MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2050207688 · doi:10.1673/031.010.2701

Observations on Hilltopping in Thick-Headed Flies (Diptera: Conopidae)

2010· article· en· W2050207688 on OpenAlexaffabout
Maurizio Mei, Joel F. Gibson, Jeffrey H. Skevington

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Insect Science · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicDiptera species taxonomy and behavior
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyMatingEcologyHabitatZoology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Direct observations of hilltopping behaviour in the thick-headed flies (Diptera: Conopidae) have only been mentioned once in the literature. Hilltop collecting, however, may be an effective way to survey these endparasitoids. The first evidence of hilltopping in species belonging to the subfamilies Myopinae and Dalmanniinae is presented and discussed. Field observations were conducted on Colle Vescovo, Italy and Mount Rigaud, Canada, and museum specimens were examined. Observations and records indicate that four species in the genera Dalmannia, Myopa, and Zodion are hilltoppers on Colle Vescovo, while three species in the genera Myopa and Physocephala are hilltoppers on three hilltops near Ottawa, Canada. Fifteen additional species of conopids have been collected on hilltops and could possibly utilize hilltops in some years as a part of their mating strategy. Detailed phenologies and observations of mating and perching behaviours are given for species in the genera Dalmannia, Myopa, Physocephala, and Zodion. The importance of hilltop habitat preservation is stressed.

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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.185 · 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

Citations5
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Insect ScienceSame topicDiptera species taxonomy and behaviorFrench-language works237,207