Redefinition of the Clusiinae and Clusiodinae, description of the new subfamily Sobarocephalinae, revision of the genus Chaetoclusia and a description of Procerosoma gen. n. (Diptera: Clusiidae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The higher classification of the Clusiidae is reviewed, and the family is divided into the subfamilies Clusiodinae, Clusiinae and the new subfamily Sobarocephalinae, all of which are (re)defined. The newly defined Clusiinae includes the genera Phylloclusia Hendel, 1917, Tetrameringia McAlpine, 1960, Amuroclusia Mamaev, 1987, Clusia Haliday, 1838, Paraclusia Czerny, 1903, Alloclusia Hendel, 1917 and Apiochaeta Czerny, 1903. The Sobarocephalinae includes the genera Sobarocephala Czerny, 1903, Procerosoma gen. n., and Chaetoclusia Coquillett, 1904. The new genus Procerosoma is described for two species, Procerosoma alini (Shatalkin) comb. n. from Brazil and P. prominens sp. n. from Mexico. Sobarocephaloides Soós, 1962 is treated as a junior synonym of Sobarocephala, and Chaetoclusia is redefined to include the monotypic genera Chaetoclusiella Soós, 1962, syn. n. and Trichoclusia Soós, 1962, syn. n. Six new species of Chaetoclusia are described (C. centrofasciata sp. n., C. amplipenis sp. n., C. transversa sp. n., C. inbionella sp. n., C. flava sp. n., and C. furva sp. n.). Chaetoclusia bakeri peruana Hennig, 1938 is included as a junior synonym of C. bakeri Coquillett, 1904. The phylogeny of Chaetoclusia is discussed and a key is provided for its 13 species.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.004 |
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".