212 



clockwise as seen from behind; upper curved arrow in fig.328e). (3) Posteriorly the 

 sclerotisation on the left edge of the Ive-pouch bends more and more into the dorsal Ive- 

 wall (compare fig. 271 and 272). (4) The genital opening has been rotated in the same way 

 and is now in the right ventral wall of the left complex (in between the lobes 47, 48, 49 

 in fig.266, 271). 



In contrast, the area of via has been rotated counterclockwise in Blaberus (as seen from 

 behind; curved arrows in fig. 328k): The contact between the lumina of the via-process 

 and of the rest of the left complex is situated ventral to the connection of the sclerotisations 

 of via and Ive (fig. 328k, 300, 302). Posteriorly the sclerotisation on the left edge of the 

 Ive-pouch bends more and more into the ventral Ive-wall (compare fig.299 and 300). In 

 contrast to the other species (fig.328b,c,d,h,i), the genital opening is not exactly on the 

 right side of the Ive-pouch but more in its dorsal wall. 



The tve-tendon is missing in Euphyllodromia and Blaberus. In Parcoblatta the 

 invagination anteriorly on the vge-groove (vge, tve in fig.273) has exactly the same 

 position as the tve-tendon in Nyctibora (fig.328e,h): At the base of via, opposite to where 

 the sclerotisations of via and Ive are connected. In Parcoblatta the right insertion of 14 

 has shifted to tve, and this might be the reason for the retention of tve despite the loss 

 of muscle 110. 



The via of Nyctibora and Nauphoeta are clearly homologous with via of Nahublattella; 

 the via-morphology of Supella and the remaining species can be derived from that of 

 Nyctibora and Nauphoeta. Therefore, for all species shown in fig.328 it is assumed that 

 the processes designated via are homologous. The presence of two sclerites L2D (in Ive) 

 and L2E+L4N (on via) is probably plesiomorphic. (Exact argumentation in 7.5.; the 

 interpretation results from the situation in Nahublattella). In the species having these two 

 sclerites fused, the resulting sclerite would have to be named correctly L2D+(L2E+L4N). 

 I will simply designate it L2. 



In most of the species shown in fig.328b-k, L2 or L2D occupy the entire left edge of the 

 Ive-pouch and the adjacent margins of the dorsal and ventral Ive- walls (cross-section like 

 in fig. 270 or 301). This groove shape of L2 or L2D extends posteriad as far as to the 

 base of via (articulation AlO, if present). This is the case in Nahublattella, where, however, 

 AlO is far anteriorly (fig. 328b), and close to AlO there is a kink to the left (edge 7 at 36 

 in fig. 242). Between AlO and the kink, L2D' bears the extension 28 (fig. 245) into the 

 ventral Ive-wall, which has a homologue in Anaplecta (28 in fig. 216). In Supella, Parco- 

 blatta, Nyctibora, Nauphoeta, and Blaberus (fig.328c,e,h,i,k) L2 is also groove- shaped, 

 but AlO or the via-base are by far more posteriorly, and there is no kink (except for a 

 hint of one in Nyctibora) and no extension 28. 



In Euphyllodromia (fig.328d) and Loboptera (fig.328f) the sclerotisation of the Ive-pouch 

 is - except for the anteriormost part - restricted to the dorsal wall (and not groove-shaped), 

 and the membranous left edge of the Ive-pouch is extensively invaginated. For a correct 

 inteipretation of these invaginations (origin, homology in Euphyllodromia and Loboptera?) 

 further investigations are necessary. Only Loboptera has a bulge (X in fig.328f; thickened 

 cuticle?) in the ventral wall of this invagination, which bears a sclerotised whip-like 

 process (Y in fig.328f). (Since there is no via-process at the posterior end of L2, these 



