MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1584716639 · doi:10.11646/zootaxa.3986.1.5

Two new species of Agonopterix (Depressariidae, Lepidoptera) from Europe

2015· article· en· W1584716639 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Peter Büchner

Bibliographic record

VenueZootaxa · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicLepidoptera: Biology and Taxonomy
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersOntario Ministry of Research and InnovationNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaGovernment of CanadaGenome CanadaOntario GenomicsOntario Genomics Institute
KeywordsBiologyLepidoptera genitaliaDNA barcodingZoologyMale genitaliaTaxonomy (biology)Botany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The species Agonopterix tripunctaria sp. nov. and Agonopterix medelichensis sp. nov. are described. A. tripunctaria, previously misidentified as Agonopterix nodiflorella (Millière, 1866), was recognized as specifically different by the distinctive male genitalia. 19 specimens have been examined, DNA-barcoding yielded full 658 bp fragment of COI from two specimens and a 639 bp sequence from a third, confirming the impression of a rather isolated species. Specimens from Italy, Slovenia, Croatia and Greece had been checked, among them one reared from Ferulago campestris. A. medelichensis was misidentified as Agonopterix rotundella (Douglas, 1846) in NHMV; its male genitalia are erroneously depicted as A. rotundella in Hannemann (1953) and (1995). 20 specimens have been examined, from one a 555 bp fragment of COI was obtained, confirming that it is not closely related to A. rotundella. Specimens from Austria, Italy, Hungary, Slovakia, Croatia and Greece have been checked, among them one reared from Trinia glauca, which had been misidentified as A. hippomarathri. A report of A. rotundella from Russia also belongs to this species.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.853
Threshold uncertainty score0.683

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.220 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZootaxaSame topicLepidoptera: Biology and TaxonomyFrench-language works237,207