MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2001502074 · doi:10.14430/arctic4329

First Records of the Arctic Moth <i>Gynaephora groenlandica</i> (Wocke) South of the Arctic Circle: A New Alpine Subspecies

2013· article· en· W2001502074 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Isabel C. Barrio, Christian Schmidt, Sydney G. Cannings, David S. Hik

Bibliographic record

VenueARCTIC · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicLepidoptera: Biology and Taxonomy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubspeciesDisjunctBiologyEcologyArcticBiological dispersalPopulationSympatric speciationFaunaZoologyGeographyDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Two adjacent populations of the Arctic moth Gynaephora groenlandica, a High Arctic endemic species, were found in southwest Yukon, ca. 900 km south of the species’ described distribution. Species identification was based on larval morphology for one population and on larvae rearing and DNA barcoding for the other. All three approaches clearly separated G. groenlandica from the closely related and frequently sympatric G. rossii. These records represent the first reports ofG. groenlandica in alpine environments, and we recognize these populations as a distinct subspecies, G. g. beringiana, on the basis of differences in habitat, geography, wing phenotype, and DNA barcode. Given the limited dispersal ability ofG. groenlandica, these records may represent isolated relict populations. Disjunct populations and new records of other species recently described for the southwest Yukon suggest 1) that this region is understudied and a potential refugium for species characteristic of different biogeographic influences and 2) that this region may be changing considerably in response to recent rapid environmental change, which has influenced species distribution, abundance, and phenology. Our findings, however, might result from a relatively poor description of the arthropod fauna of remote locations; these discoveries should therefore instigate further survey efforts.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.100
Threshold uncertainty score0.791

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.186 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations7
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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