MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2077053103 · doi:10.3897/jhr.40.7442

The genera of Nematinae (Hymenoptera, Tenthredinidae)

2014· article· en· W2077053103 on OpenAlexaff
Marko Prous, Stephan M. Blank, Henri Goulet, Erik Heibo, Andrew Liston, Tobias Malm, Tommi Nyman, Stefan Schmidt, David R. Smith, Hege Vårdal, Matti Viitasaari, Veli Vikberg, Taeger Andreas

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hymenoptera Research · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTenthredinidaeBiologyCladeGenusZoologyTaxonPhylogenetic treePhylogenetic nomenclatureHymenopteraEvolutionary biologyBotanyGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent phylogenetic studies on Nematinae based on DNA sequences have shown extensive incongruencies with current nomenclature of genus-group taxa. Here, we expand previous DNA sequence datasets based on three genes (CoI, Cytb, and EF-1α), to include a fourth (NaK) and more genera. The analyses largely confirm the previous findings, particularly the existence of two well-supported large clades, Euura and Pristiphora, together comprising more than 75% of the species of Nematinae. Basal relationships within these two clades remain poorly resolved, mirroring the difficulties in delimiting genera based on morphology. In addition, a moderately supported small clade, Nematus, is found. The relationships between the Euura, Pristiphora, and Nematus clades are uncertain. Therefore, to stabilize the nomenclature we treat these clades as genera. This taxonomic treatment results in numerous new combinations of species names. The following synonymies are proposed for the available genus-group names. Synonyms of Euura Newman, 1837: Cryptocampus Hartig, 1837, Euura Agassiz, 1848, Pontania Costa, 1852, syn. n., Epitactus Förster, 1854, syn. n., Amauronematus Konow, 1890, syn. n., Holcocneme Konow, 1890, syn. n., Pachynematus Konow, 1890, syn. n., Holcocnema Schulz, 1906, syn. n., Holcocnemis Konow, 1907, syn. n., Pteronidea Rohwer, 1911, syn. n., Pontopristia Malaise, 1921, syn. n., Brachycoluma Strand, 1929, syn. n., Decanematus Malaise, 1931, syn. n., Pikonema Ross, 1937, syn. n., Phyllocolpa Benson, 1960, syn. n., Eitelius Kontuniemi, 1966, syn. n., Gemmura E.L. Smith, 1968, Eupontania Zinovjev, 1985, syn. n., Larinematus Zhelochovtsev, 1988, syn. n., Polynematus Zhelochovtsev, 1988, syn. n., Bacconematus Zhelochovtsev, 1988, syn. n., Alpinematus Lacourt, 1996, syn. n., Epicenematus Lacourt, 1998, syn. n., Kontuniemiana Lacourt, 1998, syn. n., Lindqvistia Lacourt, 1998, syn. n., Luea Wei and Nie, 1998, syn. n., and Tubpontania Vikberg, 2010, syn. n. Synonyms of Nematus Panzer, 1801: Craesus Leach, 1817, Hypolaepus W.F. Kirby, 1882, and Paranematus Zinovjev, 1978. Synonyms of Pristiphora Latreille, 1810: Diphadnus Hartig, 1837, Lygaeonematus Konow, 1890, Micronematus Konow, 1890, Gymnonychus Marlatt, 1896, Neopareophora MacGillivray, 1908, syn. n., Neotomostethus MacGillivray, 1908, Dineuridea Rohwer, 1912, Sala Ross, 1937, Pristola Ross, 1945, syn. n., Nepionema Benson, 1960, syn. n., Melastola Wong, 1968, syn. n., Sharliphora Wong, 1969, Oligonematus Zhelochovtsev, 1988, Lygaeotus Liston, 1993, Lygaeophora Liston, 1993, and Pristicampus Zinovjev, 1993, syn. n. Varna Ross, 1937, syn. n. is treated as a synonym of DineuraDahlbom 1835. Stauronematus Benson, 1953 is treated as a separate genus from Pristiphora. Names of 20 species-group taxa are junior secondary homonyms when combined with Euura. Replacement names are proposed for these. To facilitate the identification of Nematinae genera, we provide an illustrated key to the 31 extant genera of world Nematinae.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.203 · 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

Citations57
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Hymenoptera ResearchSame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207