The lectotype of <i>Spiroplecta rosula</i> Ehrenberg, 1854 – the type species of <i>Bolivinopsis</i> Yakovlev, 1891 (Foraminifera)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. INTRODUCTIONThe Ehrenberg collection of microfossils in the Natural History Museum, Berlin contains the original reference material for a single genus of agglutinated foraminifera – Bolivinopsis Yakovlev, 1891. Among the foraminiferal specimens preserved in the collection, a single specimen was selected and illustrated by Ehrenberg (1854) as Spiroplecta rosula. This species was subsequently designated by Kisselman (1964) as the senior synonym of Bolivinopsis capitata Yakovlev, 1891, making it the type species of Bolivinopsis by virtue of synonymy. According to Kisselman (1964), the type specimens of B. capitata were deposited in the Central Geological Museum in St Petersburg, and were lost during the war. Indeed, the name B. capitata is not used in the Soviet literature, and such forms are consistently attributed to B. rosula. As part of the work undertaken for a Catalogue of Agglutinated Foraminiferal Genera, we undertook a search of the Ehrenberg Collection in order to establish the status of the type specimen(s) of Spiroplecta rosula.MATERIAL AND METHODSThe Ehrenberg collection of microfossils at the Museum für Naturkunde in Berlin consists of innumerable specimens embedded in Canada Balsam mounted on small mica disks that served as microscope slides. Small paper rings pressed onto the surface of the disks were used by Ehrenberg to mark specimens of importance, such as illustrated in Ehrenberg’s (1854) book Mikrogeologie. A catalogue of the collection was compiled originally by Ehrenberg’s daughter Clara and has been supplemented by new collection databases. We used these sources to locate and examine all the micas from the . . .
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.047 | 0.012 |
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".