MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2115555007 · doi:10.11646/zootaxa.1154.1.5

The Coccinellidae (Coleoptera) of the Maritime Provinces of Canada: new records, biogeographic notes, and conservation concerns

2006· article· en· W2115555007 on OpenAlexaffabout
Christopher G. Majka, D. B. McCorquodale

Bibliographic record

VenueZootaxa · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect-Plant Interactions and Control
Canadian institutionsCape Breton UniversityNova Scotia Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFaunaCoccinellidaeEcologyBiologyContext (archaeology)PredationPaleontologyPredator

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

New records of Coccinellidae in the Maritime Provinces of Canada are reported. The known fauna of the region consists of 47 species: 41 in Nova Scotia, 39 in New Brunswick, and 21 in Prince Edward Island. Of these, records are provided for 13 species newly recorded from Nova Scotia and 14 from Prince Edward Island. Two species, Diomus amabilis (LeConte) and Naemia seriata seriata Melsheimer, are newly recorded in Canada. Didion punctatum (Melsheimer) is removed from the fauna of PEI, and Coccidula lepida LeConte is removed from the fauna of NS, and Scymnus impexus Mulsant is removed from the faunas of NS and NB. Records of two adventive species not established in the region are also reported. Collecting effort in the three provinces and their sub-regions is briefly analyzed and compared. Biogeographic observations are provided in relation to the composition of the fauna as a whole, and of disjunct populations of six Nova Scotia coccinellids, several of which appear to be members of a coastal plain fauna that extends from New England to southern Nova Scotia. The potential vulnerability of the coccinellid fauna is discussed in the context of both adventive species in the region, and habitat loss and conservation.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.079

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.183
Teacher spread0.174 · 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

Citations52
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZootaxaSame topicInsect-Plant Interactions and ControlFrench-language works237,207