Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Aconurella Ribaut Remarks. Although this genus was not previously recorded from Pakistan, one species (indica) described from Pakistan and India in Cicadula by Pruthi (1930) and two other species described from Pakistan (karachiensis and lobata) in Chiasmus by Ahmed et al (1988), belong in the genus and are considered to be junior synonyms of the widespread A. prolixa (Lethierry), previously recorded from Europe and Africa (Nast, 1972). Despite the poor original figures of the latter two species their ocelli are shown as marginal (as in Aconurella) whereas they are dorsal in Chiasmus (compare Figs 9 a and 10a), and the original figure of the aedeagus is as in Aconurella species (Figs 9 k-m). Therefore these species were not compared to Aconurella species but to other Chiasmus species and distinguished from them based on the male pygofer. Also, for A. lobata a continuous pygofer comb is figured, as found in Aconurella prolixa and although in A. karachiensis this comb is not described or figured the pygofer figure appears to us to be incorrectly drawn in its posterior part. The aedeagal figures of both species also match A. prolixa. The head markings in A. prolixa are variable (see Figs 9 a–d) and we have seen examples of this species with vertex markings similar to the original figures of lobata and karachiensis. Therefore taking the above similarities into consideration we conclude that the latter species are junior synonyms of A. prolixa. After examination of paratypes of A. neosolana Rao & Ramakrishnan (BMNH), described from India, we also consider this species a synonym of A. prolixa (see below). In addition to indica, dealt with above, three other species of Aconurella occur in India, i.e., A. solana Ghauri, A. montana (Distant) and A. erebus (Distant) (= A. montanus macropterous (Pruthi), synonymised by Ghauri, 1974: 555). Of these, at least one (A. erebus) appears distinct from A. prolixa based on its discontinuous pygofer comb. Aconurella prolixa (Lethierry) (Plate 1, g; Fig. 9). Cicadula indica Pruthi. Syn. nov. Chiasmus lobata Ahmed & Qadeer. Syn. nov. Chiasmus karachiensis Ahmed & Qadeer & Malik. Syn. nov. Aconurella neosolana Rao & Ramakrishnan. Syn. nov. Material examined. Pakistan: holotype 3 (genitalia only), paratype 3 of Chiasmus karachiensis, no data; 53, 23Ƥ, Mithi, 7.viii.07. India: 13, 2Ƥ, Raghubendra, Nagar (A P), 13.v.1987 (paratypes of A. neosolana) (BMNH). Remarks. Specimens were compared to the figures given by Ribaut (1952, figs 99–105). A specimen from Uzbekistan, Tashkent (BMNH) is also figured (Fig. 9 l) to show the similarity of the aedeagus from both regions. See also generic remarks. Cicadula indica was described from Murree and Dalhousie Hills, Punjab and throughout India. The original figures and those of Pruthi’s material by Datta (1972) are good enough to place this species as a synonym of prolixa. Chiasmus lobata was described from a holotype male and one paratype, from: Karachi, grass, 10.xi.1985 (ZMUK); no type specimens could be found. Chiasmus karachiensis was described from the holotype male and paratype from: Karachi, grass, 1.xi.85, Qadeer (ZMUK). Paratypes are also present in the BMNH (see Material examined).
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.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,038 | 0,010 |
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 découle