MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2005876962 · doi:10.11646/zootaxa.3620.3.9

A review of the ecology and distribution of Protoribates (Oribatida, Oripodoidea, Haplozetidae) in Alberta, Canada, with the description of a new species

2013· review· en· W2005876962 on OpenAlexafffundabout
David Evans Walter, Sarah Latonas

Bibliographic record

VenueZootaxa · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicStudy of Mite Species
Canadian institutionsRoyal Alberta Museum
FundersAlberta Biodiversity Monitoring Institute
KeywordsBiologyOribatidaEcologyGenusSynonym (taxonomy)BogPeatKey (lock)Taxonomy (biology)SystematicsMite

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The oribatid mite genus Protoribates Berlese (Haplozetidae) is reviewed for North America and the genus diagnosis is revised to account for the North American species, Protoribates robustior (Jacot, 1937) is redescribed and newly reported from western North America and a new species from Alberta is described. Protoribates haughlandae sp. n. is bisexual, heterotridactylous, and lives primarily in the peat soils of fens and bogs. Protoribates robustior is all-female, monodactylous, and occurs primarily in dry forests or in dry, treeless sites dominated by grasses, sedges, and shrubs. Both species feed on fungal hyphae and spores, but P. haughlandae also is an opportunistic predator and/or necrophage of small arthropods and P. robustior gut contents often include material that resembles plant cell walls. Examination of type specimens confirms that Protoribates prionotus (Woolley, 1968) is a junior synonym of the widespread Protoribates lophotrichus (Berlese, 1904). A key to differentiate Lagenobates from Protoribates and to identify the 7 species of the latter that are known or reported from North America is provided.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.453
Threshold uncertainty score0.912

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0090.015
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations15
Published2013
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZootaxaSame topicStudy of Mite SpeciesFrench-language works237,207