceros (A-D) and D. nitidus (E—H; same scale for corresponding figures). A, E. Male head lateral; B, EF Male head frontal; C, G. Female head frontal; D, H. Female head semilateral. JOURNAL OF ORTHOPTERA RESEARCH 2021, 30(1) 90 Key to species (after Brunner von Wattenwyl 1895) 1 Pronotum weakly granulated. Knees and _ spines legs Bake Fi ie St Pieced Seidel Ait ted Se a et eto de D. monoceros on - Pronotum smooth, glossy. Spines on legs and knees same color as De eae ee Napattyaa sh. Meili tea eR ee Saws geet ne ne a sa a D. nitidus Dicranostomus monoceros Dohrn, 1888 Figs LA, 2A—D, 3A, B, 4A, 5A, 6A Dicranostomus monoceros Dohrn, 1888: 362 Holotype.—PERU e 92; Cumbasi Peruviae ad Huallagam; [Cumba- za|; MZPW. [photos in Cigliano et al. 2021]. Material examined.—PERU ¢ 26); San Martin Region, Prov. Rioja, Nueva Cajamarca; 10 Nov. 2016; local collector; C_Helb8771-C_ Helb8772 ¢ 19, 14; San Martin Region, Prov. Rioja, Nueva Ca- jamarca; Mar. 2018; local collector; C_Helb8773-C_Helb8774 e 24; San Martin Region, Prov. Rioja, confluente Altomayo river/ Naranjos; 8 Mar. 2018 & 25 Apr. 2018; local collector; C_Helb8775, 3 C_Helb8776. Remarks.—Up to now, the species was known only by the female holotype. In one female (C_Helb8773), the right foreleg is irregu- larly developed. Its tibia does not have a tympanic organ or dorsal black tubercles (Fig. 2). Redescription.—General characters as genus. K.-G. HELLER AND M. HELB Male. Fastigium frontis elongated horizontally (Fig. 2), man- dibles each with one long (2.1-2.8 times as long as pronotum) process (tusk) (Figs 1, 2; Table 1). Pronotum weakly granulated. Fore and mid femora ventrally with 3 spines, hind femora with 4 spines at anterior edge. Fore tibiae dorsally with 2-3 large, black, blunt spine-like tubercles at the anterior and two small tubercles at the posterior edge, ventrally with ca. 6 spines on both sides, mid tibia dorsally with 1-2 spines on posterior edge, ventrally with ca. 6 spines on both sides, hind tibia with ca. 8 spines on all edges, the dorsal larger than the ventral spines. Mirror cell in left tegmen triangular with broadly rounded distal tip, on right tegmen larger, subquadratical (Fig. 3). Stridulatory file on lower side of left tegmen with ca. 130 regularly spaced teeth (inter-tooth interval 20-23 jam; Fig. 4; n=1 file). Supraanal plate transverse, distally rounded. Subgenital plate elongated, with ca. 1 mm long styli. Cerci with internal subapical spine and blunt apical process directed very slightly inwards. Female. General characters as genus and male. Mandibles each with one long (0.8-0.9 times as long as pronotum), slightly upcurved process (tusk). Subgenital plate transverse, at the end straightly cut and distally slightly notched in the middle. Coloration. Head with tusks and pronotum chestnut (tusks becoming darker towards the tips); legs yellowish, but knees, tym- panic organ and tubercles in the fore tibia and larger spines in all legs black. Tegmina as in D. nitidus (see below). In some animals, the anterior and central lower parts of the paranota are brighter and more yellowish than the other parts. Measurements.—See Table 1. Bate i as ‘ ( i} 2 i Pas ey fii 1” ae te Fig. 3. Mirror cells of Dicranostomus monoceros (A, B) and D. nitidus (C, D). A, C. Left tegmen; B, D. Right tegmen. Scale bar: 5 mm. Table 1. Measurements of males and females of both species of Dicranostomus (*data from Beier 1960). Species Specimen Sex # body body + tusk pronotum D. monoceros type* 2 28 6.5 C_Helb8773 2 32 35 6.5 C_Helb8771 3 oF, 41 6 C_Helb8772 3 32 44 7 C_Helb8774 3 29 44 6 C_Helb8775 3 27 40 6.5 C_Helb8776 3 28.5 40 6.5 D. nitidus type* 3 30 vi Gurney 1950 3 35 58 7.5 CH4220 3 38 53 7.5 C_Helb8769 3 36 47 7.5 C_Helb8770 2 33 7.5 C_Helb8777 3 36 49 7.5 Measurements (in mm) forefemur hindfemur — tegmen antenna tusk ovipositor 10.5 19 27 - 6 15 10.5 16.5 23 120 5.5 15.5 10 14.5 20 95 16 11 16 21.5 95 15 10.5 15.5 22 95 16.5 10.5 16 21 16.5 15.5 21 80 17 11.5 20 vie 14 12 19 26 20 12 20.5 27 18 12 19.5 26 72 13.5 12 20 28.5 100 17.5 13 19 27.5 68 17 JOURNAL OF ORTHOPTERA RESEARCH 2021, 30(1) K.-G. HELLER AND M. HELB A Dicranostomus nitidus Brunner von Wattenwyl, 1895 Figs 1B, 2E-H, 3C, D, 4B, 5B, 6B Dicranostomus nitidus Brunner von Wattenwyl, 1895: 180 Holotype-—PERU ® no details; ISNB. [photos in Cigliano et al. 2021]. Published record.—PERU ¢ 13; Department of Huanuco, Fundo Sinchono, 37 miles east of Tingo Maria on the road to Pucallpa; 1700 maz.s.l.; 5 Aug. 1947; Jose Schunke leg.; (Gurney 1950). Material examined.—PERU ¢ 13; Oxapampa; Feb.—Apr. 1984; Rain- er Marx leg.; CH4220 e 14, 19; Prov. Huanuco, Huanuco Road, between Huanaco and Tingo Maria, Malqui [Macora?] town, fog area [sic]; Aug. 2013; local collector; C_Helb8769-C_Helb8770 e 13; San Martin Region, Prov. Rioja, Nueva Cajamarca; Mar. 2018; local collector [assumed exchange of labels—see list for localities of monoceros]|; C_Helb8777 Remark.—The species was known only by the male holotype and another male, described by Gurney (1950). Reescription.— General characters as genus. Male. Fastigium frontis elongated horizontally (Fig. 2), mandi- bles each with one long (1.8-2.7 times as long as pronotum) pro- cess (tusk) (Figs 1, 2, Table 1). Pronotum smooth. Fore and mid femora ventrally with 3-4 spines, hind femora with 4-6 spines at anterior edge. All tibiae ventrally with several spines on both sides; however, hind tibia ventrally only with few spines at tip of poste- 40 = 3 oo a ier) i=) tT RTA fh | Se Inter-tooth distance anal : | C 0 basal 0 100 Tooth number Fig. 4. Stridulatory files in Dicranostomus. A. D. monoceros (C_ Helb8775); B. D. nitidus (CH4225); C. Inter-tooth distances (specimens as in A, B). Scale bars: 1 mm (A, B). 91 Fig. 5. Male cerci of A. Dicranostomus monoceros and B. D. nitidus. Scale 1 mm. A Fig. 6. Ovipositor of A. Dicranostomus monoceros and B. D. nitidus (same scale for both figures). Fig. 7. Distribution map of Dicranostomus (all known localities; map based on SimpleMappr (Shorthouse 2010)). JOURNAL OF ORTHOPTERA RESEARCH 2021, 30(1) 92 rior edge. Fore tibiae dorsally with 4-5 blunt spine-like tubercles at the anterior edge, ventrally with ca. 6 spines on both sides, midti- bia dorsally with 1-2 spines on posterior edge, ventrally with ca. 6 spines on both sides, hind tibia with ca. 8 spines on each edge, the dorsal larger than the ventral spines; however, ventrally only with few spines at tip of posterior edge. Mirror cells in both tegmina subquadratical; in the right larger than in the left (Fig. 3). Stridula- tory file on lower side of left tegmen with ca. 130 regularly spaced teeth (inter-tooth interval 24-32 pm = tooth density ca. 30 mm’; Fig. 4; n=1 file), Supraanal plate transverse, distally rounded, or broadly cut off. Subgenital plate elongated, with ca. 1 mm long styli. Cerci with internal subapical spine and blunt apical process, directed inwards at an angle of about 40 degrees (Fig. 5). Female. General characters as genus and male. Fastigium fron- tis elongated vertically (Fig. 2), mandibles without process (tusk). Subgenital plate transverse, at the distal end slightly and triangu- larly elongated and slightly incised in the middle. Coloration. “Head, thorax and legs chestnut, the tibiae darker, the mandibular appendages practically black, palpi pale. .... teg- men with veins brown, cellules and membrane yellowish, much brighter toward base in costal area; wing with veins pale brown, membrane slightly fuscous” (Gurney 1950). However, other speci- mens (C_Helb8769, C_Helb8777) not chestnut, but more olive- brown with pro- and metazona of pronotum darker than meso- zona or pronotum uniform. Measurements.—See Table 1. Discussion The genus Dicranostomus belongs to the tribe Eucocconotini, which is part of the supertribe Pleminiiti Brunner von Watten- wyl, 1895 (Braun 2015) (or the subfamily Pleminiinae; Gorochov 2012). Within this tribe, the genus is most similar to Gnathoclita Haan, 1843 (see Gorochov 2012), with both genera having the “dorsal surface of anterior tibiae granular or with distinctive tuber- cles” (Cadena-Castafieda and Monzon-Sierra 2014). According to the key provided by these authors, males of the two genera are eas- ily separable by their mouth parts: Dicranostomus males have tusks and Gnathoclita males have enlarged mandibles. The females, however, differ only in the presence of dorsal spine(s) on the mid- dle tibia in Dicranostomus. Only D. monoceros females have tusks like their males. Possibly, both genera can also be separated by the presence of an elongated (either horizontally or vertically) fastigi- um frontis in Dicranostomus. Such a structure is not described nor figured for any Gnathoclita (s.str.; sensu Gorochov 2018) species [see G. izerskyi Gorochov, 2018, G. peruviana Carl, 1921 (Gorochov K.-G. HELLER AND M. HELB 2014), G. laevifrons Beier, 1960, G. sodalis Brunner von Wattenwyl, 1895, and G. vorax (Stoll, 1813) (Beier 1960)], although data for females are sparse. Dicranostomus and Gnathoclita are also similar in the shape of their mirrors (compare Fig. 4 to figs 20, 21, 27, 28 in Gorochov 2018, and to fig. 7D in Hugel 2019) and—to a limited extent—in their stridulatory files. In tooth number, Dicranostomus (130 teeth) is situated between the two known Gnathoclita species (G. vorax c.101 teeth (Hugel 2019), G. sodalis 217 teeth (Montealegre-Z and Morris 1999)). The inter-tooth distances in both species (G. vorax 30 jm; G. sodalis 10 ym) correlate negatively with the carrier frequencies of their resonant songs (G. vorax, 8.8 kHz; G. sodalis, 16 kHz). From these data, it can be assumed that Dicranostomus males also sing in this audio range (but perhaps with each species at a different peak frequency) and that they can be located with unaided ears. Unfortunately, no data are available concerning the function of the most distinctive structure of Dicranostomus: the tusks. These tusks are the longest found among Orthoptera in comparison to the male body size (measured relative to pronotal length) and are clearly longer than in the well-known tusked wetas (Table 2). In Dicranostomus, the tusks do not show any indication of being stridulatory structures, as documented for some wetas (Field 2001). However, although there are no observations of the use of the tusks, there are three lines of evidence that all point in the same direction. In his review about animal weapons, Emlen (2008) writes in the context of resource-defense or female-defense mating systems: “In a surprising diversity of taxa, these critical resources were burrows or tunnels where females lay eggs, and the especially defensible na- ture of burrows may have played an important role in favoring the evolutionary enlargement of weapons in these cases.” In line with these conclusions, the three New Zealand orthopteran species with long tusks (see Table 1) all inhabit burrows in the ground or holes in trees (see Trewick and Morgan-Richards 2014 for a review). The tusked king cricket Libanasidus vittatus digs holes every night but may sometimes return to previously used holes (Bateman and Toms 1998). Also supporting these ideas, new behavioral observations in the genus Gnathoclita, sister to Dicranostomus (e.g., Gorochov 2012), have shown that G. vorax also inhabits the hollow dead stems of plants, with the males displaying “a form of mate guarding” (Hugel 2019). Thus, in our opinion, it is a plausible hypothesis that Di- cranostomus inhabits holes, probably in plant material, and that the males defend these safe places against rivals using their tusks. Holes in plants are also used by other acoustically active species like frogs (e.g., the tree hole frog Metaphrynella sundana; Lardner & bin Lakim 2002). In Disceratus Scudder, 1869, a related genus, its low acoustically determined population density is used as an argument against male to male combat (Braun 2016). Thus, other reasons for Table 2. Absolute and relative (compared to pronotum) tusk length in Orthoptera. Species Specimen(s) Sex Length (in mm) of Tusk length / Source pronotum hind femur Tusk (range) | pronotum length D. monoceros mean 3 6.4 15.5 16.2 (15.17) 25 this paper mean 2 6.5 17.8 5.8 (5-6) 0.9 this paper D. nitidus mean 3 7.4 19.6 17.1 (18-27) 22 this paper Motuweta isolata holotype 3 15 38.0 26.0 1.7 Johns 1997 paratype 3 10 28.0 9.0 0.9 Johns 1997 mean 3 12.5 33.0 17.5 1.4 Johns 1997 Motuweta riparia mean 3 a. 24.0 6.4 (3-12) 0.8 Gibbs 2002 Anisoura nicobarica holotype @ 4.6 10.6 0.0 Ander 1933 syn. monstrosa 3 6.0 c. 1.3 Salmon 1950 Libanasidus vittatus mean 3 9 21,5 7.5 (7-8) 0.8 Péringuey 1916 Libanasa capicola holotype 3 17.0 7.0 0.8 from figure; Péringuey 1916 JOURNAL OF ORTHOPTERA RESEARCH 2021, 30(1) K.-G. HELLER AND M. HELB the tusks should not be excluded. Completely unknown, however, is the function of the female tusks in D. monoceros. Females of D. nitidus do not possess tusks, but they have a strongly elongated fastigium frontis, as found in both sexes of D. monoceros and in D. nitidus males. Gwynne (2001) speculated on the probability of female-to-female interactions in D. monoceros, and certainly the ac- cess, possession, and defense of holes may be important for females as well. Unfortunately, data to confirm or deny this are missing. Acknowledgements We are grateful to Holger Braun, Sigfrid Ingrisch, Ming Kai Tan, and an anonymous referee for helpful comments on the manu- script. The Orthopterists’ Society provided free publication of this paper. Duplication of information presented in Cigliano et al. 2021 on request of the main editor. References Ander K (1933) Uber Anisoura nicobarica m., eine bemerkenswerte Laubheuschrecke aus der Familie Gryllacrididae (Orth. Saltatoria). Konowia, 12: 217-230. https://www.zobodat.at/pdf/KON_12_0217- 0230.pdf Bateman PW, Toms RB (1998) Mating, mate guarding and male-male rela- tive strength assessment in an African king cricket (Orthoptera: Mim- nermidae). Transactions of the American Entomological Society 124: 69-75. https://www.jstor.org/stable/25078654 Beier M (1960) Orthoptera Tettigoniidae (Pseudophyllinae II). In: Mertens R, Hennig W, Wermuth H (Eds) Das Tierreich. 74. Walter de Gruyter & Co, Berlin, 396 pp. Braun H (2015) On the family-group ranks of katydids (Orthoptera, Tettigoniidae). Zootaxa 3956: 149-150. https://doi.org/10.11646/ zootaxa.3956.1.10 Braun H (2016) Notes on the tropical Andean genus Disceratus (Orthop- tera, Tettigoniidae, Pseudophyllinae), the probable male of D. nu- biger, and its calling song. Journal of Orthoptera Research 25: 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1665/034.025.0102 Brunner von Wattenwyl C (1895) Monographie der Pseudophylliden. Kaiser- lich-K6nigliche Zoologisch-Botanischen Gesellschaft, Vienna, 282 pp. https://www.zobodat.at/pdf/MON-E-ORTH_0007_0001-0282.pdf Burmeister H (1838) Handbuch der Entomologie, Zweiter Band. Beson- dere Entomologie. Zweite Abtheilung Kaukerfe, Gymnognatha. Erste Halfte; vulgo Orthoptera. T.C.E Enslin, Berlin, 457-756. Cadena-Castaneda OJ, Monzon-Sierra J (2014) A new species of the ge- nus Onychopygia Beier (Orthoptera: Tettigoniidae: Pseudophyllinae) from Guatemala. Insecta Mundi 0329: 1-8. https://journals.flvc.org/ mundi/article/view/82728/79636 Carl J (1921) Phasgonurides nouveaux du Muséum de Géneve. Revue Suisse de Zoologie 28: 301-309. https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/ page/ 10708169 Cigliano MM, Braun H, Eades CD, Otte D (2021) Orthoptera Species File. Version 5.0/5.0. [01/01/2021] http://Orthoptera.SpeciesFile.org Dohrn H (1888) Ueber einige merkwiirdige Pseudophylliden. Stettiner Entomologische Zeitung 49: 353-362. https://www.zobodat.at/pdf/ Entomologische-Zeitung-Stettin_49_0353-0362.pdf Emlen DJ (2008) The evolution of animal weapons. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 39: 387-413. https://doi. org/10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.39.110707.173502 Fialho VS, Chamorro-Rengifo J, Lopes-Andrade C, Yotoko KSC (2014) System- atics of spiny predatory katydids (Tettigoniidae: Listroscelidinae) from the Brazilian Atlantic Forest based on morphology and molecular data. PLoS ONE 9: e103758. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0103758 Field LH (2001) Stridulatory mechanisms and associated behaviour in New Zealand wetas. In: Field LH (Ed.) The Biology of Wetas, King Crickets and Their Allies. CABI, Wallingford, 271-295. https://doi. org/10.1079/9780851994086.0271 93 Field LH, Deans AN (2001) Sexual Selection and Secondary Sexual Charac- ters of Wetas and King Crickets. In: Field L (Ed.) The Biology of Wetas, King Crickets and Their Allies. CABI, Wallingford, 179-204. https:// doi.org/10.1079/9780851994086.0179 Gibbs GW (2002) A new species of tusked weta from the Raukumara Range, North Island, New Zealand (Orthoptera: Anostostomatidae: Motuweta). New Zealand Journal of Zoology 29: 293-301. https:// doi.org/10.1080/03014223.2002.9518313 Gorochov AV (2012) Systematics of the American katydids (Orthoptera: Tettigoniidae). Communication 1. Proceedings of the Zoological In- stitute of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 316: 3-21. https://www. zin.ru/journals/trudyzin/doc/vol_316_1/TZ_316_1_Gorochov.pdf Gorochov AV (2014) Systematics of the American katydids (Orthoptera: Tettigoniidae). Communication 3. Proceedings of the Zoological In- stitute RAS Vol. 318: 109-147. https://acrenap.com/wp-content/up- loads/2020/01/tz_318_2_gorochov.pdf Gorochov AV (2018) Systematics of the American katydids (Orthoptera: Tettigoniidae). Communication 8. Proceedings of the Zoological Institute RAS Vol. 322: 398-456. https://doi.org/10.31610/trudy- zin/2018.322.4.398 Gurney AB (1950) On Dicranostomus, a remarkable Peruvian genus of katy- dids; and notes on other insects having elongate mandibles (Orthop- tera: Tettigoniidae). Annals of the Entomological Society of America 43: 546-554. https://doi.org/10.1093/aesa/43.4.546 Gwynne DT (2001) Katydids and Bush-Crickets. Cornell University, Ithaca. 317 pp. Haan W de (1843) Bijdragen tot de kennis der Orthoptera. In: Temminck CJ (Ed.) Verhandelingen over de Natuurlijke Geschiedenis der Neder- lansche Overzeesche Bezittingen, de Leden der Natuurkundige Com- missie in Indié en andere Schrijvers 19/20: 165-228. Hugel S (2019) Panoploscelis scudderi Beier, 1950 and Gnathoclita vorax (Stoll, 1813): two katydids with unusual acoustic, reproductive and defense behaviors (Orthoptera, Pseudophyllinae). Zoosystema 40: 327-340. https://doi.org/10.5252/zoosystema2019v41a17 Johns PM (1998) The Gondwanaland weta: family Anostostomati- dae (formerly in Stenopelmatidae, Henicidae or Mimnermidae): nomenclatural problems, world checklist, new genera and spe- cies. Journal of Orthoptera Research 6: 125-138. https://doi. org/10.2307/3503546 Kirby WF (1899) Notes on a collection of Gryllidae, Stenopelmati- dae, Gryllacridae, and Hetrodidae formed by Mr. W.L. Distant in the Transvaal and other South- and East-African localities. An- nals and Magazine of Natural History 3: 475-480. https://doi. org/10.1080/00222939908678153 Krauss HA (1902) Die Namen der 4ltesten Dermapteren- (Orthopteren-) Gattungen und ihre Verwendung ftir Familien- und Unterfamilien- Benennungen auf Grund der jetzigen Nomenclaturregeln. Zoologis- cher Anzeiger 25: 530-543. Lardner B, bin Lakim M (2002) Tree-hole frogs exploit resonance effects. Nature 420: e475. https://doi.org/10.1038/420475a Montealegre-Z F, Morris GK (1999) Songs and systematics of some Tet- tigoniidae from Columbia and Ecuador I. Pseudophyllinae (Or- thoptera). Journal of Orthoptera Research 8: 163-236. https://doi. org/10.2307/3503439 Péringuey L (1916) Descriptions of new or little-known Orthoptera in the collection of the South African Museum. Annals of the South African Museum 15: 401-452. [pl. 42.] https://doi.org/10.5962/bhl. part.22199 Salmon JT (1950) A revision of the New Zealand wetas - Anostostomi- nae (Orthoptera, Stenopelmatidae). Dominion Museum Records in Entomology, New Zealand 1: 121-177. http://www.bugz.org. nz/WebForms/ResultDetails.aspx? CurrentDoc=E3878A90-CE05- 401A-A30A-D75D1B60D9AD&CurrentPage=57&searchType=1&St artChar= Scudder SH (1869) Entomological notes II: Notes on Orthoptera collected by Prof. James Orton on either side of the Andes of Equatorial South America. Proceedings of the Boston Society of Natural History 12: 330-345. https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/9493972 JOURNAL OF ORTHOPTERA RESEARCH 2021, 30(1) 94 K.-G. HELLER AND M. HELB Shorthouse DP (2010) SimpleMappr, an online tool to produce publica- Trewick S, Morgan-Richards M (2004) Phylogenetics of New Zealand’s tion-quality point maps. http://www.simplemappr.net/ [accessed 05 tree, giant and tusked weta (Orthoptera: Anostostomatidae): evi- October 2020] dence from mitochondrial DNA. Journal of Orthoptera Research 13: Stoll C (1813) Natuurlijke en naar het leven nauwkeurig gekleurde af- 185-196. https://doi.org/10.1665/1082-6467(2004)013[0185:PONZ beeldingen en beschrijvingen der spoken, wandelende bladen, TG]2.0.CO;2 zabel-springhanen, krekels, trek-springhanen en kakkerlakken. J.C. Trewick S, Morgan-Richards M (2014) New Zealand Wildlife. Publisher Sepp & Sohn, Amsterdam, 344 pp. [Dutch and French] https://doi. Penguin Books, Auckland, 240 pp. org/10.5962/bh1.title. 169412 JOURNAL OF ORTHOPTERA RESEARCH 2021, 30(1)