Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Platylabus clarus (Cresson, 1867) (Figures 22, 23) Ichneumon clarus Cresson, 1867: 297 (descr.); Berthoumieu 1904: 42 (distr.); Cresson 1916: 24 (cat.). Platylabus clarus Cresson 1877: 199 (distr., key, notes); Cresson 1887: 191 (cat.); Dalla Torre 1902: 781 (cat.); Bradley 1903: 280 (distr., key, fig., syn.); Viereck 1917: 343 (key); Townes 1944: 311 (cat., syn.); Guppy 1948: 13 (distr.); Townes and Townes 1951: 280 (cat.); Strickland 1952: 120 (distr.); Foxlee 1954: 13 (distr.); Short 1959: 449 (larva descr.); Heinrich 1959: 215 (notes, syn.); Heinrich 1962b: 705 (descr., distr., neallotype designation, key); Heinrich 1977: 274 (descr., distr., key); Short 1978: 120 (larva descr.); Bradley 1978: 6 (distr., host); Carlson 1979: 544 (cat., distr.); Bugg et al. 1989: 112 (distr., host); Yu and Horstmann 1997: 678 (cat.); Yu et al. 2016 (cat.). Platylabus magnificus Provancher, 1886: 36 (descr., key); Cresson 1887: 191 (cat.); Dalla Torre 1902: 784 (cat.); Bradley 1903: 280 (distr., key, syn.); Berthoumieu 1904: 57 (cat.); Gahan and Rohwer 1918a: 168 (invalid lectotype designation); Barron 1975: 503 (notes). Regarded as synonym of I. clarus by Bradley (1903: 280). Original type series Holotype ♀ of Platylabus clarus, by monotypy (ANSP); holotype ♀ of Platylabus magnificus, by monotypy (LUEC). Cresson (1867, p. 297) described Platylabus clarus based on ‘One ♀ specimen’. Therefore, this specimen is here referred to as the holotype fixed by monotypy (ICZN 1999, Article 73.1.2). Provancher (1886, p. 36) described Platylabus magnificus based on ‘Une seule ♀ capturée Bécàncour’ (= only one ♀ captured at Bécàncour). Gahan and Rohwer (1918a, p. 168) designated a lectoype, but as Barron (1975, p. 503) acknowledged, there is no need for a lectotype as Provancher clearly mentioned only one specimen. Therefore, this specimen is here referred to as the holotype fixed by monotypy (ICZN 1999, Article 73.1.2) and Gahan and Rohwer’s (1918a, p. 168) designation should be considered an invalid lectotype designation. Type locality United States of America, Massachusetts, Ridings (Platylabus clarus). Canada, Québec, ‘Bécancour’ (Platylabus magnificus). Heinrich (1962b, 1977) reported New Hampshire as the type locality for Platylabus clarus, even though the type locality, as reported by Cresson (1867, p. 297), is Massachusetts, while New Hampshire is a locality later added by Cresson (1877, p. 199). Material examined UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ALABAMA: Madison Co., Huntsville, Monte Sand [Sano] St. Park, blacklight trap, 24 May–02 June 1982, leg. L.L. Lampert, 1♀ (FSCA); FLORIDA: Leon Co., Tall Timb. R. S., M. Trap 6, 13–20 November 1983, leg. Gupta, 1♂ & 1♀ (FSCA); GEORGIA: Athens, Bot. Garden M.Tr., 04 May 1983, leg. Gupta, 1♂ (FSCA); idem, 05 July 1983, 1♀ (FSCA); idem, 05 June 1983, ♀ (FSCA);; Cobb Co., Smyrna, M. Trap 3, 04 May 1983, leg. Gupta, 2♂♂ (FSCA); NEW YORK: Westchester Co., Armonk, Calder Center, Malaise trap, 12–18 July 1974, leg. C. Calmbacher, 1♂ (FSCA); VIRGINIA: Carrol Co., 14 October 1969, leg. R.G. Gardner, 1♀ (VMNH); Essex Co., 1.5 km SE of Dunnsville, Malaise Trap, 11 October 1991, leg. D.R. Smith, 2♀♀ (VMNH); Mecklenburg Co., Elm Hill S.G.M.A., Cyde’s Pond, Malaise Trap, 1–30 October 1995, leg. VMNH Sruvey, 1♀ (VMNH); University of Richmond, 11 February 1962, 1♀ (VMNH). Updated distribution (Figure 23) CANADA: Alberta (Strickland 1952), British Columbia (Guppy 1948; Foxlee 1954; Bradley 1978), Newfoundland and Labrador (Bradley 1978), Ontario (Heinrich 1962b; Bradley 1978), Quebec (Provancher 1886; Bradley 1978), Saskatchewan (Bradley 1978); UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: Alabama (new state record), Florida (Heinrich 1977), Georgia (Heinrich 1977), Louisiana (Heinrich 1977), Maine (Heinrich 1962b), Massachusetts (Cresson 1867), New Hampshire (Cresson 1877), North Carolina (Heinrich 1962b), Pennsylvania (Heinrich 1962b), Virginia (new state record), West Virginia (new state record). Host Caripeta divisata Walker (Bradley 1978), Eutrapela clemataria J.E. Smith (Bradley 1978; Bugg et al. 1989), Phaeuora quernaria J.E. Smith (Bradley 1978) (Lepidoptera: Geometridae). Bradley (1978, p. 6) reported also one ‘ Noctuidae ’ among the possible hosts for the species, without mentioning any genus or species. Further investigations are needed to confirm the record. Male The first description of a male was provided by Cresson (1877, p. 199), but Heinrich (1962b, p. 705) believed that he himself was describing the male for the first time (referring to it as neallotype). Comments This species is widespread across the entire eastern part of North America, as stated by Townes and Townes (1951) and Carlson (1979), where it is the Platylabus with the southernmost distribution (reaching Florida) (Heinrich 1977; Yu et al. 2016). Heinrich (1962b) stated that he has never seen specimens of this species from the west, but the species was reported by Guppy (1948, p. 13) for Vancouver Island (British Columbia). However, this last record is inconsistent as the author listed the species for the island but also added a comment by Henry Townes – the one responsible for the determination – who stated that the species was ‘not recorded from the West’. It is unclear whether he was referring to the western United States or more generally to western North America. Subsequent records by Foxlee (1954, p. 13) and Bradley (1978, p. 6) provided new evidence of the species occurring in the West, specifically at Robson, British Columbia. There are several images of the species on BugGuide. However, we preferred to be cautious with including those records within this publication as there are species morphologically very similar to Platylabus clarus (e.g. Platylabus divisatae Heinrich, 1963 or Platylabus hyperetis Heinrich, 1962), which could prevent a correct identification from photos. Townes (1944) proposed that Platylabus metallicus Bradley, 1903 was a junior synonym of P. clarus without providing any comments, while Heinrich (1959, p. 215) rejected this view, noting that Townes (1944) misidentified some specimens as Platylabus clarus when they actually belonged to the former species.
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 | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,034 | 0,007 |
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 ».