Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-s22k5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-06T03:00:55.081Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The oldest-known Lestidae (Odonata) from the late Eocene of Tibet: palaeoclimatic implications

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 November 2021

Guoqing Xia
Affiliation:
State Key Laboratory of Oil and Gas Reservoir Geology and Exploitation, Chengdu University of Technology, Chengdu, China
Daran Zheng
Affiliation:
Department of Earth Sciences, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China State Key Laboratory of Palaeobiology and Stratigraphy, Nanjing Institute of Geology and Palaeontology and Center for Excellence in Life and Paleoenvironment, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Nanjing, China
Régis Krieg-Jacquier
Affiliation:
Office pour les insectes et leur environnement, Opie-odonates, Guyancourt, France
Qiushuang Fan
Affiliation:
State Key Laboratory of Oil and Gas Reservoir Geology and Exploitation, Chengdu University of Technology, Chengdu, China
Yun Chen
Affiliation:
State Key Laboratory of Oil and Gas Reservoir Geology and Exploitation, Chengdu University of Technology, Chengdu, China
André Nel*
Affiliation:
Institut de Systématique, Évolution, Biodiversité, ISYEB–UMR 7205–CNRS, MNHN, UPMC, EPHE, Muséum national d’Histoire naturelle, Sorbonne Universités, Université des Antilles, Paris, France
*
Author for correspondence: André Nel, Email: anel@mnhn.fr
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Terrestrial fossils from the Palaeogene of Tibet could help us to better understand the past climate and environment in this area. We herein report a new late Eocene non-marine fossil site from southern Nima Basin, central Tibet, SW China, including abundant insects and fishes. These fossils are similar to those from the late Eocene (∼39.5–37 Ma) Lunpola–Nima sediment depo-centres in sharing the dominating aquatic bug Aquarius lunpolaensis and cyprinid fishes. Chalcolestes tibetensis sp. nov., the oldest representative of the modern family Lestidae, is described. Lestidae were previously only recorded in Western Europe, and the oldest records were from the uppermost Eocene of France and the UK. The present discovery demonstrates that Lestidae already had a broad distribution during the Eocene and probably originated much earlier. The recent representatives of Chalcolestes occur in the low-altitude ponds or lakes of Western Palaearctic. Together with the other freshwater fossils in this site, this new discovery indicates a humid climate and low altitude for the Nima Basin and nearby basins in the middle part of the Bangong Nujiang suture zone.

Type
Original Article
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

1. Introduction

While the damselfly fossil record has greatly increased during recent years, thanks to the study of the mid-Cretaceous Burmese amber fauna, these are mainly Caloptera Belyshev & Haritonov, Reference Belyshev and Haritonov1983 and Coenagrionomorpha Bechly, Reference Bechly1996. The recorded Mesozoic Lestomorpha Bechly, Reference Bechly1996 (= Hemiphlebiidae Tillyard, Reference Tillyard1926 + Lestiformia Bechly, Reference Bechly1996) (= Lestoidea Calvert, Reference Calvert, Godman and Salvin1901, sensu Dijkstra et al. Reference Dijkstra, Kalkman, Dow, Stokvis and Van Tol2014) are mainly Hemiphlebiidae, and three or four Lestiformia in the families Cretacoenagrionidae Bechly, Reference Bechly1996, Perilestidae Tillyard & Fraser, Reference Tillyard and Fraser1938 and Synlestidae Tillyard, Reference Tillyard1917. The oldest current records of the highly diverse extant Lestidae are from the Latest Eocene (Nel & Paicheler, Reference Nel and Paicheler1994; Nel & Fleck, Reference Nel and Fleck2014). This family is currently subdivided into Lestinae and Sympecmatinae, the former being diverse and frequently found in the Oligocene and the Miocene lacustrine sediments of Europe, while the latter is known by a Sympecma sp. from the Late Miocene of Italy, and Sympecma incerta (Piton, Reference Piton1934) from the Pliocene of France (Cavallo & Galetti, Reference Cavallo and Galletti1987; Nel & Paicheler, Reference Nel and Paicheler1994). No fossil Lestidae is currently recorded outside of Europe, while the family is cosmopolitan (except Antarctica).

Here we report a new fossil site and describe the oldest-known Lestidae from the late Eocene of Tibet (China), attributing it to the extant Western Palaearctic lestine genus Chalcolestes Kennedy, Reference Kennedy1920. It demonstrates the very broad distribution of Lestidae during the Eocene and supports its potential greater antiquity, in accordance with its extant distribution. We also discuss the palaeoclimatic implications of the new discovery.

2. Materials and methods

The fossils including the well-preserved Lestidae were collected in a new late Eocene deposit in northern Kanggale Hill (NK, 31° 58′ 21.38″ N, 88° 26′ 10.19′ E, 4662 m a.s.l.) of the south Nima Basin, which is a large Cenozoic continental basin in central Tibet, SW China (Fig. 1). It is an east–west-trending elongated rift basin resting on a Jurassic–Cretaceous marine succession, situated in the Bangong–Nujiang suture zone formed by the Mesozoic collision of the Lhasa and Qiangtang blocks (Kapp et al. Reference Kapp, Yin, Harrison and Ding2005, Reference Kapp, DeCelles, Gehrels, Heizler and Ding2007; DeCelles et al. Reference DeCelles, Kapp, Ding and Gehrels2007a) The fossiliferous strata comprise greyish-green mudstones and calcareous shales, interbedded with mudstones, sandstones and limestones (Fig. 2). Abundant fossils including Odonata, Orthoptera, Hemiptera, Hymenoptera and cyprinid fish occur in the greyish-white laminated limestones, dominated by the aquatic hemipteran Aquarius lunpolaensis and cyprinid fishes (Fig. 3), previously also recorded in the Dayu area of Lunpola Basin. The latest palaeomagnetic study of the Dayu Section provided a late Eocene (c. 39.5–37 Ma) age for the fossil layers (middle Niubao Formation) (Fang et al. Reference Fang, Dupont-Nivet, Wang, Song, Meng, Zhang, Nie, Zhang, Mao and Chen2020), thus indicating a late Eocene age for the new fossiliferous layers in the northern Kanggale Hill.

Fig. 1. Geological map showing fossil site in northern Kanggale Hill of Nima Basin, central Tibet, SW China.

Fig. 2. Photograph showing fossiliferous outcrop in Kanggale Hill.

Fig. 3. Representative fossils from fossiliferous outcrop in Kanggale Hill. (a) Chalcolestes tibetensis sp. nov., holotype (NIGP174550). (b) Aquarius lunpolaensis (Hemiptera). (c) Aquarius lunpolaensis and a cyprin fish. (d) Cyprinid fish. (e) Orthoptera: Grylloidea. Scale bars = 10 mm.

The specimens were examined dry using a Nikon SMZ1000 stereomicroscope. Observation was augmented by temporary wetting with laboratory alcohol, which improved the contrast between the fossil and the matrix, eliminating the surface irregularity of the latter. Photographs were taken using a Canon 5D digital camera, and line drawings were prepared from these photographs using image-editing software (CorelDraw X8 and Adobe Photoshop CS6). The specimens NIGP 174550 are housed in the Nanjing Institute of Geology and Palaeontology (NIGP), Chinese Academy of Sciences, China. We follow the wing venation nomenclature of Riek & Kukalová-Peck (Reference Riek and Kukalová-Peck1984), modified by Nel et al. (Reference Nel, Martínez-Delclòs, Paicheler and Henrotay1993), Bechly (Reference Bechly1996, Reference Bechly2016) and Jacquelin et al. (Reference Jacquelin, Desutter-Grandcolas, Chintauan-Marquier, Boistel, Zheng, Prokop and Nel2018). Abbreviations. AA, Analis anterior; AP, Analis posterior; Arc, arculus; Ax, primary antenodal cross-vein; C, Costa; CuA, Cubitus anterior; CuP Cubitus posterior; dc, discoidal cell; IR, Interradius; MA, Media anterior; MP, Media posterior; N, nodus; Pt, pterostigma; RA, Radius anterior; RP, Radius posterior; Rspl, radial supplementary longitudinal vein; sdc, subdiscoidal cell; sn, subnodus.

3. Systematic palaeontology

Order Odonata Fabricius, Reference Fabricius1793

Family Lestidae Calvert, Reference Calvert, Godman and Salvin1901

Genus Chalcolestes Kennedy, Reference Kennedy1920

Chalcolestes tibetensis sp. nov.

(Figs. 3a, 4 and 5).

Fig. 4. Line drawing of Chalcolestes tibetensis sp. nov., holotype (NIGP174550).

Fig. 5. Line drawing of four wings of Chalcolestes tibetensis sp. nov., holotype (NIGP174550).

Material. Holotype NIGP174550; imprint of a body with attached legs and wings, only five abdominal segments preserved; head deformed by the compression, so that the eyes seem to be closer than in an extant Lestidae, as occurs frequently for compression fossil damselflies; deposited in the Nanjing Institute of Geology and Palaeontology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, China.

Etymology. Named after the Tibet region where the type was found.

Age and outcrop. Late Eocene; Kanggale Hill, south Nima Basin, Central Tibet, China.

Diagnosis. Wings c. 21 mm long; only ten postnodal cross-veins; pterostigma covering two cells; base of AA clearly basal to CuP; five to six cells in supplementary row between MP and CuA in forewing and three rows in hind wings.

Description. Body length c. 17 mm, head length c. 1 mm, thorax length c. 3 mm and abdominal length c. 13 mm; head dark, broader than long. Eyes not well preserved, separated by gap of 0.8 mm. One foreleg, two mid-legs and two hind legs preserved (Fig. 3). Left forewing complete (Fig. 4). Wing length 21.2 mm; length from wing base to Arc 3.3 mm, from Arc to N 4.1 mm, from N to Pt 9.9 mm, from Pt to wing apex 3.8 mm. Primary antenodal cross-veins preserved, Ax0 close to wing base, Ax1 1.9 mm distal of Ax0, Ax2 1.3 mm distal of Ax1; no secondary antenodal and antesubnodal cross-veins present. Ten postnodal cross-veins nearly aligned with ten postsubnodal cross-veins present before Pt. Four postnodal and six postsubnodal cross-veins present distal of Pt, non-aligned. Arc aligned with Ax2. dc basally closed, free with strong distal angle; length of basal side 0.6 mm, of anterior side 0.3 mm, of distal side 0.8 mm, of posterior side 1.2 mm. sdc free and elongate, 1.7 mm long and maximum 0.3 mm wide. CuP 0.3 mm distal of level of Ax1. Nodal structures well preserved, Sn aligned with Cr. Midfork (base of RP3/4) lying closer to dc than to Arc, and 1.0 mm distal of Arc. Base of IR2 one cell and 0.6 mm distal of midfork. RP2 originating three cells distal of Sn, lying 3.0 mm distally, nearer to N than to Pt. IR1 long, originating two cells distal of base of RP2 and six cells basal of Pt, lying 2.7 mm distal of base of RP2; one row of cells present between IR1 and RP1, and three cells between IR1 and RP2. Rspl well present, with one row of cells between it and IR2, MA distally zigzagged and long. MP long and slightly curved, with one or two rows of cells between it and CuA. CuA long, with one row of cells between it and posterior wing margin. Pt long, hyaline, covering two cells and well braced, 2.0 mm long and 0.5 mm wide; posterior side of Pt thickened and fused with strongly thickened pterostigmal part of RA to form U-shaped structure; Pt brace in same oblique with Pt base.

4. Discussion

4.a. Relationship between Chalcolestes tibetensis sp. nov. and Lestidae

The wing venation of Chalcolestes tibetensis sp. nov. is characteristic of the Lestidae and more precisely of the subfamily Lestinae, because of the elongate pterostigmata; bases of RP3/4 and IR2 midway between arculus and nodus; an oblique cross-vein ‘O’; distal discoidal vein MAb very oblique, with distal angle of discoidal cell very acute; MA strongly zigzagged; area between IR2 and RP3/4 distally strongly widened with three rows of cells between these two veins; fore- and hind-wing discoidal cells of the same width and shape (excluding the Sympecmatinae Fraser, Reference Fraser1951 that have discoidal cell in forewings narrower and shorter than in hind wings); arculus mainly formed by the basal discoidal cross-vein, so that the discoidal cell is nearly touching the RA.

The Eocene Eolestes syntheticus Cockerell, Reference Cockerell1940 (type species of the Eolestidae Greenwalt & Bechly, Reference Greenwalt and Bechly2014) and Chalcolestes tibetensis sp. nov. have similar wing venations especially in the base of AA quite basal to CuP and the presence of secondary rows of cells between MP and CuA, but with the following major differences: area between RP3/4 and IR2 distally strongly widened with three rows of cells between these veins in C. tibetensis sp. nov. (as in other Lestidae); MA more strongly zigzagged in C. tibetensis sp. nov. as in other Lestidae; and pterostigma clearly shorter in C. tibetensis sp. nov. than in Eolestes. The synlestid genus Megalestes has a venation similar to those of the Lestidae and of C. tibetensis sp. nov., but differing in the absence of the oblique vein ‘O’ (although a rudimentary one can be present in some specimens) and clearly less acute distal angle of the discoidal cell with a longer anterior side of the same cell (Münz, Reference Münz1919: pl. 7, fig. 39; Payra et al. Reference Payra, Dawn, Subramanian, Deepak, Chandra and Tripathy2021). The enigmatic Eocene taxon Lutetialestes uniformis Greenwalt & Bechly, Reference Greenwalt and Bechly2014 (in Lestinoidea Calvert sensu Bechly, Reference Bechly1996, but of uncertain family) shares with C. tibetensis sp. nov. the base of AA quite basal to CuP and the presence of secondary rows of cells between MP and CuA, but differs from it in the MA very weakly zigzagged and ScP less oblique.

Within the Lestidae, the three sympecmatine genera Sympecma Burmeister, Reference Burmeister1839 , Indolestes Fraser, Reference Fraser1922 and Austrolestes Tillyard, Reference Tillyard1913 (incl. Ceylonolestes Kennedy, Reference Kennedy1920) have the discoidal cell of the hind wing of different shape than that of the forewing, more than l.15 times, usually 1.3–1.5 times, longer than that of the forewing (Fraser, Reference Fraser and Stephenson1933; Watson & Moulds, Reference Watson and Moulds1979; Seehausen, Reference Seehausen2017). Austrolestes also has the sectors of arculus not appressed to RA (Tillyard, Reference Tillyard1913: 422, fig. 2).

The classification of the Lestinae has been the subject of numerous changes in the past. Numerous genera, considered as valid by Fraser (Reference Fraser1951), were put as subgenera of Lestes by Pinhey (Reference Pinhey1980), viz. Chalcolestes, Paralestes Schmidt, Reference Schmidt1951, Xerolestes Fraser, Reference Fraser1951, plus the three subgenera Pseudochalcolestes Pinhey, Reference Pinhey1980, Icterolestes Pinhey, Reference Pinhey1980 and Malgassolestes Pinhey, Reference Pinhey1980. Pinhey (Reference Pinhey1980) synonymized the subgenus Africalestes Kennedy, Reference Kennedy1920 with the subgenus Lestes. Vajda et al. (Reference Vajda, Szabó, Cserháti and Dévaia2018) re-separated Chalcolestes from Lestes on the basis of body characters of adult and nymph. After Fraser (Reference Fraser1951), the vein AA separating from AP distinctly basal to vein CuP is a character proper to the genus Chalcolestes, vs AA emerging at the level of CuP or even slightly more basal in the other Lestinae (see also Tillyard, Reference Tillyard1913: fig. 1). This character is present in Chalcolestes tibetensis sp. nov. and even more pronounced than in the two extant species Chalcolestes parvidens (Artobolevsky, Reference Artobolevsky1929) and C. viridis (Van der Linden, Reference Van der Linden1825). Nevertheless, Jödicke (Reference Jödicke1997) indicated that not all specimens of C. viridis have this character, rendering it weaker than supposed by Fraser (Reference Fraser1951). C. tibetensis sp. nov. further differs from these two species in the presence of two rows of —five to six cells in the forewings, and three cells in the hind wings, between MP and CuA.

We investigated the potential affinities of Chalcolestes tibetensis sp. nov. with the other lestine genera. Archilestes Selys-Longchamps, Reference Selys-Longchamps1862 (including Superlestes Williamson, Reference Williamson1921) has a very broad pterostigma, and the base of RP2 only one cell distal to subnodus, unlike C. tibetensis sp. nov. (Münz, Reference Münz1919: pl. 7, fig. 40; Williamson, Reference Williamson1921; Fraser, Reference Fraser1951; Pérez-Gutiérrez, Reference Pérez-Gutiérrez2012). Cyptolestes Williamson, Reference Williamson1921, synonymized with Archilestes by Gloyd (Reference Gloyd1980), but considered by Donnelly (Reference Donnelly1981) as a subgenus of Archilestes, has a shorter pterostigma than the other species of Archilestes. Nevertheless, both also differ from C. tibetensis sp. nov. in the more numerous postnodal cross-veins (more than 12 instead of 9–10) (Williamson, Reference Williamson1921). Superlestes also has the apex of IR2 opposite the base of the pterostigma.

Platylestes Selys-Longchamps, Reference Selys-Longchamps1862 has a pterostigma quadrate or subquadrate (Münz, Reference Münz1919). Icterolestes has a short pterostigmata (l.5 mm or less, vs 2.0 mm in Chalcolestes tibetensis sp. nov.) and wing apices rounded instead of being acute in C. tibetensis sp. nov. (Pinhey, Reference Pinhey1980). Sinhalestes Fraser, Reference Fraser1951 has 18–20 postnodal cross-veins, unlike C. tibetensis sp. nov. (Fraser, Reference Fraser and Stephenson1933). Orolestes McLachlan, Reference McLachlan1895 has a longer pterostigma, covering more than four cells, and the wings of males broadly banded or spotted with brown colour (McLachlan, Reference McLachlan1895; Martin, Reference Martin1903; Fraser, Reference Fraser1951). The Lestes subgenera Paralestes and Malgassolestes have only long intercalary veins in the area between MA and RP3/4, unlike C. tibetensis sp. nov. (Fraser, Reference Fraser1951; Schmidt, Reference Schmidt1951; Pinhey, Reference Pinhey1980). Pseudochalcolestes differs from C. tibetensis sp. nov. in the base of AA opposite CuP in hind wing and the presence of only one supplementary longitudinal vein between MA and RP3/4 (Schmidt, Reference Schmidt1951). Xerolestes differs from C. tibetensis sp. nov. in the longest intercalary vein between RP3/4 and MA beginning well basal to base of RP2 (Pinhey, Reference Pinhey1980). The subgenus Lestes differs from C. tibetensis sp. nov. in the base of AA opposite CuP in fore- and hind wing.

Several fossils currently attributed to Lestes with a supplementary row of cells in the area between MP and CuA are known from the latest Eocene and Oligocene in Europe. We need to compare Chalcolestes tibetensis sp. nov. to these taxa. C. tibetensis sp. nov. has a wing venation very close to that of the latest Eocene Lestes regina Théobald, Reference Théobald1937 (Gard, France), even in the wings’ sizes (20–22 mm long in L. regina and 22 mm in C. tibetensis sp. nov.), but the latter has 11–12 postnodals, four cells between subnodus and base of RP2 and 5–6 cells in the supplementary row between MP and CuA in all wings (Théobald, Reference Théobald1937; Jattiot et al. Reference Jattiot, Latutrie and Nel2020). Nel & Fleck (Reference Nel and Fleck2014) described a latest Eocene fossil as Lestes aff. regina (Isle of Wight, UK), very similar to the French fossils. The early Oligocene Lestes forsterii Hess, Reference Hess1895 (Haut-Rhin, France) and L. vicina Hagen, Reference Hagen1858 (Germany) have five cells in the supplementary row between MP and CuA but 11–12 postnodal cross-veins (Hagen, Reference Hagen1858; Théobald, Reference Théobald1937). The Oligocene Lestes ceresti Nel, Reference Nel1985 (Vaucluse, France) also has a venation very close to that of C. tibetensis sp. nov., but many more cells in the supplementary row between MP and CuA (8–12 cells), more postnodal cross-veins and longer wings (25.2–28.8 mm long) than C. tibetensis sp. nov. It seems that the base of AA and CuP are closer to each other in L. ceresti than in C. tibetensis sp. nov. (Nel & Papazian, Reference Nel and Papazian1985; Nel & Paicheler, Reference Nel and Paicheler1994;). The Oligocene Lestes brisaci Nel et al. Reference Nel, Martínez-Delclòs, Papier and Oudard1997 (Vaucluse, France) has only two to four cells in the supplementary row between MP and CuA, but four cells between subnodus and base of RP2 (Nel et al. Reference Nel, Martínez-Delclòs, Papier and Oudard1997). The Oligocene Lestes statzi Schmidt, Reference Schmidt1958 (Germany) has many more postnodals than C. tibetensis sp. nov., base of RP2 three to four cells distal of subnodus, and only one to three cells in the supplementary row between MP and CuA (Schmidt, Reference Schmidt1958). The latest Oligocene Lestes aquisextana Nel, Reference Nel1985 has only one cell in the same area but two rows of cells between CuA and posterior wing margin (Nel, Reference Nel1985; Nel & Paicheler, Reference Nel and Paicheler1994).

In the sister clade (Synlestidae + Perilestidae) of the Lestidae, the base of AA is well basal to CuP in Megalestes (see Gyeltshen et al. Reference Gyeltshen, Kalkman and Orr2017; Payra et al. Reference Payra, Dawn, Subramanian, Deepak, Chandra and Tripathy2021) while AA separates from AP quite distal to CuP in Synlestes and Nubiolestes and there is no distinct AA in Perilestes (Münz, Reference Münz1919; Schmidt, Reference Schmidt1942). But as Megalestes is the sister group of all the others (Synlestidae + Perilestidae), it is likely that the situation in this genus is plesiomorphic, while the other representatives of this clade have a strong tendency to pronounced petiolation with a distal ‘migration’ of AA. The presence of the same situation in Hemiphlebia mirabilis (Hemiphlebiidae, sister group of all other Lestomorpha) supports this hypothesis. Also, the Early Cretaceous Cretalestes martinae Jarzembowski et al. Reference Jarzembowski, Martínez-Delclòs, Bechly, Nel, Coram and Escullié1998 and two Eocene taxa Eolestes syntheticus and Lutetialestes uniformis have the base of AA well basal to CuP, suggesting that it is the plesiomorphic state of character for the Lestoidea. Chalcolestes would have kept this state of character. Thus, the attribution of C. tibetensis sp. nov. to this genus is based on a plesiomorphy, rendering it only tentative. Nevertheless, without other evidence to the contrary and any autapomorphic character that would allow the creation of a new lestid genus, we prefer to keep it in this genus. Also a phylogenetic analysis of the whole Lestidae is necessary to clarify the relationships in this family.

The synlestid genus Megalestes has a venation very similar to those of the Lestidae and Chalcolestes tibetensis sp. nov., but differing in the absence of oblique veins ‘O’ and clearly less acute distal angle of the discoidal cell with a longer anterior side of the same cell (Münz, Reference Münz1919: pl. 7, fig. 39).

4.b. Remarks

Jattiot et al. (Reference Jattiot, Latutrie and Nel2020: 435) indicated that a ‘supplementary row of cells between MP and CuA can be found also in some specimens but not in others, of extant Lestes species (L. dryas Kirby, Reference Kirby1890)’, but it is remarkable that a majority of Lestinae from the Eocene and Oligocene share this character, while those from the Miocene have only one row of cells in this area. This character is also rare among the extant Lestinae. This phenomenon needs further material to be confirmed, but the present discovery of Chalcolestes tibetensis sp. nov. is one more case supporting it. The presence of the same character in the two Eocene Eolestes syntheticus and Lutetialestes uniformis would suggest that it could also be a plesiomorphy in the Lestiformia, but this hypothesis needs to be confirmed because the Hemiphlebiidae do not share it.

5. Conclusion

5.a. Fossil calibration

Chalcolestes tibetensis sp. nov. is the oldest record of the crown group of Lestidae, as the previous ones were from the Latest Eocene of France and the UK (33.9–28.4 Ma). The widespread distribution of this family during the Eocene suggests a greater antiquity. Unfortunately, the putative older record of Lestes zalesskyi Piton, Reference Piton1940 from the Palaeocene of Menat (France) is very uncertain because its original description is very imprecise and the holotype is lost (Nel & Paicheler, Reference Nel and Paicheler1994: 7).

5.b. Palaeoclimatic implications

The modern-day hinterland of the Tibetan Plateau has a relatively low-relief topography, in stark contrast to the high-relief Himalaya and surrounding mountain ranges (Fielding et al. Reference Fielding, Isacks, Barazangi and Duncan1994); such a unique low-relief landscape in central Tibet has been formed since at least the late Eocene (Han et al. Reference Han, Sinclair, Li, Wang, Tao, Qian, Ning, Zhang, Wen, Lin, Zhang, Xu, Dai, Zhou, Liang and Cao2019). The Palaeogene Lunpola–Nima sediment depo-centre is located between the palaeo-Gangdese and the palaeo-Qiangtang (Tangulha) mountain ranges to the south and north of the basin (DeCelles et al. Reference DeCelles, Quade, Kapp, Fan, Dettman and Ding2007b), respectively. It is generally accepted that Qiangtang Block in the north entered into collision by the Cretaceous and has since been in an intracontinental setting (Yin & Harrison, Reference Yin and Harrison2000). The Gangdese Mountains in the south have probably also maintained high elevations since at least the Palaeocene (Ding et al. Reference Ding, Xu, Yue, Wang, Cai and Li2014). However, the Palaeogene topographic characteristics and palaeoclimatic history of the Lunpola–Nima sediment depo-centre between the palaeo-Gangdese and the palaeo-Qiangtang (Tangulha) mountains are very poorly known.

Some isotope studies suggest a high Lunpola Basin floor (4–5 km) (Rowley & Currie, Reference Rowley and Currie2006; Decelles et al. Reference DeCelles, Quade, Kapp, Fan, Dettman and Ding2007b; Polissar et al. Reference Polissar, Freeman, Rowley, McInerney and Currie2009; Quade et al. Reference Quade, Breecker, Daëron and Eiler2011), a high palaeo-Gangdese (∼4.5 km; Ding et al. Reference Ding, Xu, Yue, Wang, Cai and Li2014) and a high palaeo-Qiangtang/Tangulha mountain range (>5.0 km; Xu et al. Reference Xu, Ding, Zhang, Cai, Lai, Yang and Zeng2013; Lin et al. Reference Lin, Dai, Zhuang, Jia, Zhang, Ning and Wang2020). However, evidences from palaeobotany (Wang et al. Reference Wang, Dutta, Kelly, Rudra, Li, Zhang, Zhang, Wu, Cao, Wang, Li and Zhang2018) and palaeontology (Deng et al. Reference Deng, Wang, Xie, Li, Hou and Sun2011; Sun et al. Reference Sun, Xu, Liu, Zhang, Xue and Zhao2014; Ma et al. Reference Ma, Wang, Meng, Ma, Zhao, Li and Wang2017; Wu et al. Reference Wu, Miao, Chang, Shi and Wang2017; Su et al. Reference Su, Farnsworth, Spicer, Huang, Wu, Liu, Li, Xing, Huang, Deng, Tang, Xu, Zhao, Srivastava, Valdes, Deng and Zhou2019) suggest much lower elevations (1–3 km). Moreover, emerging numerical simulations of palaeoelevations based on temperature constraints and thermal lapse rates are also widely divergent (e.g. Botsyun et al. Reference Botsyun, Sepulchre, Donnadieu, Risi, Licht and Caves2019; Valdes et al. Reference Valdes, Lin, Farnsworth, Spicer, Li and Tao2019). In view of this situation, the fundamental reason for the contradiction of the above-mentioned palaeoelevation reconstruction results is that the stratigraphic age of the Lunpola basin has not been well constrained (Fang et al. Reference Fang, Dupont-Nivet, Wang, Song, Meng, Zhang, Nie, Zhang, Mao and Chen2020). In other words, the high altitude of the Lunpola Basin proposed by Rowley & Currie (Reference Rowley and Currie2006) mainly refers to the late Oligocene period of 26.5–23.3 Ma, while palaeontological teams proposed that the low elevation was mainly for the Eocene period of 39.7–37 Ma (Wu et al. Reference Wu, Miao, Chang, Shi and Wang2017; Su et al. Reference Su, Farnsworth, Spicer, Huang, Wu, Liu, Li, Xing, Huang, Deng, Tang, Xu, Zhao, Srivastava, Valdes, Deng and Zhou2019). Most importantly, after the comprehensive study of a large number of plant fossils by Su et al. (Reference Su, Spicer, Wu, Farnsworth, Huang, Del Rio, Deng, Ding, Deng, Huang, Hughes, Jia, Jin, Li, Liang, Liu, Liu, Sherlock, Spicer, Srivastava, Tang, Valdes, Wang, Widdowson, Wu, Xing, Xu, Yang, Zhang, Zhang, Zhang, Zhao and Zhou2020), a subtropical forest called the ‘Shangri La’ ecosystem was also proposed for the Middle Eocene (∼47 Ma). Its palaeogeomorphological features are low valleys distributed in an east–west direction, at ∼1500 m elevation within an east–west-trending valley under a monsoonal climate with a mean annual temperature of ∼19 °C and a cold-month mean temperature of 7 ± 2.9 °C with rare frosts.

Our finding provides evidence for a regional climate system and its possible response to Tibetan landscape evolution. The steady specific ecosystem directly affects insect population dynamics and geographic distributions. As ectotherms, insects are highly sensitive to ambient temperatures and may respond very quickly to temperature fluctuations (Robinet & Roques, Reference Robinet and Roques2010). The recent Chalcolestes parvidens and Chalcolestes viridis have Western Palaearctic distributions (Southern, Eastern and Central Europe, Syria, Jordan, Israel, Turkey, and Maghreb in North Africa), all under low altitudes (Wildermuth & Martens, Reference Wildermuth and Martens2019). Chalcolestes viridis has a rather narrow temperature tolerance between 14 °C and 24 °C (Romero, Reference Romero1988). They occur in still or slow-flowing water in ditches, ponds, lakes and canals. The discovery of a Chalcolestes in the late Eocene of Tibet indicates a low altitude for the Nima basin during this period and further suggests that the genus is quite old and was more widespread during the Palaeogene.

This conclusion enables us to have a clearer understanding of the palaeogeomorphological constraints of the Nima and the surrounding Lunpola basins during the Palaeogene: the Tibetan landscape comprised a high (>4 km) Gangdese mountain range along the southern margin of the Lhasa terrane and a Tanghula upland on the more northerly Qiangtang terrane; while the Nima, Lunpola and other basins in the middle of the Bangong Nujiang suture zone were almost in the valley area, with relatively low altitudes, c. 1500– m a.s.l.

This discovery provides a warm and humid climate with low latitude for the Niima and Lunpola basins during the late Eocene.

Acknowledgements

We offer our sincere gratitude to the editors and anonymous reviewers for their very useful comments on an earlier version of the manuscript. This research was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (41972115), the Second Tibetan Plateau Scientific Expedition and Research (2019QZKK0706), and the Strategic Priority Research Program of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (XDB26000000).

Conflict of interest

We declare that we have no conflict of interest.

References

Artobolevsky, G (1929) Les Odonates de la Crimée. Bulletin de la Société des Naturalistes et Amis de la Nature de la Crimée 11, 139–50.Google Scholar
Bechly, G (1996) Morphologische Untersuchungen am Flügelgeäder der rezenten Libellen und deren Stammgruppenvertreter (Insecta; Pterygota; Odonata), unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Phylogenetischen Systematik und des Grundplanes der Odonata. Petalura 2 (Special), 1402.Google Scholar
Bechly, G (2016) Phylogenetic systematics of Odonata. Website homepage available at https://bechly.lima-city.de/phylosys.htm (accessed 11 February 2021).Google Scholar
Belyshev, BF and Haritonov, AIU (1983) Zoogeographic structure of the odonatan fauna of the subholarctic Mediterranean subregion. Vestnik Zoologii 5, 915.Google Scholar
Botsyun, S, Sepulchre, P, Donnadieu, Y, Risi, C, Licht, A and Caves, K (2019) Revised paleoaltimetry data show low Tibetan Plateau elevation during the Eocene. Science 363, eaaq1436. doi: 10.1126/science.aaq1436.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Burmeister, H (1839) Handbuch der Entomologie. Berlin: Reimer, 400 pp.Google Scholar
Calvert, PP (1901) Insecta Neuroptera Odonata. In Biologia Centrali-Americana (eds Godman, FD and Salvin, O), pp. 17420. London: Dulau and Co.Google Scholar
Cavallo, O and Galletti, PA (1987) Studi di Carlo Sturani su Odonati e altri insetti fossili del Messiniano albese (Piemonte) con descrizione di Oryctodiplax gypsorum n. gen. n. sp. (Odonata, Libellulidae). Bolletino della Società Paleontologica Italiana 26, 151–76.Google Scholar
Cockerell, TDA (1940) A dragon-fly from the Eocene of Colorado (Odonata, Agrionidae). Entomological News 51, 103–5.Google Scholar
DeCelles, PG, Kapp, P, Ding, L and Gehrels, G (2007a) Late Cretaceous to mid-Tertiary basin evolution in the central Tibetan Plateau: changing environments in response to tectonic partitioning, aridification, and regional elevation gain. Geological Society of America Bulletin 119, 654–80. doi: 10.1130/B26074.1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeCelles, P, Quade, J, Kapp, P, Fan, MJ, Dettman, DL and Ding, L (2007b) High and dry in central Tibet during the Late Oligocene. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 253, 389401. doi: 10.1016/j.epsl.2006.11.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deng, T, Wang, S-Q, Xie, G-P, Li, Q, Hou, S-K and Sun, B-Y (2011) A mammalian fossil from the Dingqing Formation in the Lunpola Basin, northern Tibet, and its relevance to age and paleo-altimetry. Chinese Science Bulletin 57, 261–9. doi: 10.1007/s11434-011-4773-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dijkstra, KDB, Kalkman, VJ, Dow, RA, Stokvis, FR and Van Tol, J (2014) Redefining the damselfly families: a comprehensive molecular phylogeny of Zygoptera (Odonata). Systematic Entomology 39, 6896. doi: 10.1111/syen.12035.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ding, L, Xu, Q, Yue, Y, Wang, H, Cai, F and Li, S (2014) The Andean-type Gangdese Mountains: paleoelevation record from the Paleocene–Eocene Linzhou Basin. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 392, 250–64. doi: 10.1016/j.epsl.2014.01.045.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Donnelly, TW (1981) A new species of Archilestes from Mexico and Central America, with further notes on the status of Cyptolestes Williamson (Odonata: Lestidae). Florida Entomologist 64, 412–17. doi: 10.2307/3494503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fabricius, JC (1793) Entomologia systematica emendata et aucta, secundum classes, ordines, genera, species, adjectis synonymis, locis, observationibus, descriptionibus. C.G. Proft, Hafniae [= Copenhagen] 3, 1487.Google Scholar
Fang, XM, Dupont-Nivet, G, Wang, CS, Song, CH, Meng, QQ, Zhang, WL, Nie, JS, Zhang, T, Mao, ZQ and Chen, Y (2020) Revised chronology of central Tibet uplift (Lunpola Basin). Science Advances 6, eaba7298. doi: 10.1126/sciadv.aba7298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fielding, E, Isacks, B, Barazangi, M and Duncan, C (1994) How flat is Tibet? Geology 22, 163–7. doi: 10.1130/0091-7613(1994)022<0163:HFIT>2.3.CO;2.2.3.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fraser, FC (1922) New and rare Indian Odonata in the Pusa Collection. Memoirs of the Department of Agriculture in India, Entomological Series 7, 3977.Google Scholar
Fraser, FC (1933) Odonata. In The Fauna of British India, Including Ceylon and Burma (ed. Stephenson, J), pp. ixiii + 1–423. London: Taylor and Francis.Google Scholar
Fraser, FC (1951) Outline of a reclassification for the legion Lestes Selys (order Odonata). Entomological News 62, 61–9.Google Scholar
Gloyd, LK (1980) The taxonomic status of the genera Superlestes and Cyptolestes Williamson, 1921 (Odonata: Lestidae). Occasional Papers of the Museum of Zoology, University of Michigan 694, 13.Google Scholar
Greenwalt, DE and Bechly, G (2014) A re-description of the fossil damselfly Eolestes syntheticus Cockerell, 1940 (Odonata: Zygoptera: Eolestidae n. fam.) with description of new taxa from the Eocene of North America. Zootaxa 3887, 138–56. doi: 10.11646/zootaxa.3887.2.2.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gyeltshen, T, Kalkman, VJ and Orr, AG (2017) Honouring His Royal Highness the Crown Prince of Bhutan: Megalestes gyalsey (Odonata: Synlestidae). Zootaxa 4244, 588–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hagen, HA (1858) Zwei Libellen aus der Braunkohle von Sieblos. Palaeontographica 5, 121–6.Google Scholar
Han, Z, Sinclair, HD, Li, Y, Wang, C, Tao, Z, Qian, X, Ning, Z, Zhang, J, Wen, Y, Lin, J, Zhang, B, Xu, M, Dai, J, Zhou, A, Liang, H and Cao, SH (2019) Internal drainage has sustained low-relief Tibetan landscapes since the early Miocene. Geophysical Research Letters 46. doi: 10.1029/2019GL083019.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hess, W (1895) Beitrag zur Kenntnis der tertiären Agrioniden: eine neue Lestes-Art aus dem plattigen Steinmergel von Brunstatt bei Mülhausen i. E. Wissenschaftliche Beilage zum Programm der Oberrealschule, Gewerbeschule für das Schuljahr 1894–95, Programm, Mülhausen 538, 115.Google Scholar
Jacquelin, L, Desutter-Grandcolas, L, Chintauan-Marquier, I, Boistel, R, Zheng, DR, Prokop, J and Nel, A (2018) New insights on basivenal sclerites using 3D tools and homology of wing veins in Odonatoptera (Insecta). Scientific Reports 8, 17. doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-18615-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jarzembowski, EA, Martínez-Delclòs, X, Bechly, G, Nel, A, Coram, R and Escullié, F (1998) The Mesozoic non-calopterygoid Zygoptera: description of new genera and species from the Lower Cretaceous of England and Brazil and their phylogenetic significance (Odonata, Zygoptera, Coenagrionoidea, Hemiphleboidea, Lestoidea). Cretaceous Research 19, 403–44. doi: 10.1006/cres.1997.0113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jattiot, R, Latutrie, B. and Nel, A (2020) The first damselfly (Odonata, Lestidae) from the upper Eocene of Monteils (Gard, France). Zootaxa 4750, 432–6. doi: 10.11646/zootaxa.4750.3.9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jödicke, R (1997) Die Binsenjungfern und Winterlibellen Europas. Lestidae. Westarp Wissenschaften, Die Neue Brehm-Bücherei Magdeburg 631, 1280.Google Scholar
Kapp, P, DeCelles, P, Gehrels, G, Heizler, M and Ding, L (2007) Geological records of the Lhasa-Qiangtang and Indo-Asian collisions in the Nima area of central Tibet. Geological Society of America Bulletin 119, 917–32. doi: 10.1130/B26033.1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kapp, P, Yin, A, Harrison, TM and Ding, L (2005) Cretaceous-tertiary shortening, basin development, and volcanism in central Tibet. Geological Society of America Bulletin 117, 865–78. doi: 10.1130/B25595.1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kennedy, CH (1920) Forty-two hitherto unrecognized genera of Zygoptera. Ohio Journal of Science 21, 83–8. http://hdl.handle.net/1811/2112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirby, WF (1890) A Synonymic Catalogue of Neuroptera Odonata, or Dragonflies. With an Appendix of Fossil Species. London: Gumey & Jackson, ix + 202 pp. doi: 10.5962/bhl.title.5534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lin, J, Dai, JG, Zhuang, G, Jia, G, Zhang, L, Ning, Z and Wang, C (2020) Late Eocene–Oligocene high relief paleotopography in the North Central Tibetan Plateau: insights from detrital Zircon U–Pb geochronology and leaf wax hydrogen isotope studies. Tectonics 39, e2019TC005815. doi: 10.1029/2019TC005815.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ma, P, Wang, C, Meng, J, Ma, C, Zhao, X, Li, Y and Wang, M (2017) Late Oligocene-early Miocene evolution of the Lunpola Basin, central Tibetan Plateau: evidences from successive lacustrine records. Gondwana Research 48, 224–36. doi: 10.1016/j.gr.2017.04.023.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin, R (1903) Odonates indo-océaniens des collections du Muséum. Bulletin du Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle Paris 8, 506–12.Google Scholar
McLachlan, R (1895) Some new species of Odonata of the “Legion” Lestes, with notes. Annals and Magazine of Natural History 16, 1928.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Münz, PA (1919) A venational study of the suborder Zygoptera (Odonata) with keys for the identification of genera. Memoirs of the Entomological Society (of the Academy of Natural Sciences) 3, 178.Google Scholar
Nel, A (1985) Sur la présence d’un Lestes Leach (1815) fossile de la lignée de Lestes regina Théobald dans les calcaires stampiens d’Aix-en-Provence. (Odon., Lestidae). Entomologica Gallica 1, 317–19.Google Scholar
Nel, A and Fleck, G (2014) Dragonflies and damselflies (Insecta: Odonata) from the Late Eocene of the Isle of Wight. Earth and Environmental Science Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh 104, 283306. doi: 10.1017/S175569101400005X.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nel, A, Martínez-Delclòs, X, Paicheler, J-C and Henrotay, M (1993) Les ‘Anisozygoptera’ fossiles. Phylogénie et classification (Odonata). Martinia Numéro Hors Série 3, 1311.Google Scholar
Nel, A, Martínez-Delclòs, X, Papier, F and Oudard, J (1997) New Tertiary fossil Odonata from France (Sieblosiidae, Lestidae, Coenagrioniidae, Megapodagrionidae, Libellulidae). Deutsche Entomologische Zeitschrift 44, 231–58. doi: 10.1002/mmnd.19970440210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nel, A and Paicheler, J-C (1994) Les Lestoidea (Odonata, Zygoptera) fossiles: un inventaire critique. Annales de Paléontologie 80, 159.Google Scholar
Nel, A and Papazian, M (1985) Description d’une nouvelle espèce fossile de Lestes Leach, 1815, du Stampien de Céreste (Alpes-de-Haute-Provence) (Odon. Lestidae). Entomologica Gallica 1, 275–9.Google Scholar
Payra, A, Dawn, P, Subramanian, KA, Deepak, CK, Chandra, K and Tripathy, B (2021) New record of Megalestes gyalsey Gyeltshen, Kalkman & Orr, 2017 (Zygoptera: Synlestidae) from India, with first description of female and larva. Zootaxa 4938, 233–42. doi: 10.11646/zootaxa.4938.2.4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pérez-Gutiérrez, LA (2012) Archilestes chocoanus, a new damselfly from Colombia (Odonata: Lestidae). Odonatologica 41, 347–52. doi: 10.5281/zenodo.3236059.Google Scholar
Pinhey, E (1980) Revision of African Lestidae (Odonata). Occasional Papers of the National Museums and Monuments of Rhodesia (B). Natural Sciences 6, 327480.Google Scholar
Piton, L (1934) Pseudo-névroptères des cinérites du tertiaire d’Auvergne. Bulletin Mensuel de la Société Linnéenne de Lyon 78, 171–6.Google Scholar
Piton, L (1940) Paléontologie du gisement éocène de Menat (Puy-de-Dôme), flore et faune. Mémoires de la Société d’Histoire Naturelle d’Auvergne 1, 1303.Google Scholar
Polissar, PJ, Freeman, KH, Rowley, DB, McInerney, FA and Currie, BS (2009) Paleoaltimetry of the Tibetan Plateau from D/H ratios of lipid biomarkers. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 287, 6476. doi: 10.1016/j.epsl.2009.07.037.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quade, J, Breecker, DO, Daëron, M and Eiler, J (2011) The paleoaltimetry of Tibet: an isotopic perspective. American Journal of Science 311, 77115. doi: 10.2475/02.2011.01.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Riek, EF and Kukalová-Peck, J (1984) A new interpretation of dragonfly wing venation based upon Early Carboniferous fossils from Argentina (Insecta: Odonatoidea) and basic characters states in pterygote wings. Canadian Journal of Zoology 62, 1150–66. doi: 10.1139/z84-166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robinet, C and Roques, A (2010) Direct impacts of recent climate warming on insect populations. Integrative Zoology 5, 132–42. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-4877.2010.00196.x.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Romero, MF (1988) New data on the ecological tolerance of some rheophilous Odonata in Mediterranean Europe (Sierra Morena, Southern Spain). Odonatologica 17, 121–6.Google Scholar
Rowley, DB and Currie, BS (2006) Palaeo-altimetry of the late Eocene to Miocene Lunpola basin, central Tibet. Nature 439, 677–81. doi: 10.1038/nature04506.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schmidt, E (1942) Bemerkungen über Lestiden. 2. Eine neue Gattung und Art aus Kamerun (Eolestes diotima). Mitteilungen der Deutsche Entomologischen Gesellschaft 11, 102–11.Google Scholar
Schmidt, E (1951) The Odonata of Madagascar (Zygoptera). Mémoires de l’Institut Scientifique de Madagascar (A) 6, 115283.Google Scholar
Schmidt, E (1958) Bemerkungen über Lestiden. 3. Über Oligolestes grandis Statz, 1935 und eine neue Lestes-Art aus dem mittel-Oligozän von Rott im Siebengebirge. Decheniana 111, 17.Google Scholar
Seehausen, M (2017) Indolestes lafaeci sp. nov. (Odonata: Lestidae) from Timor, with comparisons to related species. Zootaxa 4244, 7990. doi: 10.11646/zootaxa.4244.1.4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Selys-Longchamps, E de (1862) Synopsis des Agrionines. Troisième légion: Podagrion. Bulletin de l’Académie Royale des Sciences, des Lettres et des Beaux-Arts de Belgique 14, 544.Google Scholar
Su, T, Spicer, RA, Wu, F, Farnsworth, A., Huang, J, Del Rio, C, Deng, T, Ding, L, Deng, W-Y-D, Huang, Y-J, Hughes, A, Jia, L-B, Jin, J-H, Li, S-F, Liang, S-Q, Liu, J, Liu, X-Y, Sherlock, S, Spicer, T, Srivastava, G, Tang, H, Valdes, P, Wang, T-X, Widdowson, M, Wu, M-X, Xing, Y-W, Xu, C-L, Yang, J, Zhang, C, Zhang, S-T, Zhang, X-W, Zhao, F and Zhou, Z-K (2020) A Middle Eocene lowland humid subtropical “Shangri-La” ecosystem in central Tibet. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 117, 32819–22. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2012647117.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Su, T, Farnsworth, A., Spicer, RA, Huang, J, Wu, F, Liu, J, Li, S-F, Xing, Y-W, Huang, Y-J, Deng, W-Y-D, Tang, H, Xu, C-L, Zhao, F, Srivastava, G, Valdes, PJ, Deng, T and Zhou, Z-K (2019) No high Tibetan Plateau until the Neogene. Science Advances 5, eaav2189. doi: 10.1126/sciadv.aav2189.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sun, J, Xu, Q, Liu, W, Zhang, Z, Xue, L and Zhao, P (2014) Palynological evidence for the latest Oligocene−early Miocene paleoelevation estimate in the Lunpola Basin, central Tibet. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 399, 2130. doi: 10.1016/j.palaeo.2014.02.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Théobald, N (1937) Les insectes fossiles des terrains oligocènes de France. Bulletin Mensuel (Mémoires) de la Société des Sciences de Nancy 1, 1473.Google Scholar
Tillyard, RJ (1913) On some new and rare Australian Agrionidae (Odonata). Proceedings of the Linnean Society of New South Wales 37, 404–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tillyard, RJ (1917) The Biology of Dragonflies (Odonata or Paraneuroptera). London: Cambridge University Press, xii + 396 pp.Google Scholar
Tillyard, RJ (1926) The Insects of Australia and New Zealand. Sydney: Angus and Robertson, xi + 560 pp.Google Scholar
Tillyard, RJ and Fraser, FC (1938) A reclassification of the order Odonata based on some new interpretations of the venation of the dragonfly wing. Part 1. Australian Zoologist 9, 124–69.Google Scholar
Vajda, C, Szabó, LJ, Cserháti, C and Dévaia, G (2018) Analysing the European genera of family Lestidae (Odonata: Zygoptera) with special emphasis on the status of Chalcolestes based on the morphological characteristics of male adults. International Journal of Odonatology 21, 241–59. doi: 10.1080/13887890.2018.1547224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Valdes, PJ, Lin, D., Farnsworth, A, Spicer, RA, Li, S-H and Tao, S (2019) Comment on “Revised paleoaltimetry data show low Tibetan Plateau elevation during the Eocene”. Science 365, eaax8474. doi: 10.1126/science.aax8474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van der Linden, PL (1825) Monographiae Libellulinarum Europaearum Specimen. Brussels: Frank, 42 pp.Google Scholar
Wang, H, Dutta, S, Kelly, RS, Rudra, A, Li, S, Zhang, QQ, Zhang, QQ, Wu, YX, Cao, MZ, Wang, B, Li, JG and Zhang, HC (2018) Amber fossils reveal the early Cenozoic dipterocarp rainforest in central Tibet. Palaeoworld 27, 506–11. doi: 10.1016/j.palwor.2018.09.006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watson, JAL and Moulds, MS (1979) New species of Australian Lestidae (Odonata). Journal of the Australian Entomological Society 18, 143–55. doi: 10.1111/j.1440-6055.1979.tb00828.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wildermuth, H and Martens, A (2019) Die Libellen Europas. Alle Arten von den Azoren bis zum Ural im Porträt. Wiebelsheim: Quelle & Meyer, 960 pp.Google Scholar
Williamson, EB (1921) Two new Neotropical genera of Lestinae (Odonata). Occasional Papers of the Museum of Zoology, University of Michigan 96, 19.Google Scholar
Wu, FX, Miao, DS, Chang, MM, Shi, GL and Wang, N (2017) Fossil climbing perch and associated plant megafossils indicate a warm and wet central Tibet during the late Oligocene. Scientific Reports 7, 878. doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-00928-9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Xu, Q, Ding, L, Zhang, L, Cai, F, Lai, Q, Yang, D and Zeng, J (2013) Paleogene high elevations in the Qiangtang Terrane, central Tibetan Plateau. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 362, 3142. doi: 10.1016/j.epsl.2012.11.058.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yin, A and Harrison, TM (2000) Geologic evolution of the Himalayan-Tibetan orogen. Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences 28, 211–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Figure 0

Fig. 1. Geological map showing fossil site in northern Kanggale Hill of Nima Basin, central Tibet, SW China.

Figure 1

Fig. 2. Photograph showing fossiliferous outcrop in Kanggale Hill.

Figure 2

Fig. 3. Representative fossils from fossiliferous outcrop in Kanggale Hill. (a) Chalcolestes tibetensis sp. nov., holotype (NIGP174550). (b) Aquarius lunpolaensis (Hemiptera). (c) Aquarius lunpolaensis and a cyprin fish. (d) Cyprinid fish. (e) Orthoptera: Grylloidea. Scale bars = 10 mm.

Figure 3

Fig. 4. Line drawing of Chalcolestes tibetensis sp. nov., holotype (NIGP174550).

Figure 4

Fig. 5. Line drawing of four wings of Chalcolestes tibetensis sp. nov., holotype (NIGP174550).