An integrative approach to species discrimination in the <i>Eupelmus urozonus</i> complex ( <scp>H</scp> ymenoptera, <scp>E</scp> upelmidae), with the description of 11 new species from the <scp>W</scp> estern <scp>P</scp> alaearctic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The systematics of the E uropean species of Eupelmus ( Eupelmus ) D alman ( H ymenoptera: E upelmidae) belonging to the ‘ urozonus ‐complex’ is elucidated through combined molecular and morphological characterization. One mitochondrial gene fragment ( Cytochrome oxidase I ) and one nuclear protein‐coding gene fragment ( Wingles s) were sequenced and the results compared with those of a detailed morphological study of the specimens from an extensive sampling. Knowledge of the biodiversity of Eupelmus in the W estern P alearctic R egion is significantly improved through the separation and description of 11 new species: E. ( Eupelmus ) confusus A l khatib sp.n. , E. gemellus A l khatib sp.n. , E. janstai D elvare & G ibson sp.n. , E. longicalvus A l khatib & F usu sp.n. , E. minozonus D elvare sp.n. , E. opacus D elvare sp.n. , E. pistaciae A l khatib sp.n. , E. priotoni Delvare sp.n. , E. purpuricollis F usu & A l khatib sp.n. , E. simizonus A l khatib sp.n. and E. tremulae D elvare sp.n. Illustrated keys to females and, when known, males of these new 11 species plus the other already described species considered to belong to the ‘ urozonus ‐complex’ ( E . acinellus A skew, E. annulatus N ees, E. azureus R atzeburg, E. cerris F örster, E. fulvipes F örster, E. kiefferi D e S tefani, E. martellii M asi, E. stenozonus A skew, E. tibicinis B ouček and E. urozonus D alman) are provided and all the species are described based on morphology. Eupelmus kiefferi is removed from synonymy under E. urozonus and E. azureus is recognized as the valid senior synonym of Pteromalus cordairii Ratzeburg, and Eupelmus spongipartus Förster, syn.n. The discrimination of the species included in this complex is particularly relevant because some are potential biological control agents and have been confused in the past. This published work has been registered in ZooBank, http://zoobank.org/urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:F52CD199‐C65F‐43CC‐B347‐4E724096F2D5 .
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".