Acanthosoma rufispinum Tsai & Rédei 2015, new combination
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Acanthosoma rufispinum (Distant, 1887), new combination Figs 44–56, 160 Sastragala rufispina Distant, 1887: 352. Syntype (s): North India; BMNH! Sastragala minuta: Ahmad et al. (1979: 8, 12), Schaefer & Ahmad (1987: 24). Unavailable name. Sastragala minuta Ahmad & Moizuddin, 1990: 287, 290. Holotype: ♂, Pakistan: Punjab, Murree; NHMUK. New subjective synonym. Sastragala murreeana (non Distant, 1900): Ahmad & Moizuddin (1990: 289). Misidentification. Sastragala rufispina: Atkinson 1889: 29 (reproduction of original description, distribution), Lethierry & Severin 1893: 254 (catalogue, distribution), Distant 1902: 319 (redescription, distribution), Kirkaldy 1909: 173 (catalogue, distribution), Distant 1918: 148 (diagnostic characters, distribution, record), Ahmad & Moizuddin 1990: 287 (in key, distribution). Sastragala murreeana (misidentification): Ahmad et al. 1979: 8 (listed), 12 (record, host plant), Ahmad & Moizuddin 1985: 66 (anatomy, figures), Ahmad & Moizuddin 1986: 169 (figures, host plant, immatures), Schaefer & Ahmad 1987: 23 (host plant), Ahmad & Moizuddin 1990: 287 (in key, distribution), 289 (redescription, figures, record, host plant). Type material examined. Sastragala rufispina. Lectotype (present designation): ♀, “Type \ H. T.” [pr circle with red border], “Col. \ Buckley” [gray circle, hw], “ Distant coll. \ 1911-383” [pr], “rufispinus \ Dist.” [Distant’s hw]; pinned, both antennae, tibiae and tarsi of left fore, both mid, and right hind leg, tarsus of right fore leg, tarsal segment II of left hind leg lacking; deposited in BMNH (Figs 44–46). Additional specimens examined. PAKISTAN. Punjab: Murree, leg. F. Stoliczka, F.S. 118 (1 ♀ BMNH); same locality and collector, coll. Atkinson, B.M. 92-6 (1 ♂ BMNH); same locality and collector, coll. W.L. Distant, B.M. 1911-383 (1 ♀ BMNH); Azad Kashmir: Tararkhel [= Tarar Khel], from grass, 4.viii.1965, leg. S.M. Khan (1 ♂ BMNH).— INDIA. Himachal Pradesh: Kulu [= Kullu], 5000 ft., leg. C. Rost (1 ♀ HNHM), Dalhousie, 21.vi.1961, leg. P.W. Oman (1 ♂ USNM); Uttarakhand: Mussoorie [= Masūrī], United Prov. Forest Dept., Dehra Dun, A.W. Imms, B.M. 1915-228 (1 ♂ BMNH); Mussoorie, Inoti, United Prov. Forest Dept., Dehra Dun, 16.x.1910, A.W. Imms, B.M. 1915-228 (1 ♀ BMNH); Dehra Dun, leg. Ollenbach, Pusa coll. (1 ♂ BMNH); Almora Dist., Chaubattia, 6000–7000 ft., leg. S. R. Archer, B.M. 1920-175 (1 ♀ BMNH); Naini Tal [= Nainital], 7800 ft., 4.ii.1934, leg. J.A. Graham, B.M. 1934-147 (2 ♂♂ BMNH), Garhwal, Saklana Tehri, Uniyal Gaon, Jai K. Uniyal, 5500 ft., 22.v.1946, on leaves of Alnus nitida, coll. J.C. Lutz (11 ♂♂ 9♀♀ USNM).— NEPAL. Jiri, 1900 m, 17– 19.v.1962, leg. G. Ebert (1 ♂ NMPC), Janakpur, Malipu-Dolakha, 1000–1700 m, 9.viii.1983, unknown collector (1 ♀ SEHU), Godavari, Napal Valley, 17.vi.1968, leg. T. Kumata (1 ♀ SEHU). Diagnosis. Recognized by its distinctly anterolaterally produced and apically rather obtuse humeri (Figs 44– 45) and particularly its male genitalia (Figs 47–55). Pendergrast’s organ of ventrite VI larger than that of ventrite VII, rounded (Fig. 56). Description of male and female terminalia. Male. Genital capsule (Figs 47–51) with a pair of short, broadly rounded lateral projections almost reaching apex of membrane in rest; dorsal rim with a broad, deep, U-shaped incision; apex of lateral projection with a pigmented denticle, dorsal infolding protruding basally, with a pair of pigmented ridges; ventral rim with a broad, rounded medial incision, with a pair of pigmented denticles laterally, and a pair of somewhat elongate, pigmented protuberances subapically. Paramere as in Figs 52–55. Segment X with a dorsoapical protusion (cf. Fig. 47). Female (Fig. 56). Posterior margin of ventrite VII with a deep, parabolic median incision surrounding valvifers VIII, margined with black, with a pair of black submedian patches submarginally; laterotergites IX obliquely directed and broadly separated along meson; posterior margin of laterotergites VIII shallowly arcuate. Notes. Sastragala rufispina was described from North India based on an unspecified number of individuals (syntypes) (Distant 1887). A single female syntype was found in BMNH (Figs 29–30) and it is designated as lectotype; several additional specimens of both sexes were examined from various localities of northern India and Nepal. The species is hereby transferred to Acanthosoma based on arguments presented in the Discussion. Based on several specimens from Murree of Punjab Province, Pakistan, Ahmad & Moizuddin (1990) provided a detailed redescription of a species identified by them as Sastragala murreeana Distant, 1900. Their text and illustrations, particularly those of the genitalia of the male leave no doubt that they misidentified Acanthosoma murreeanum and their record pertains to A. rufispinum. We have examined specimens of A. rufispinum from the same locality. Based on a single male also from Murree, Ahmad & Moizuddin (1990) described a new species, Sastragala minuta. According to their diagnosis it only differs from S. murreana sensu Ahmad & Moizuddin (= Acanthosoma rufispinum) by insignificant characters; its male genitalia, particularly the very characteristic genital capsule (cf. Ahmad & Moizuddin 1990: 299, fig. 24), are identical with those of A. rufispinum. Unfortunately we could not access the holotype, but as the original description and illustrations of S. minuta convincingly indicate that this species does not differ from A. rufispinum, the synonymy of the two species seems justified. We treat the specific epithet as an adjective (New Latin rufispinus, - a, - um, meaning ‘having red spine’) and therefore we change the ending according to the gender of the genus. Distribution. Apparently a Himalayan species occurring in the mountainous regions of north Pakistan, India, and Nepal. It is reported from Nepal for the first time in the present paper.— PAKISTAN. Punjab!; Azad Kashmir!— INDIA. Himachal Pradesh!; Uttarakhand!— NEPAL!
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,010 | 0,004 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».