STATUS OF THE GENERA 
UNGLA AND MALLADA NAVAS* 
(NEUROPTERA: CHRYSOPIDAE) 
By Phillip A. Adams 
Department of Biological Science 
California State University 
Fullerton, California 92634 
This paper is the first in a series treating results of an examina- 
tion of Navas material in several museums, and deals with two 
genera whose status has been problematical. One of these proves 
to be a striking example of a composite specimen, or “humbug”. 
A recent trend in chrysopid svstematics is toward division of the 
genus Chrysopa , based primarily upon characters of the male geni- 
talia. It appears that despite conservatism in wing and body 
characters, the genitalic structures exhibit considerable divergence. 
Furthermore, non-genitalic characters are by no means absent; for 
example, I estimate that at least 80% of the species of Suarius can 
be assigned to that genus on the basis of these characters, as discussed 
below. A problem arises from the plasticity of the genitalic struc- 
tures. The principal generic criterion is the particular combination 
of tignum, gonosaccus, pseudopenis, or gonapsis present (plus what- 
ever venational and female genitalic characters may be available). 
Any of these structures 'appears subject to reduction or loss by species 
within a taxon, with consequent high probability of erroneous as- 
signment. Until a better understanding of evolutionary trends is 
achieved and additional characters are found, a period of nomen- 
clatorial instability is to be expected. In my view, the inconvenience 
and confusion thus inevitably generated is amply justified by the 
pressing need to subdivide the genus Chrysopa , in which most species 
reside, into workably small fragments. 
I am grateful to the following for their kind help: J. Bastero, 
Colegio del Salvador, Zaragoza; S. Courtoy, Societe scientifique, 
Brussels; F. Espanol, Museo de Zoologia, Barcelona; W. Gunther, 
Berlin Museum ; S. Kelner-Pillault, Paris Museum ; J. Lawrence, 
Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard; P. E. S. Whalley, 
British Museum (Natural History). I am also grateful to the 
California State University, Fullerton Foundation, for financial 
assistance. 
* Manuscript received by the editor August 12, 1975 
167 
