Triassoscelis Evans, 1956 Triassoscelis Evans, 1956: 192. Type species. Triassoscelis anomala Evans, 1956, by original designation. Emended diagnosis. Tegmen (base not preserved) c. 2.5 times longer than wide (estimate only); post-nodal area very finely punctate, pre-nodal area not well preserved, but some sparse coarser punctation detected; costal margin broadly rounded, apex bluntly rounded; peripheral membrane noticeably wider at CuA; costal space c. 2 times as wide as medial cell, with 2–4 faint, incompletely developed costal veinlets; R and M apparently separating near apex of basal cell; R fork just beyond tegmen length, a short distance before M fork which is aligned with the RA and CuA forks; RA complexly and variably branched; RA 1 directed towards antero-apical margin, with 2 or 3 terminations; RA 2 stem directed towards apical margin, parallel with RP, with 3 or 6 main branches; RA 1 + RA 2 field occupying entire antero-apical margin; RP with 2 main branches; one apical ir, running between last main branch of RA 2 and RP or RP 1; one r-m, proximal to ir, running to M 1+2 just beyond length of intra-medial cell; M variably branched, with 4, 5 or 7 terminations; im between M 1+2 and M 3, or M 2 and M 3a; intra-medial cell long and narrow, more than 3 times longer than wide, occupying a small portion of post-nodal area; CuA fork quite deep; CuA 1 strongly angled at m-cua which joins M 3+4 very near its base; CuA 2 and distal piece of CuA 1 more or less parallel, the CuA 1 cell thus quite broad and parallelogram-like; CuA 1 with 2 or 3 short terminal branches; apical crossvein field not aligned; CuA 2 simple; clavus not preserved. Notes. Triassoscelis, was placed by Evans (1956), Becker-Migdisova (1962a), Carpenter 1992), and Jell (2004) in the catch-all Scytinopteridae, and by Evans (1961) simply in Cicadelloidea without family attribution. It was transferred to Hylicellidae by Hamilton (1992). Triassoscelis looks to be the sister genus of Crosbella, sharing the wider peripheral membrane at CuA, and the parallelogram-like CuA cell. It differs from Crosbella in having a broader, more squat wing shape with a much more bluntly rounded apex, CuA fork in line with rather than proximal to the M fork, and in less proliferated apical venation, with far fewer crossveins and terminal branches. With Crosbella, it shares the proliferated and variable radial and medial venation, and presence of weakly developed costal veinlets, and is therefore also assigned to the subfamily Vietocyclinae.

Published as part of Lambkin, Kevin J., 2020, Revision of the Hylicellidae of the Late Triassic of Queensland (Hemiptera Cicadomorpha: Hylicelloidea), pp. 525-539 in Zootaxa 4790 (3) on pages 530-532, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4790.3.7, http://zenodo.org/record/3891303