MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2049562708 · doi:10.11646/zootaxa.3946.1.2

Sexual dimorphism in Autogneta, with description of three new species from North America and new diagnosis of the genus (Acari, Oribatida, Autognetidae) 

2015· article· en· W2049562708 on OpenAlexaffabout
Valerie M. Behan‐Pelletier

Bibliographic record

VenueZootaxa · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicStudy of Mite Species
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível SuperiorState University of New YorkU.S. Department of Agriculture
KeywordsSexual dimorphismBiologyAcariSetaOribatidaGenusZoologyMiteKey (lock)Type speciesEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Species in the oribatid mite genus Autogneta are primarily Palaearctic, with a few, mainly unidentified records from North America. Strong sexual dimorphism is reported in the genus for the first time; it is expressed by a posterior porose region on the male notogaster that in some species is associated with modifications of notogastral setae h1 and p1. Herein, I describe 3 new dimorphic Autogneta species from North America, based on adult specimens: A. aokii sp. nov. and A. schusteri sp. nov., from California, USA, and A. flaheyi sp. nov., from British Columbia and Alberta, Canada. New diagnoses for 2 other dimorphic species, the type species Autogneta longilamellata (Michael) and A. amnica Jacot, are presented that accommodate their previously unreported dimorphic males. Autogneta flumengalei Jacot is recombined as Conchogneta flumengalei (Jacot) comb. nov. Finally, I give a key to adults of Autogneta species known from North America.

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)0.000
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.057
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.145 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations3
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZootaxaSame topicStudy of Mite SpeciesFrench-language works237,207