MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W6912813960 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.8169896

Rothaeina beaudini Bennett & Copley & Copley 2023, spec. nov.

2023· article· en· W6912813960 sur OpenAlex

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.

affAu moins un auteur déclare une institution canadienne dans l'instantané OpenAlex épinglé.

Notice bibliographique

RevueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2023
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
ThématiqueSpider Taxonomy and Behavior Studies
Établissements canadiensImmunoPrecise (Canada)
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésHolotypeVolcanoTaxonIntraspecific competitionSternum

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Rothaeina beaudini Bennett spec. nov. Figs 66–69, 85 Type material. U.S.A.: California: Holotype female. Tehama County, near junction south of Lassen Volcanic National Park, 19.ix.1961, W. Ivie & W.J. Gertsch (AMNH). Paratypes. Butte, 1♀, 3.3 mi. from junction of Humbug & Understock Roads, 5.v.1966, Dokes (CAS); Plumas, 1♀, 9.2 mi. NE of Bucks Lake, 4.ix.1988, D. Ubick (CAS); 7♀, S side of Lake Almanor, 5.ix.1959, V.D. Roth & W.J. Gertsch (AMNH); Shasta, 1♀, 5 mi. N of Manzanita Lake, 19.ix.1961, W. Ivie & W.J. Gertsch (AMNH); 3♀, Delta, N end of Shasta Lake, 3.ix.1959, W.J. Gertsch & V.D. Roth (AMNH); 4♀, Emigrant Ford Rd., 4 mi. S of Old Station, 4.ix.1959, V.D. Roth & W.J. Gertsch (AMNH); Tehama, 1♀, Hwy 89, 3.5 mi. S of Lassen Volcanic National Park, 8.viii.1968, F.O. Leech (UASM); 5♀, nr. junction S of Lassen Volcanic National Park, 19.ix.1961, W. Ivie & W.J. Gertsch (AMNH); Etymology. The specific name is a patronym honouring Beaudin A. Bennett who was born in January 1985 at the beginning of the first author’s study of Nearctic Cybaeinae. Diagnosis. As is common among females of other Cybaeinae as well as other supraspecific taxa of spiders (Bennett 2006), intraspecific variability and interspecific similarity of genitalic morphology characters can render the females of Rothaeina gen. nov. difficult to distinguish from each other. In some cases, collection with accompanying males, or geographic locality, may provide the best indication of species identification of females. The male of R. beaudini spec. nov. is unknown; the female can usually be distinguished from its congeners by a combination of epigynal, atrial, and spermathecal characters. The atrium (Fig. 66) is usually small but prominent and U-shaped and, although various components of the vulval ducts are visible through the integument of the uncleared epigyne, none appear decidedly ring-shaped. The vulva (Figs 67–69) is relatively narrow with width (measured at widest extent of spermathecae) usually less than 3.5 times atrial height (measured from epigastric groove to atrium). Additionally, in the vulva the path of the copulatory and spermathecal ducts is relatively easily to trace from the atrium to the fertilization ducts and the medial transverse section of the spermathecae is inconspicuous in dorsal view. In the females of the other species of Rothaeina gen. nov., the atrium is usually small but inconspicuous and never U-shaped (Figs 70, 73, 75, 80). Furthermore, the females of R petersoni spec. nov. and R. sequoia comb. nov. are unique among the females of Rothaeina gen. nov. in having the posterior-most spermathecal ducts clearly visible through the integument of the uncleared epigyne as circular, ring-like structures (Figs 75, 80) and the vulva is relatively broad (vulval width usually 4–5 times atrial height) (Figs 77–79, 81–83). Finally, in the females of the remaining two species (R. jamesi spec. nov. and R. mackinleyi spec. nov.), the vulval ducts (Figs 72, 74) are more complex with the path from the atrium to the fertilization ducts difficult to trace and, in dorsal view, the medial transverse section of each spermatheca is prominent and conspicuous. Description. As in diagnosis and description of the genus. Additional descriptive characters presented here. Abdomen pale or gray, lightly patterned. Male: Unknown. Female: (n=24). Epigyne (Fig. 66) with single, anteromedial atrium; atrium occasionally reduced or apparently absent. Vulva (Figs 67–69) with copulatory ducts separated at atrium; spermathecal ducts not as convoluted as in other species; Bennett’s glands within medial third of spermathecal ducts. Measurements (n=20). CL 1.95–2.45 (2.26+0.15), CW 1.48–1.90 (1.73+0.11), SL 1.09–1.33 (1.23+0.07), SW 1.03–1.24 (1.14+0.06). Holotype CL 2.25, CW 1.73, SL 1.24, SW 1.17. Note: Two species may be represented here. Specimens from the northwestern part of the distribution around Shasta Lake have more heavily pigmented abdomens and somewhat more complex spermathecal ducts (Fig. 67) than specimens from southeast of Shasta Lake (Figs 68–69). Because the male of R. beaudini spec. nov. is unknown and the vulval and atrial characters of females tend to be variable even within populations, all these specimens are here considered to be members of R. beaudini spec. nov. Distribution and natural history. (Fig. 85). Rothaeina beaudini spec. nov. is endemic to north central and northeastern California, U.S.A., from the Shasta Lake area southeast to the northern Sierra Nevada. Within that area, females appear to have been relatively common in the 1950s and 1960s but only a single specimen has been recorded since the 1960s (in 1988) and the conservation status of this taxon is currently unknown.

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 enseignants

Ni 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.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesÉtudes des sciences et des technologies, Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,138
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0010,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0040,010

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,046
Tête enseignante GPT0,266
Écart entre enseignants0,220 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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