Larval morphology of genus<i>Lancetes</i>(Coleoptera: Adephaga: Dytiscidae): the hypothesis of sister-group relationship with the subfamily Dytiscinae revisited
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Descriptions of the larvae ofLancetes angusticollis(Curtis),L.lanceolatus(Clark),L.subseriatusZimmermann,L.flavoscutatusEnderlein,L.delkeskampiRíha, andL.nigriceps(Erichson) are provided. Characters from larval morphology are analyzed to infer the phylogenetic relationships of the genusLancetesSharp with other genera of Dytiscidae. A parsimony analysis based on 51 informative larval characteristics was conducted with the program NONA. The most parsimonious tree supports a sister-group relationship between the genusLancetesand members of the subfamily Dytiscinae. The only unambiguous synapomorphy in support of this hypothesis is the secondary subdivision of some cephalic appendages. Other putative synapomorphies are the proximal articulation of the primary seta CO7 both on meso- and meta-coxa and the presence of additional primary setae on the ventral margin of the tibiae. Based on several character states including the presence of multifragmented urogomphi, the genusLancetesis monophyletic.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".