The cocoon‐spinning behaviour of <i>Austrosimulium australense</i> (Diptera: Simuliidae) with a discussion of phylogenetic implications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract There are 25 extant black fly (Simuliidae) genera, six of which build “well‐formed” cocoons, including Austrosimulium , the only simuliid represented in New Zealand. The well‐formed cocoon has been used in several analyses to suggest a close relationship among these six genera. A detailed account of cocoon‐spinning behaviour would both provide a reliable indication of the homology of the well‐formed cocoon structure, as well as indicate which behavioural features are important for the construction of a well‐formed cocoon. Austrosimulium cocoon‐spinning information was added to an existing behavioural phylogeny of the Simuliidae, which included two other genera with well‐formed cocoons. One most parsimonious tree is produced (length 21, CI 0.95, RI 0.95), with the three genera constructing well‐formed cocoons ( Austrosimulium, Ectemnia and Simulium) resolved as a monophyletic group sharing six derived character states. Austrosimulium is resolved as the sister group of Simulium , the most derived and speciose genus of black fly, based on three synapomorphies.
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) | 0.001 | 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".