Ontogeny, variation, and synonymy in North American<i>Cybaeus</i>spiders (Araneae: Cybaeidae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Ontogeny, interspecific homogeneity, and intraspecific variability of female genitalic and other characters of North AmericanCybaeusL. Koch spiders are described and used to resolve taxonomic problems in the genus. Ontogenetic changes in spermathecal duct morphology occur as females mature and age. Three distinct ontogenetic stages are described: pre-epigynum/pre-vulva, subadult / teneral adult, and mature adult. Concordant with aspects of sexual selection theory, closely related females may be morphologically indistinguishable. ManyCybaeusspecies exhibit a wide range of body size. Within single species, ontogenetic stages and outlier size classes have been described as separate species. Species with similar females have been lumped under one name. Based on this, 10 new synonyms are proposed for North AmericanCybaeus:C. adenoidesSchenkel =C. grizzlyiSchenkel;C. chaudiusExline andC. hatchiExline= C. shoshoneusChamberlin and Ivie;C. exlineaeChamberlin and Ivie =C. bulbosusExline;C. hystrixChamberlin and Ivie =C. cribelloidesChamberlin and Ivie;C. janusChamberlin and Ivie =C. eutypusChamberlin and Ivie;C. marinensisChamberlin and Ivie andC. angelusChamberlin and Ivie =C. consociusChamberlin and Ivie; andC. olympiaeExline andC. tiusChamberlin and Ivie =C. reticulatusSimon. In addition, four old synonyms are rejected:C. grizzlyiSchenkel andC. adenoidesSchenkel ≠C. adenesChamberlin and Ivie;C. patritusBishop and Crosby andC. silicisBarrows ≠C. giganteusBanks.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".