Relationships among coleopteran suborders and major endoneopteran lineages: Evidence from hind wing characters
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A phylogenetic analysis of the four coleopteran suborders (Polyphaga, Archostemata, Myxophaga and Adephaga), four other endoneopteran taxa (Strepsiptera, Neuropterida, Mecopterida and Hymenoptera) and three neopteran outgroups (Orthoneoptera, Blattoneoptera and Hemineoptera) is performed based on 63 characters of hind wing venation, articulation and folding patterns, with character states coded for the groundplan of each taxon (not for exemplar genera or species). The shortest tree found using Winclada with Nona exhibits the following topology: Orthoneoptera + (Blattoneoptera + (Hemineoptera + Endoneoptera: (Hymenoptera + ((Neuropterida + Mecopterida) + (Coleoptera + Strepsiptera))))). Homologization of the hind wing venation in Coleoptera is reviewed and updated, and comments are made concerning recent works on wing folding. Recent phylogenetic schemes proposed for the orders of Endoneoptera and suborders of Coleoptera are reviewed and their supporting evidence critically examined. The special role and influence of the hind wing anojugal lobe on the diversification of Neoptera and Endoneoptera is discussed. A scenario is proposed for the origin and evolution of the insect hind wing.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it