274 



7. THE GROUND-PLAN AND THE EVOLUTION OF THE PHALLOMERE 

 COMPLEX AND THE PHYLOGENY OF BLATTARIA AND MANTODEA 



In the sections of chapter 6 many features of the common ground-plan of Blattaria and 

 Mantodea have been reconstructed. This ground-plan will be given completely in 7.1. 

 In 7.2. and 7.3. the evolution of the phallomere complex will be described for Mantodea 

 and for Blattaria. This will be done in accordance with a phylogenetic hypothesis which 

 results as the most parsimonious solution from the distribution of the phallomere character 

 states analysed in chapter 6. In this description, all derived character states present in the 

 various subgroups will be listed, and these derivations are regarded as autapomorphies of 

 the respective subgroups. For each autapomorphy the section of chapter 6. in which the 

 respective feature has been discussed will be given. Most of the phallomere characters are 

 consistent with each other in the distribution of their states over the subgroups defined in 

 7.2. and 7.3., and this phylogenetic hypothesis is thus highly supported. Some derived 

 character states which appear as autapomorphies of single species in the frame of the 

 sample of species included in this investigation and which are uninformative in the present 

 analysis will also be mentioned, since in later investigations they might be detected in 

 other species, too, and might then serve as synapomorphies and help in integrating further 

 species into this phylogenetic hypothesis. 



A survey of all assumed aut/synapomorphies is given in 7.4. - together with a phylogenetic 

 tree (diagram 1) showing the most parsimonious solution. 



For some characters the polarity of the states does not become unambiguously clear from 

 the discussions and informations given in chapter 6, and the respective interpretations 

 given in 7.1.-7.4. are not yet sufficiently substantiated. The evolution of these characters 

 and the polarity of their states will be discussed in 7.5. The single topics will be designated 

 with letters and referred to in 7.2. and 7.3. 



For some characters there will, despite the previous discussions, remain some doubt in 

 terms of polarity. In some other characters whose polarity is rather clear the distribution 

 of the character states over the species is in some way inconsistent with the phylogenetic 

 hypothesis in 7.2. and 7.3. The respective (possibly or clearly) derived character states 

 and the groupings they would suggest will be listed in 7.6. All these inconsistencies will 

 be also mentioned in 7.2. and 7.3. 



In the following discussions, assemblages of species regarded as holophyletic are called 

 "subgroups" and numbered according to their hierarchy. Assemblages not regarded as 

 holophyletic are called "groupings" and are designated with capital letters for cross 

 reference. The character states which are assumed to be autapomorphies of subgroups, and 

 also the character states whose role as possible autapomorphies is discussed but regarded 

 as improbable, are, for easy reference, numbered (bold printed and put in brackets, e.g. 

 (45)). 



