374 
Psyche 
[September-December 
to abnormal development of the unique specimen on which the 
species was based. His final suggestion was that Permoneura be 
placed in the Spilapteridae, near Dunbaria. Laurentiaux (1953), 
on the other hand, placed it in a new order, Permoneurodea, close 
to the Palaeodictyoptera. Rohdendorf (1962) assigned it to the 
order Archodonata, which in my opinion is inseparable from the 
Palaeodictyoptera. Dr. Kukalova-Peck has suggested (personal 
communication) that the type of lameerei might be a hind wing 
of a protorthopteron. This is indeed a possibility, but none of the 
Protorthoptera are known to have a pectinate RS in the hind wings 
and none are known to lack CUA. 
Inasmuch as no additional specimens of Permoneura have turned 
up in the 45 years since its description, I believe the family Per- 
moneuridae should be placed in the category of ineertae sedis at 
the ordinal level. This has the advantage of removing it from both 
the Palaeodictyoptera and the Protorthoptera, in neither of which 
it seems to belong. Its assignment to a separate order of its own 
seems unjustified; an order based on a single wing has no meaning. 
Reexamination of the specimen of lameerei convinces me that 
although my original figure is essentially correct (1931, figure 6), 
it does not indicate that all the veins are concave, except for R and 
R1 and, apparently, the short basal piece of MA. A photograph 
of the counterpart of this specimen, showing the peculiarity of the 
venational topography, is included here (figure 23). 
Figure 23. Permoneura lameerei; photograph of holotype, no. 9876, M.C.Z. 
Length of wing, 9 mm. 
