Talk:Gomphidae

Untitled

The French page gives this list of genera and authorities:

• Agriogomphus Selys, 1869
• Anomalophlebia Belle, 1995
• Aphylla Selys, 1854
• Archaeogomphus Williamson, 1919
• Arigomphus Needham, 1897
• Brasiliogomphus Belle, 1995
• Cacoides Cowley, 1934
• Cyanogomphus Selys, 1873
• Desmogomphus Williamson, 1920
• Diaphlebia Selys, 1854
• Dromogomphus Selys, 1854
• Epigomphus Hagen in Selys, 1854
• Erpetogomphus Selys, 1858
• Gomphoides Selys, 1854
• Gomphus Leach, 1815
• Hagenius Selys, 1854
• Idiogomphoides Belle, 1984
• Lanthus Needham, 1897
• Melanocacus Belle, 1986
• Mitragomphus Needham, 1944
• Neogomphus Selys, 1858
• Octogomphus Selys, 1873
• Ophiogomphus Selys, 1854
• Perigomphus Belle, 1972
• Peruviogomphus Klots, 1944
• Phyllocycla Calvert, 1948
• Phyllogomphoides Belle, 1970
• Praeviogomphus Belle, 1995
• Progomphus Selys, 1854
• Stylogomphus Fraser, 1922
• Stylurus Needham, 1897
• Tibiagomphus Belle, 1992
• Zonophora Selys, 1854

However, it does not seem to include any of the genera listed in the taxobox. Are those missing, is there synonymy, or has there been a mistake? Rigadoun (talk) 19:18, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Size of genitalia of the club-tailed dragonfly

In an X-files episode, "War of the Coprophages" an entomologist examines the genitalia of a cockroach on order to establish specie and is astounded to discover that it is "hung like a club-tailed dragonfly". Does this reflect on reality? Is there something unusual about the size if these genitalia that should be mentioned in the article? __meco (talk) 14:29, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Distinctive Nymph

I feel like it should be discussed on this page that the nymphs of Gomphidae have extremely distinctive antennae and are notable in aquatic entomology keys as such. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Delightedly (talk • contribs) 07:33, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

I have sourced and added this information. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:42, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Range

Not a word on range. Where do these Gomphidae proliferate? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.161.169.67 (talk) 13:44, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

Is Lindeniidae a synonym of Gomphidae?

I moved Lindeniidae from the 'synonyms' field and this is my rationale.

Under ICZN Article 36 (Principle of Coordination), Lindeniidae is the family-group name based on the type genus Lindenia. In modern classification (e.g., Dijkstra et al. 2013; Theischinger & Endersby 2021), this taxon is treated at the subfamily rank (Lindeniinae).

Listing it as a synonym of the family Gomphidae (type genus Gomphus) is nomenclaturally incorrect because:

1. Scope: Lindeniidae only includes a subset of species (like Ictinogomphus), whereas Gomphidae includes the entire family. They are not co-extensive.

2. Rank: Under Article 23.3, synonyms are different names for the same taxon at the same rank. Lindeniidae is a name for a subordinate taxon that was once elevated, not an alternative name for the family Gomphidae itself.

For the consensus that Lindeniidae is a subfamily, not a family:

• Dijkstra, Klaas-Douwe B.; Bechly, Günter; Bybee, Seth M.; Dow, Rory A.; Dumont, Henri J.; Fleck, Günther; Garrison, Rosser W.; Hämäläinen, Matti; Kalkman, Vincent J.; Karube, Haruki; May, Michael L.; Orr, Albert G.; Paulson, Dennis R.; Rehn, Andrew C.; Theischinger, Günther; Trueman, John W.H.; Van Tol, Jan; von Ellenrieder, Natalia; Ware, Jessica (2013). "The classification and diversity of dragonflies and damselflies (Odonata). In: Zhang, Z.-Q. (Ed.) Animal Biodiversity: An Outline of Higher-level Classification and Survey of Taxonomic Richness (Addenda 2013)". Zootaxa. 3703 (1): 36–45. doi:10.11646/zootaxa.3703.1.9.

Note 35. The monophyly of the family Gomphidae is well supported (Bybee et al. 2008; Dumont et al. 2010; Fleck et al. 2008b; Rehn 2003). The first two authors favoured its recognition at superfamily level, which we follow. Carle (1986) recognised eight subfamilies, of which Lindeniidae Yakobson & Bianchi, 1905 is occasionally treated as a family (e.g. Davis et al. 2011). However, with no extensive molecular phylogenetic reconstruction available, the validity of any classification remains untested. Moreover, for the sake of stability, it seems best to express any supported subdivision at the subfamily level at most.

The local authority for Australian dragonflies following this move:

• Theischinger, Günther; Hawking, John (2021). The Complete Field Guide to Dragonflies of Australia (2nd ed.). Melbourne, Australia: CSIRO Publishing. ISBN 9781486313747.

As I am new to attempting to understand what a synonym is at family-group level, I welcome disabuse.

John Tann (talk) 12:56, 23 April 2026 (UTC)