Plesioblattogryllus magnificus Huang, Nel & Petrulevičius, 2008

(Fig. 1)

Plesioblattogryllus magnificus Huang et al., 2008: 18, figs 1–3; Storozhenko & Aristov, 2014: 24, figs 3, 8.

Duoduo qianae Cui, 2012: 176, fig. 6; Storozhenko & Aristov, 2014: 23. syn. nov.

Revised diagnosis. Large size, wing length about 43/ 40 mm for fore- and hind wing respectively; absence of RP+MA fusion; occurrence of two rows of crossveins in median part of the RP–MA area.

Remarks. The examination of a new photograph of the holotype of P. magnificus confirmed that RP and MA are separated in this species (Fig. 1). Indeed, in the best exposed forewing, the observed venation pattern is best explained by a crease occurring between ScP and R/RA (which may be related to the occurrence of a flexion line in the ScP–RA area; see below, redescription of A. minor material). Consequently, ScP is visible in the area between R/RA and MA. Once ignored, it is then clear that RP and MA remain separated along their entire course. This is also the case in D. qianae, known from a single specimen (see original description). Further similarities encompass size: in P. magnificus, forewing length is about 43 mm and hind wing length about 40 mm; while in D. qianae, wing length is about 35 mm. Considering the likely occurrence of sexual size dimorphism in Blattogryllopterida (a phenomenon common in Polyneoptera), and the fact that the holotype of D. qianae is probably a hind wing (owing to the development of the AA area), the observed size difference cannot justify maintaining distinct species. Finally, the occurrence of two rows of crossveins in the median part of the RP–MA area, well-documented in P. magnificus and likely in D. qianae, further suggests that the latter species is the junior synonym of the former.