Lipurometriocnemus Saether 1981
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Lipurometriocnemus - Four species were collected, three of them undescribed. Lipurometriocnemus was first described from the British West Indies by Saether (1981), with L. glabalus as the sole species. Saether (1982) then described L. vixlobatus from South Carolina, USA. The two species were supposedly separated by the absence of setae on R 1, a weak inferior volsella and a “slight hump on tergite IX representing a reduced anal point” in L. vixlobatus. Cranston & Oliver (1988) reported L. vixlobatus from the Yukon Territory of Canada, and examined paratypes of L. glabalus and a single specimen (which they thought to also represent L. glabalus) from Braulio Carillo National Park in Costa Rica (the Zurquí site is adjacent to a portion of the huge park). They noted that the two species were difficult to separate because of variation in the supposedly diagnostic characters, but gave no reason why they assigned the Yukon specimen to vixlobatus, which following its description should lack any setae on R 1, instead of assigning it to L. glabalus. I noted such variation in the volsellae and “anal hump” in the Zurquí material I’ve designated as L. glabalus; there was variation in the length/ breadth of the gonostylus but much appeared due to the viewing angle. I saw no specimens in which R 1 was devoid of setae and considered all material I put in this group to be L. glabalus (63 specimens). My L. sp. ZUR–1(eight specimens) has genitalia similar to those of L. glabalus but has a very low AR (~0.32–0.58) compared to what is being called L. glabalus today (following Cranston & Oliver 1988 and Andersen et al. 2016). In Saether’s (1981) original description of L. glabalus, all of the type material lacked antennae, but it is now apparently assumed that the species has an AR similar to that of L. vixlobatus – around 1.60–1.75. Zurquí material of L. glabalus had ARs> 1.70. My L. sp. ZUR–2 (36 specimens) has an AR around 1.76–1.85 and genitalia very similar to those of L. glabalus, except the proximal portion of the gonostylus bears a hump that separates it from that of L. glabalus. Further work (i.e., measurements of other body parts, etc.) may show this taxon may also belong with L. glabalus. My L. sp. ZUR–3 (two specimens) has an AR of about 1.0 or less and has a distinctively pronounced inferior volsella. Andersen et al. (2016) described two new Lipurometriocnemus species from Brazil and provided a key for the known species. Their L. biancae has a pronounced inferior volsella, but not the same as L. sp. ZUR–3, and an AR of 1.29-1.45. Their L. amazonicus (AR 1.23–1.45) is very similar to L. glabalus, but has fewer dorsocentral setae.
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 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 | 0,006 | 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) | 0,019 | 0,006 |
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; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».