Male terminalia of Ceraphronoidea: morphological diversity in an otherwise monotonous taxon
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The skeletomuscular system of male terminalia in Evaniomorpha (Hymenoptera) is described and the functional morphology of male genitalia is discussed. Confocal laser scanning microscopy is the primary method used for illustrating anatomical phenotypes, and a domain-specific anatomy ontology is employed to more explicitly describe anatomical structures. A comprehensive data set of ceraphronoid male genitalia is analyzed, yielding the first phylogeny of the superfamily. One hundred and one taxa, including three outgroups, are scored for 48 characters. Ceraphronoidea are recovered as sister to the remaining Evaniomorpha in the implied weighting analyses. Numerous character states suggest that Ceraphronoidea is a relatively basal apocritan lineage. Ceraphronoidea, Ceraphronidae, and Megaspilinae are each retrieved as monophyletic in all analyses. Megaspilidae is not recovered as monophyletic. Lagynodinae is monophyletic in the implied weighting analyses with strong support and is a polytomy in the equal weighting analysis. Lagynodinae shares numerous plesiomorphies with both Megaspilinae and Ceraphronidae. Relationships among genera are weakly corroborated.Masneris sister of Ceraphronidae.Trassediais nested within Ceraphronidae based on the present analysis. Because of this and numerous features shared between it andCeraphronwe transferTrassediafrom Megaspilidae to Ceraphronidae.Dendrocerusforms a single monophyletic clade, with modest support, together with someConostigmusspecies. This result challenges the utility of such traditional diagnostic characters as ocellar arrangement and shape of the male flagellomeres.Aphanogmusis monophyletic in the implied weighting, but remains a polytomy withCeraphronin the equal weighting analysis.Gnathoceraphronis always nested within a well-supportedAphanogmusclade.CyoceraphronandElysoceraphronare nested withinCeraphronandAphanogmus, respectively. The male genitalia prove to be a substantial source of phylogenetically relevant information. Our results indicate that a reclassification of Ceraphronoidea both at the family and generic level is necessary but that more data are required.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".