1983] 
Burnham — Geraridae 
5 
compressed air gun. The technique is particularly effective at 
revealing regions of an insect’s body (wing tips, legs, etc.) that are 
found beneath the bedding plane. Following degagement, specimens 
were studied under a Wild M-5 stereo microscope and photo- 
graphed with a Zeiss 4" by 5" format camera. 
Drawings were made of each fossil by tracing a general outline 
from a photographic enlargement. Verification of detail was made by 
referring back to the specimens and examining them frequently 
under the microscope. The most complete reconstructions (e.g., fig. 2 
of G. danielsi) were possible for those species that consist of a large 
series of specimens. This is because one fossil rarely displays all 
characters equally well, and, therefore, the larger the number of speci- 
mens, the greater the likelihood of multiple character preservation. 
Type specimens, including the holotypes, for all taxa considered 
in this revisionary study were borrowed and examined using the 
above methods. Pre-existing taxa were synonymized whenever pos- 
sible, a decision based on the assumption that (for reasons cited 
earlier) intraspecific variation in the Protorthoptera is great. Char- 
acters of greatest taxonomic importance were venation and body 
size and shape, particularly with respect to the prothorax. In situa- 
tions where clearcut characters were lacking, as is true for several of 
the Mazon Creek gerarids, I relied solely on size as a criterion for 
specific assignment. While this may result in the recognition of some 
dubious species, it seems preferable to relegating certain specimens 
to incertae sedis status. 
Since wing venation is such an im.portant taxonomic tool both in 
paleoentomological and extant systematic study, it is surprising that 
until recently no standardized wing terminology has been adopted. 
This is particularly unfortunate for the Protorthoptera, 80% of 
which have been described on the basis of wings alone. Inroads 
have recently been made into this problem primarily by the efforts 
of Carpenter in the United States and Wootton in Great Britain. 
Both have stressed (Carpenter, 1966; Wootton, 1979, 1981) the 
importance of a standardized venational nomenclature and Woot- 
ton (1979) has proposed a terminology modified slightly from the one 
used previously by Lameere (1922) and Martynov (1924, 1938). 
Wootton proposes that the following nine major longitudinal 
veins be recognized: Costa (C); Subcosta (SC); Radius (R); Radial 
Sector (RS); Anterior Media (MA); Posterior Media (MP); Ante- 
rior Cubitus (CUA); Posterior Cubitus (CUP), and Anals. In light 
