identifier	taxonID	type	CVterm	format	language	title	description	additionalInformationURL	UsageTerms	rights	Owner	contributor	creator	bibliographicCitation
5CF357B0640757A5BC5C11DD6BD38227.text	5CF357B0640757A5BC5C11DD6BD38227.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Balticobaetisca bispinata Staniczek & Storari & Godunko 2022	<div><p>Balticobaetisca bispinata sp. nov.</p><p>Figures 1, 2, 3, 4; Table S1</p><p>Balticobaetisca bispinata “Eintagsfliege”, p 15, fig. 5, W. Struve (1960): Die Eroberung der Luft, in: Schmidt H. (ed.): Der Flug der Tiere. Verlag Waldemar Kramer, Frankfurt am Main: 9-40 [figured specimen herein designated as paratype of the new species].</p><p>Material.</p><p>Holotype: BaB 1373/ 1 in coll. CCHH. Paratype: SMF Be 411 in coll. SMF (see also Supplementary Material 1, Fig. S1).</p><p>Etymology.</p><p>The species epithet refers to the shape of the paired subapical process of the penis, which is sharply pointed at the tip.</p><p>Diagnosis.</p><p>Male subimago (Figs 1A-D, 2A-D): (1) body length 6.80-7.50 mm; (2) from vein A1, 8-9 veins going to basitornal margin of forewing; (3) costal projection of hind wings distinctly prominent, widely rounded apically; (4) numerous simple and forked cross veins between C and Sc of hind wings; (5) forceps segment I with widely rounded hump on inner margin.</p><p>Description of holotype.</p><p>Male subimago (Figs 1 - 3). Well preserved specimen visible in dorsoventral aspect. Head, thorax and abdomen covered by a whitish cloud of turbidity or so-called “Verlumung”, a milky emulsion surrounding the embedded carcass due to leaking gases and fluids during decomposition ( Schlüter and Kühne 1975). Body completely preserved. Left forewing partly damaged, twisted centrally, covered by streaks and overlaying cracks of amber. Rest of body also surrounded by darkened bands and cracks. The subimaginal stage is indicated by the presence of microtrichia covering the wings and by a fringe of microtrichia along posterior wing margin. Additionally, the wings are not translucent, but markedly frosted (Fig. 2). For complete measurements see Table S1.</p><p>Colouration relatively pale, dirty yellow to light brown, except of fore- and hind wings distinctly darker, coloured brown to dark brown; distal half of left forewing intensively dark brown to blackish. Due to “Verlumung”, body colouration slightly frosted. Femora relatively pale, yellow to yellowish-brown; tibiae and tarsi darker than femora, up to brown, with blackish maculation irregularly scattered. Abdominal segments unicoloured, dirty brown to greyish brown, segments VII-X fully covered by “Verlumung” . Genitalia only visible ventrally, due to streaks and cracks of amber mainly from dorsal side; natural colouration of genitalia most probably not preserved.</p><p>Head. Eyes large, well developed, indistinctly separated into two portions; medially contiguous at short distance, flattened laterally; hexagonal ommatidia of upper portion of eyes well distinguishable; no preserved bands or strips on eyes laterally; ocelli poorly visible due to streaks and cracks, relatively small; antennae short, not longer than length of head; facial keel relatively large (Fig. 1C and D). - Thorax: Prothorax mostly covered by “Verlumung”, relatively short; prosternum medially with strong bispinate projection between bases of forelegs (Fig. 1B and D). Mesothorax covered by “Verlumung”; details of lateral mesothorax not visible; mesonotum massive, with elongate medioscutum; sutures of mesonotum poorly recognizable; mesonotal suture [MNs] nearly transverse, laterally stretched backwards; medioparapsidal suture [MPs] slightly curved medially; lateroparapsidal suture [LPs] not elongate, curved outward distally, not reaching posterior scutal protuberance; mesobasisternum [BS] elongate; furcasternal protuberances [FSp] contiguous, without median impression. Metathorax short; metanotum reduced (Fig. 1C and D). - Wings: Forewing. Opaque, not translucent (Figs 1A, 1B; 2A; 3A, 3B), relatively narrow, with posterior margin slightly scalloped. Pterostigma with 11-13 simple veins only. Longitudinal veins well recognizable, including short marginal intercalaries; cross venation well developed. Venation of “posteritornous” condition, i.e. CuP and A1 end distally of wing tornus; RS, MA and MP triads well developed; RS field complete, with RSa2 diverting from RSa; RS and MA without common stem, basally approached; MA furcation nearly symmetrical, forked after 0.56-0.58 of its length; MP1 and MP2 without common stem; MA-CuA arise from the same point; base of CuP distant from CuA base; CuA and CuP nearly parallel centrally, slightly divergent distally, no cubital intercalaries; 6-7 simple veins going from A1 to basitornal margin; four cross veins between A1 and A2; anal veins except of A1 short, ending distally near wing base. Numerous free short intercalaries along of tornoapical margin of forewing, and a smaller number of short marginal intercalary veins connected to longitudinal veins (Fig. 3). - Hind wings: Opaque, not translucent, nearly round, as long as 0.26 × forewing length (Fig. 1A and B). Costal projection well developed, situated strongly proximally; widely rounded apically; numerous simple and forked cross veins between C and Sc, densely grouped in costal area; MA not forked, thus lacking MA triad; MP triad complete, MP fork situated nearly middle of vein length; CuA and CuP nearly parallel; at least three longitudinal veins and a few intercalaries in anal field. Cross venation well developed; numerous short and elongatemarginal intercalaries between RA and A1 (Fig. 3). - Legs. Subimaginal forelegs shorter than body. Patellotibial suture vestigial, present on middle and hind legs, absent on forelegs. Tarsi five-segmented; first tarsomere longest, well separated from foretibia, but fused with tibia in middle and hind legs. Tarsi of forelegs with paired blunt pretarsal claws, in each pair one foreclaw smaller than the other; middle and hind legs with one hooked and one blunt claw (Figs 1D, 2B, 2C). - Abdomen: Abdomen relatively short and massive, moderately tapered distally. Segment I shortest, fused with metathorax; segments II-V relatively short, segments VI-VII enlarged and robust; segment VI largest; tergum VI without middorsal transverse evaluation; segment IX markedly enlarged, wider than adjacent segments. Cerci completely preserved, approximately two times shorter than body; paracercus very short, segmentation not recognizable (Fig. 1A and B).</p><p>Genitalia.</p><p>Penis lobes partly covered by “Verlumung” . Two-segmented forceps well preserved. Segment I long, moderately expanding distally, with widely rounded hump on inner margin; apically of hump indented, superficially giving the appearance of segmentation; after this indentation, segment I distinctly bent inwards at half-length, so forcipes tilted towards each other. Distal segment short, as long as 0.22-0.24 of segment I length, only laterobasally with clear segment border towards segment 1, tapering apically, with widely rounded tip. Penis lobes well separated by wide, V-shaped cleft; each lobe moderately tapered apically, rounded at tip; both lobes with prominent subapical process, sharply pointed at the tip (Figs 2D, 3C).</p><p>Description of paratype.</p><p>Male subimago (Figs 3D, 4). Well preserved and almost complete specimen visible in dorsoventral aspect. Piece of amber with numerous cracks and streaks. Head, thorax and abdomen covered with thin layer of “Verlumung” . Dense layer of “Verlumung” on posterior half of abdomen, so details of genitalia poorly visible; shape of styliger basally not recognizable. Right forewing and both hind wings well preserved, complete; distal half of left forewing missing. A dense row of microtrichia along of posterior margin of wings. Wings not translucent, frosted. Legs well preserved, complete. Most part of cerci missing. For complete measurements see Table S1.</p><p>Remarks.</p><p>Despite some differences in body size of the specimens (see Table S1), we attribute both male subimagines described here to the single species B. bispinata sp. nov., based on similarities in wings venation and shape of genitalia. It should however be noted that, unlike in the holotype, the upper portion of compound eyes in the paratype specimen is not contiguous dorsally, but separated by a narrow gap. Although genitalia are mostly covered by “Verlumung” in the paratype, the shape of the apical portion of the penis lobes and forceps resemble those of the holotype.</p><p>The new species described herein can be undoubtedly assigned to the genus Balticobaetisca Staniczek and Bechly, 2002 within Baetiscidae . In contrast to extant representatives of the subgenus Balticobaetisca Fascioculus Pescador and Berner, 1981 (genus Baetisca) (Pescador and Berner 1981), the upper portion of compound eyes is unicolorous and without stripes. The same character state is observed in the two other known species of Balticobaetisca, as well as in representatives of Baetisca s. str.</p><p>Like other taxa of Baetiscidae, B. bispinata sp. nov. has a prominent bispinate prosternal projection located between the bases of forelegs (Fig. 1D) and characteristically rounded hind wings (see also Kluge 2004, Staniczek and Bechly 2002). It is further characterized by the presence of (1) forewings with fully developed RS, MA and MP triads, and numerous intercalaries between RS and CuP (see Kluge 2004: 68, fig. 17B); (2) foretarsus with each of both paired claws blunt apically, similar to males of Balticobaetisca stuttgardia and extant species of Baetisca, both claws of one pair with different length to each other (see also Fig. 5B, inlay); (3) tergum VI of abdomen without mid-dorsal transverse evaluation (see also Staniczek and Bechly 2002: 127, fig. 2) and (4) vestigial, not segmented paracercus (see Staniczek and Bechly 2002; Kluge 2004: 68-69, fig. 17).</p><p>Balticobaetisca bispinata sp. nov. can be distinguished from other representatives of the genus by (1) its smaller general size; (2) by having tarsomere I as the longest (tarsomere V is the longest in Balticobaetisca velteni and Balticobaetisca stuttgardia); (3) having shorter caudal filaments (half the length of B. velteni and B. stuttgardia); (4) shorter intercalaries between longitudinal veins (at least 3) compared to other Balticobaetisca representatives, and (5) lacking forked veins in the anal field unlike the other two species.</p><p>Up to now there was only a single male specimen of Balticobaetisca known: B. stuttgardia was established based on a specimen with complete genitalia that have well separated penis lobes, which are blunt at the tip (Godunko and Krzemiński 2009: 130). A similar shape of penis is described for B. bispinata sp. nov. (Fig. 2D), but the new species can be clearly separated from B. stuttgardia (Fig. 2F) by the first segment of forceps, which lacks the distinct triangular inner projection of segment I, as well as the general shape of both forceps segments (Fig. 2F, Godunko and Krzemiński 2009: 130).</p><p>A comparison of B Balticobaetisca bispinata sp. nov. with B. velteni is limited, as only the opposite sex is described in both species (Staniczek and Bechly 2002). The female holotype of B. velteni however differs by the pattern of venation, especially of forewings, with a rich cross venation and numerous veins, mostly forked, going from A1 to the basitornal margin. The hind wings of B. velteni also have a less prominent costal projection and fewer cross veins in the costal field [in contrast to the costal projection of B. bispinata sp. nov., which is markedly protruding and proximally in the costal field with rich cross venation] (Staniczek and Bechly 2009: 7-8, figs 3-7). It also differs in the foreclaws, which are dissimilar (one hooked, one blunt) in B. velteni (Fig. 2E), but this may be a generic character, which is only present in the female sex (as also in females of extant Baetisca).</p><p>Regarding body size, there remains the possibility that the described female of B. velteni and male of B. bispinata sp. nov. belong to the same species (Staniczek and Bechly 2002: 7-8). On the other hand, a clear difference in the venation of fore- and hind wings between B. velteni and B. bispinata sp. nov. rather points to the presence of two different fossil species. Table 2 lists a detailed comparison of characters between Balticobaetisca representatives.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/5CF357B0640757A5BC5C11DD6BD38227	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.		Plazi	Staniczek, Arnold H.;Storari, Arianny P.;Godunko, Roman J.	Staniczek, Arnold H., Storari, Arianny P., Godunko, Roman J. (2022): Revised systematics, phylogeny, and paleontology of the mayfly family Baetiscidae (Insecta: Ephemeroptera). Arthropod Systematics & amp; Phylogeny 80: 389-409, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/asp.80.e82845, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/asp.80.e82845
43B40AFF81CD57D59807A0FA65F4FDEC.text	43B40AFF81CD57D59807A0FA65F4FDEC.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Balticobaetisca Staniczek and Bechly 2002	<div><p>Genus Balticobaetisca Staniczek and Bechly, 2002</p><p>Type species.</p><p>Balticobaetisca velteni Staniczek and Bechly, 2002 [by monotypy] in Staniczek and Bechly 2002: p.7, figs 1-10.</p><p>Species composition.</p><p>Balticobaetisca velteni Staniczek and Bechly, 2002 [type species; female imago, holotype BB-2376]; B. stuttgardia Godunko and Krzemiński, 2009 [male imago, holotype BB-2394]; B. bispinata sp. nov. [male subimago, holotype BaB 1373/1, male subimago paratype SMF Be 411]. Nymphs unknown.</p><p>Type locality and horizon.</p><p>The pieces of amber with embedded holotypes of B. velteni and B. stuttgardia and B. bispinata sp. nov. originate from unknown Eocene deposits of Baltic amber; for information on the piece with the embedded paratype of B. bispinata sp. nov., see below.</p><p>Revised diagnosis.</p><p>Modified after Staniczek and Bechly 2002, Godunko and Krzemiński 2009, and characters of B. bispinata sp. nov. ADULTS: (1) abdominal tergum VI without mid-dorsal transverse elevation; (2) eyes without vertical bands; (3) wings without maculation; in male (4) two blunt claws of different size on each foreleg; (5) first segment of forceps with distinct projection of variable shape on inner margin; (6) penis lobes clearly separated and apically tapered, blunt at the tip; in female (7) dissimilar claws (one hooked, one blunt) on each foreleg (8) sternum IX without apical cleft.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/43B40AFF81CD57D59807A0FA65F4FDEC	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.		Plazi	Staniczek, Arnold H.;Storari, Arianny P.;Godunko, Roman J.	Staniczek, Arnold H., Storari, Arianny P., Godunko, Roman J. (2022): Revised systematics, phylogeny, and paleontology of the mayfly family Baetiscidae (Insecta: Ephemeroptera). Arthropod Systematics & amp; Phylogeny 80: 389-409, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/asp.80.e82845, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/asp.80.e82845
0BA0D3165DE35793BA7E2523115B64E0.text	0BA0D3165DE35793BA7E2523115B64E0.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Protobaetisca bechlyi Staniczek 2007	<div><p>Protobaetisca bechlyi Staniczek, 2007</p><p>Protobaetisca bechlyi = Protobaetisca bechlyi Staniczek, 2007: The Crato Fossil Beds of Brazil: window into an ancient world, p. 182, fig. 11.6g</p><p>Revised diagnosis (Figs 6 - 7).</p><p>Modified based on Staniczek (2007) and on newly described characters of male nymph [holotype] and putative adult of P. bechlyi . ADULT: (1) body length 7 mm [as preserved]; (2) forewing length of approximately 6 mm, maximum width 3.5 mm [as preserved]; (3) forewing triangular-shaped, width/length ratio approximately 0.58 [as preserved]; (4) longitudinal venation of “posteritornous” condition; (5) MA slightly asymmetrical, fork located at 0.65 of wing length; (6) at least 15 simple and forked cross veins in pterostigma; (7) distinct short intercalary vein between MP2 and CuA; (8) CuP nearly parallel to A1, approaching close to each other; (9) at least five veins going from A1 to basitornal margin; (10) small (ratio of forewing/hind wing length of 1/5) rounded hind wings with prominent costal projection at base; (11) abdominal segment VI enlarged. Nymph: (12) body length 8 mm [without caudal filaments], caudal filaments length 3 mm; (13) genal shelf of head not distinctly projected; (14) femur short, as long as 0.32 of tibia length; tarsus at least 0.50 of tibia length; preserved part of pretarsal claw at least 0.34 of tibia length; (15) notal shield without traces of dorsal or lateral spines; (16) abdominal segment X ventrally covered by well-preserved paired sclerites of triangular shape, rounded apically, markedly separated by narrow V-shaped incision, which may be interpreted either as genital buds (outgrowths of IX) or paraprocts.</p><p>Material.</p><p>Male nymph, holotype, SMNS 66620 adult, SMF VI 993.</p><p>Redescription of holotype (male nymph; Fig. 6A, C, E).</p><p>Length of body 8 mm [without terminal filaments]. Length of cerci 3 mm. The nymph was initially described by Staniczek (2007) as a new species and attributed to a new fossil genus within Baetiscidae . A thorough reinvestigation confirmed that the compressed specimen is visible from its ventral side, which implies an amended description and interpretation as follows: Relatively well-preserved nymph, visible from ventral side (see also Fig. 6 for interpretation). Body stout, nearly ovoid shaped (Fig. 6C). - Head: Poorly preserved, relatively large, head width at least 0.53 × of head length; lateral portions of head moderately damaged; distinct remnants of frontal and genal projections; frontal projections relatively large, rounded apically, located close to each other; putative remnants of left antenna along left lateral side of head; basal antennal segments better visible; length of antenna at least ⅔ × of head length; genal shelf not distinctly projected, not protruding above anterolateral margin of head. Head in ventrocaudal posture, ventral outer edge of cranium well visible, but labrum and other mouthparts mostly not preserved except of mandibles, maxilla not visible, labium probably lost (Fig. 6A). - Thorax: Prosternum well separated from head and anterior part of mesothorax, without traces of bispinate projection; prosternum relatively wide, at least 0.30 × its length (Fig. 6A, C). Base of foreleg large; coxa and trochanter apparently robust; remnants of foreleg located along right side of nymphal body; femur short, about 0.32 × of tibia length; tarsus shorter than tibia, at least 0.50 × of tibia length; pretarsal claw stout and long, with preserved part as long as at least 0.34 × of tibia length (Fig. 6C). Mesosternum and metasternum mainly lost, distinctly short. Mesonotum posteriorly extended to abdominal segment VI, forming a notal shield (or “carapace”); notal shield well recognizable from ventrally (as anterior abdominal sterna not preserved), with distinct outer margin on right side; notal shield robust, with widest part at half length; near posterior margin slightly narrower than at half length, without traces of dorsal or lateral spines (Fig. 6C). - Abdomen: Abdominal segments VI-IX with prominent posterolateral projections; no preserved traces of median spines; lateral margins of abdominal segments I-V slightly bent up; abdominal segment VI slightly enlarged, longest, with traces of transversal crest indicating the caudal closure of notal shield; segment VI covered approximately at 1/2 of its length by notal shield (Fig. 6C). Abdominal segment X ventrally covered by well-preserved paired sclerites of triangular shape (Fig. 6E), rounded apically, markedly separated by narrow V-shaped incision, which may be interpreted either as genital buds (outgrowths of IX) or paraprocts. Cerci and paracercus stout; swimming setae on both inner sides of cerci and paracercus, denser at half length.</p><p>Description of new putative adult (SMF VI993; Fig. 7).</p><p>Length of body 7 mm; length of forewing approximately 6 mm, maximum width 3.5 mm. Imago of unknown sex. Specimen preserved in right lateral view with both forewings overlapping. Except of forewings, entire body of specimen poorly preserved, first abdominal segments not discernible, only base of cerci preserved. Right forewing is almost complete except of cubital and anal fields with venation poorly distinguishable. Traces of left forewing venation partly overlapping with right forewing venation. Costal brace and basal part of costal field almost destroyed; longitudinal venation mostly preserved and distinguishable; cross veins poorly visible, especially in anal field. Hind wings partially superimposing forewings. Hind wing mostly damaged, with poorly preserved outline and trace of costal projection; venation almost lost. Legs completely missing, except of traces of putative trochanter of right and left foreleg. Because of poor preservation of eyes and lacking gonopods, the sex of this specimen is not determinable (Fig. 7A). - Head: Relatively small; shape of eyes not distinguishable; preserved part of facial keel relatively short. - Thorax: Prothorax not widened, relatively narrow; m esonotum with trace of elongate medioscutum; putative sharply pointed [? bispinate] projection on ventral side of prothorax, close to pointed projection trace of putative trochanter. Border between pro- and mesothorax poorly recognizable; mesothorax distinctly large; mesonotal sutures poorly preserved; shape of preserved part of MPs and putative MS similar to those in Baetisca (Fig. 5A); lateral sclerites completely damaged; ventrally with traces of relatively elongate furcasternal projection. Metathorax short (Fig. 7B). - Wings: Preserved forewing of triangular shape, relatively wide, with width/length ratio approximately 0.58 [as preserved]. Longitudinal venation well recognizable; cross venation well developed, occasionally poorly visible, present in all the fields of forewing. Pterostigma with at least 15 simple and forked cross veins; only simple veins between C and Sc proximally. RP basally forked at 0.30 × of its length; RP2 basally forked at 0.29 × of its length. Longitudinal venation with complete RP, MA and MP triads; RP and MA without common stem, basally approached; posteritornous wing condition: wing tornus situated basally of CuP and A1, A1 nearly parallel and close to CuP throughout remaining length. Furcation of MA slightly asymmetrical, fork located at 0.65 of wing length; iMP slightly closer to MP2 proximally; MP and CuA without common stem; distinct short intercalary vein between MP2 and CuA; traces of short intercalaries in MA and MP fields poorly preserved; MP1 and MP2 without common stem; base of CuP markedly distant from CuA base; at least five veins branching from A1 to basitornal margin; A2, if preserved, most probably visible in basal part of wing (Fig. 7C, D). Ratio of hind wing / forewing length 1/5. Hind wing length 1 mm; rounded, almost circular appearance, with prominent costal projection near its base, rounded at tip (Fig. 7B). - Abdomen: All abdominal terga and sterna poorly preserved; borders between segments I-IV poorly preserved, other segments with more or less preserved borders; segments IV-VI partly damaged; distal segments relatively large; segment VI the longest. Gonopods not preserved.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/0BA0D3165DE35793BA7E2523115B64E0	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.		Plazi	Staniczek, Arnold H.;Storari, Arianny P.;Godunko, Roman J.	Staniczek, Arnold H., Storari, Arianny P., Godunko, Roman J. (2022): Revised systematics, phylogeny, and paleontology of the mayfly family Baetiscidae (Insecta: Ephemeroptera). Arthropod Systematics & amp; Phylogeny 80: 389-409, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/asp.80.e82845, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/asp.80.e82845
46DA3C3A0BC55EFC96FA73B561149B85.text	46DA3C3A0BC55EFC96FA73B561149B85.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Protobaetisca Staniczek 2007	<div><p>Genus Protobaetisca Staniczek, 2007</p><p>Type species.</p><p>Protobaetisca bechlyi Staniczek, 2007 [by monotypy] in Staniczek 2007: 182, fig. 11.6g.</p><p>Specimens.</p><p>Protobaetisca bechlyi Staniczek, 2007 [type species; nymph, holotype SMNS 66620]; P. bechlyi Staniczek, 2007 [putative adult of unknown sex; SMF VI 993].</p><p>Type locality and horizon.</p><p>Vicinity of Nova Olinda, southern Ceará state, northeast Brazil; upper Aptian, Lower Cretaceous, Nova Olinda Member, Crato Formation, Santana Group, Araripe Basin.</p><p>Revised diagnosis.</p><p>As for type species, since monotypic (see below); modified based on Staniczek (2007) and characters redescribed in nymph and described in putative adult.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/46DA3C3A0BC55EFC96FA73B561149B85	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.		Plazi	Staniczek, Arnold H.;Storari, Arianny P.;Godunko, Roman J.	Staniczek, Arnold H., Storari, Arianny P., Godunko, Roman J. (2022): Revised systematics, phylogeny, and paleontology of the mayfly family Baetiscidae (Insecta: Ephemeroptera). Arthropod Systematics & amp; Phylogeny 80: 389-409, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/asp.80.e82845, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/asp.80.e82845
