Haplaphalara Uichanco 1912, stat. rev.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Haplaphalara Uichanco, 1912, stat. rev. Haplaphalara Uichanco 1921: 260. Type species: Aphalara dahli Rübsaamen, 1905, by original designation. = Aconopsylla Tuthill and Taylor 1955: 247. Type species: Psylla sterculiae Froggatt 1901, by original designation. Syn. nov. Diagnosis: Adult. Head, in lateral view, deflexed 45–90° from longitudinal axis of body (Fig. 1G); in dorsal view about as wide as or slightly narrower than thorax, moderately transverse. Vertex rhomboidal; covered in areolate-rugose or imbricate microsculpture, sometimes much reduced on disc; passing smoothly into genae anteriorly; coronal suture fully developed; genaeweaklyproducedventrallybutnotenlargedintoprocesses; frons widely trapezoidal; median ocellus visible or hidden in perpendicular view to vertex; compound eyes, in dorsal view, hemispherical, adpressed to head. Clypeus pear-shaped, medium- to large-sized, flattened ventrally, not or hardly visible in lateral view as it is hidden by genae. Antenna 10-segmented, distinctly longer than head width; flagellum with simple setae; segment 3 longest, longer than segment 4 and shorter than 4–6 together; segments 4, 6, 8, and 9 bearing each a subapical rhinarium lacking marginal spines. Thorax moderately slender; dorsal outline, in lateral view, weakly curved. Pronotum, in dorsal view, weakly curved posteriad laterally; propleurites subrectangular, divided by oblique suture into larger epimeron and smaller episternum. Metapostnotum with blunt tubercle or shallow longitudinal ridge. Mesosternum narrower than head, forming transverse band more than three times as wide as long laterally; anterior margin weakly concave; pleurosternal suture not or hardly visible; basisternum indistinct, but large, oval in H. irvingiae and H. Laos; katepisternum small antero-laterally, not bent dorsad laterally; angle between arms of precoxale obtuse. Pro- and mesotibiae cylindrical. Metacoxa with blunt or subacute horn-shaped meracanthus. Metafemur with the three ventral sense organs in medial or submedial position (Fig. 6I, J); apex with a group of stout long setae. Metatibia longer than metafemur, hardly to distinctly widened apically; bearing 6–10 evenly spaced to distinctly grouped apical sclerotized spurs that may be on raised processes, without unsclerotized bristle-like setae (Fig. 7G). Both metatarsal segments relatively short, subequal in length. Forewing oblong-oval, widest in the middle or in apical third; 2.2–2.4 times as long as wide, membranous; vein C + Sc weakly, evenly convex, slender, distinctly delimited from cell; costal break developed, close apex of vein R 1; pterostigma wide, entirely membranous; nodal line developed in some species; vein R as long as or shorter than M + Cu; vein Rs weakly or moderately convex relative to costal margin; vein M longer than M 1 + 2; vein Cu 1a curved towards anal margin; veins M 1 + 2 and M 3 + 4 perpendicular to wing margin apically; anal break adjacent to apex of vein Cu 1b; surface spinules fine or coarse, spaced or dense, present in all cells or sometimes almost completely lacking. Hindwing slightly shorter than forewing; with one or two costal setae proximal to costal break and two distinct groups one to four proximal and two to five distal setae, distal to costal break; vein R + M + Cu indistinctly trifurcating, base of vein Cu indistinct. Abdominal base usually with a sclerotized area on either side covered in spines. Aedeagus with proximal portion simple or subdivided subapically; apex of distal portion differentiated from stem, though sometimes indistinctly (Fig. 9E). Female subgenital plate with or without apical process. Last instar immature. Antenna nine segments; bearing sectasetae or lanceolate setae on antennal flagellum. Mid- and hindlegs without massive peg-like setae. Dorsal body surface bearing minute clavate setae. Precaudal abdominal tergites lacking densely spaced simple setae or sectasetae. Anus in terminal position; with additional pore fields developed. Comments: In all analyses, Haplaphalara as redefined here is an artificial, paraphyletic assemblage (Figs 10, 11; Supporting Information, File S4). It is morphologically similar to Diclidophlebia and Melanastera from which it differs in the ungrouped apical metatibial spurs and the apex of the metatibia lacking unsclerotized antero-apical bristle-like setae. Except for the strong support in the molecular analyses for H. irvingiae + H. Laos as sister-taxa, there are no consistently supported groupings warranting generic rank within this assemblage. We, therefore, keep it as an artificial, paraphyletic genus awaiting further analyses. Included species, distribution, and host plants are summarized in Table 3 and Supporting Information, File S3. The following new or revived combinations are proposed here: Haplaphalara adelaidae (Braza and Calilung 1981: 344), comb. rev. (from Paurocephala; Haplaphalara, Navasero and Calilung 1998: 14; Diclidophlebia, Burckhardt and Mifsud 2003: 13); H. dahli (Rübsaamen 1905: 23), comb. rev. (Aphalara; Haplaphalara, Uichanco 1921: 261; Strophingia, Crawford 1925: 40: 40; Diclidophlebia, Burckhardt and Mifsud 2003: 13); H. dombeyae (Burckhardt et al., 2006: 369), comb. nov. (Diclidophlebia); H. grewiae (Kandasamy 1986: 61), comb. nov. (Paurocephala; Diclidophlebia, Burckhardt and Mifsud 2003: 14); H. irvingiae (Burckhardt et al., 2006: 376), comb. nov. (Diclidophlebia); H. maculata (Crawford 1919: 151), comb. rev. (Paurocephala; Haplaphalara, Loginova 1972: 841; Diclidophlebia, Burckhardt and Mifsud 2003: 14); H. menoni (Mathur 1975: 50), comb. rev. (Paurocephala; Haplaphalara, Hollis 1984: 28; Diclidophlebia, Burckhardt and Mifsud 2003: 14); H. parinari (Burckhardt et al., 2006: 382), comb. nov. (Diclidophlebia); H. sterculiae (Froggatt 1901: 255), comb. nov. (Psylla; Aconopsylla, Tuthill and Taylor 1955: 247; Diclidophlebia, Burckhardt and Mifsud 2003: 14); H. trimaculata (Mathur 1975: 69), comb. rev. (Paurocephala; Haplaphalara, Hollis 1984: 28; Diclidophlebia, Burckhardt and Mifsud 2003: 14); H. tuberculata (Burckhardt et al., 2006: 385), comb. nov. (Diclidophlebia); H. wagneri (Burckhardt et al., 2006: 386), comb. nov. (Diclidophlebia).
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 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,081 | 0,033 |
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 ».