Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Neotridactylus apicialis (Say 1825) Figs. 21A–D, 22A, 23 Type locality. USA: Florida: St. John’s River, and Iowa: Council Bluff, on Missouri River. Holotype repository. The type material is lost according to Günther (1975). Etymology. Presumably apicialis refers to the apical edges of the wings; in the original description, Say (1825) describes “...wings edged and tipped with blackish”. Distribution. Günther (1975) describes this as the most wide-ranging species of the genus, with specimens recorded from Peru to southern Canada. All the Florida material examined by Günther, as well as all material collected during the present study, is from the northern ⅔ of the state (as far south as Lakeland), although we note that there is a single iNaturalist record of a nymph from Miami-Dade county, indicating that it likely occurs sporadically across the entire state. Variation. Günther (1975) indicated that there is considerable variation in several morphological characters across the wide range of this species, including coloration, overall body size, wing length, and shape/spination of the foretibia, but that characters of the male and female terminalia were uniform throughout. He did not describe subspecies within N. apicialis. Perhaps most striking and noticeable among these variable morphological characters is the shape of the foretibia. As described by Günther (1975), “…the central notch between the digging spines at the distal edge can be more or less deep, and the two forked branches can be asymmetrically shaped”. Examples of this latter variation can be seen in Fig. 21C and 22A. The only specimens I have seen which possess these striking forelimbs are from northern Florida and Georgia, and in all other respects they matched the description of typical apicialis. Notably, N. archboldi and N. insularis sp. nov. never have foretibia with asymmetrically shaped lobes as in these individuals. Interestingly, all the specimens examined with this morphology are males, suggesting some sort of sexual selective pressure at work, but there is too little evidence to say anything for certain. Material examined (n=94). USA, Alabama • 1 ♂, Clarke County: Silver Creek Campground, 10km N Gosport; 29 May 1991; Davidson, Zanol, Acciavatti leg. (CMNH) • USA, Florida • 1 ♀, Leon County: Rock Bluff, Apalachicola NF; 02 July 1994; M. and S. Deyrup leg.; mesic hardwoods (ABS) • 2 ♀, Liberty County: Torreya St Pk.; 21 April 1984; R. Turnbow leg. (UGCA) • 2 ♂, 2 nymphs, Liberty County: Bristol Landing Park: 30.440, -84.986; 22 July 2022; B. Woo leg. (TAMUIC) • 1 ♀, Madison County: Jct. 53 and I-10; 08 July 1992; M. Deyrup leg. (ABS) • 3 ♂, 7 ♀, 11 nymphs, Washington County: Chipley Whitewater Lakes: 30.483, -85.551; 17 June 2023; B. Woo leg. (TAMUIC) • USA, Georgia • 1 ♀, Effingham County; 28 April 1984; R. Morris leg. (UGCA) • 1 ♂, Montgomery County: 3 mi. N. Uvalda; 13–14 July 1985; R. Morris leg.; blacklight (UGCA) • 1 ♀, Oconee County: Oconee Forest near lake; 18 September 2008; SY Lim leg. (UGCA) • 9 ♂, 9 ♀, Wheeler County: 2.2 km NNE Lumber City, Alligator Creek WMA: 31.945, -82.666; 21–24 June 2020; UV light trap in sandhills; JK Adams leg. (CMNH) • 1 ♂, 3 ♀, Wheeler County: same location and dates as previous: 31.949, -82.674; UV light trap in sandhills; JK Adams leg. (CMNH) • 5 ♂, 4 ♀, Wheeler County: same location and dates as previous: 31.947, -82.670; UV light trap in sandhills; JK Adams leg. (CMNH) • 1 ♂, Wheeler County: same location as previous: 31.948, -82677; 13 June 2021; R Androw and K. Karns leg.; UV/MV light (CMNH) • 1 ♂, 2 ♀, Wheeler County: 3.4 km NNE Lumber City, Alligator Creek WMA: 31.956, -82.665; 21–24 June 2020; UV light trap in woodland habitat; JK Adams leg. (CMNH) • 6 ♂, 5 ♀, Wheeler County: 3.7 km NNE Lumber City: Alligator Creek WMA: 31.963, -82.679; 21–24 June 2020; JK Adams leg; UV light trap in cypress-sandhills-woodland ecotone (CMNH) • USA, Illinois • 1 ♀, St. Clair County: 2.2km WNW East St. Louis: 38.630, -90.175; 121m; 25 May–08 June 2018; S. Mills leg. (CMNH) • USA, Michigan • 1 ♀, Washtenaw County: Whitmore Lake; October 04, 1949; H. Clench leg. (CMNH) • USA, North Carolina • 1 ♀, Dare County: Buxton, Cape Hatteras; 23 July 1975; SM Gifford leg. (CMNH) • 1 ♀, Dare County: Roanoke Island; 14 July 1976; SM Gifford leg. (CMNH) • 1 ♂, Dare County: Manteo: 20 July 1980; SM Gifford leg. (CMNH) • USA, Ohio • 1 ♀, Butler County: 2 km NE Port Union: 39.342, -84.444; 185m; 14–28 August 2017; E. Larue leg.; blacklight (CMNH) • USA, Tennessee • 6 ♀, Shelby County: Willington; 04–05 July 1986; WH Yackley leg. (CMNH) • USA, Texas • 3 ♀, Gonzales County: Palmetto State Park; 13 October 1983; J. Rawlins and R. Davidson leg. (CMNH).
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) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,031 | 0,009 |
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 ».