MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2094229192 · doi:10.3897/zookeys.462.8229

Species delimitation using morphology, morphometrics, and molecules: definition of the Ophion scutellaris Thomson species group, with descriptions of six new species (Hymenoptera, Ichneumonidae)

2014· article· en· W2094229192 on OpenAlexaff
Marla Schwarzfeld, Felix A. H. Sperling

Bibliographic record

VenueZooKeys · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Northern British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMorphometricsIchneumonidaeNearctic ecozoneBiologySpecies groupZoologyMorphology (biology)HymenopteraTaxonomy (biology)Group (periodic table)Key (lock)EcologyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The diverse genus Ophion is almost entirely undescribed in the Nearctic region. In this paper we define the Ophionscutellaris species group. This species group is well-supported by analysis of DNA (ITS2, COI, and 28S D2-D3) and morphology. It includes the Palearctic species Ophionscutellaris and the Nearctic species Ophionidoneus. An integrative analysis of DNA, geometric wing morphometrics, classical morphometrics and qualitative morphology indicates that this species group contains a minimum of seven species in North America, although the full diversity of the group has likely not been sampled. Ophionclave Schwarzfeld, sp. n., Ophionaureus Schwarzfeld, sp. n., Ophionbrevipunctatus Schwarzfeld, sp. n., Ophiondombroskii Schwarzfeld, sp. n., Ophionkeala Schwarzfeld, sp. n. and Ophionimportunus Schwarzfeld, sp. n. are described, and a key to the known Nearctic species of the Ophionscutellaris group is provided.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

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 studies0.0000.001
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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.120 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations56
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZooKeysSame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207