Documents

Büsse S. & Ware J.L. 2022 – Taxonomic note on the species status of Epiophlebia diana (Insecta, Odonata, Epiophlebiidae), including remarks on biogeography and possible species distribution. – ZooKeys, 1127 : 79-90.

This article is, in my opinion, relatively heavy on the global classification of Odonata. Indeed, it clearly demonstrates the invalidity of the suborder Anisozygoptera, but does not propose a clear complete replacement.
Unlike Bybee & al. (2021), we no longer have three suborders (Zygoptera, Anisozygoptera, Anisoptera), but only two (Zygoptera, Epiprocta). The second suborder comprises a family Epiophlebiidae and an infraorder with Anisoptera. In theory there should be an infra-order opposite the Epiophlebiidae which I believe is the Epiophlebioptera Bechly, 1996, but I have to check and it seems to me a difficult task. In the meantime, the following structure Zygoptera Selys, 1854, Epiprocta Lohmann, 1996 with an isolated family Ephiophlebioptera and an infra-order (Anisoptera) regrouping all the other families seems to me a good compromise.

C.Deliry (November 9, 2022 – 14h43)

Aside from a few paleontologists, I think no-one sees the benefit of abandoning the popular and well-understood suborders Anisoptera and Anisozygoptera. This was also the consensus in our 2013 Zootaxa paper, which Bybee et al 2021 and WOL follow. Only if we start treating fossil taxonomy as fully compatible with the extant species (not likely given the methodological limitations), that becomes a problem.

• Bybee S.M. & al. 2021 – Phylogeny and classification of Odonata using targeted genomics. – Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 18 février 2021.

K.D.Dijkstra (November 15, 2022 – 11h40)

I agree with you regarding the use of the suborder names.

J.Abbott (November 15, 2022 – 15h27)