Clarification of the Lycodes diapterus Species Complex (Perciformes: Zoarcidae), with Comments on the Subgenus Furcimanus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lycodes diapterus, the type species of Furcimanus, has been divided into as many as three subspecies (L. diapterus diapterus, L. d. beringi, and L. d. nakamurae). Although L. d. nakamurae has been broadly recognized as a distinct species by recent authors, the status of L. d. beringi is unresolved, and several authors have noted the need for a comprehensive morphological study of L. diapterus. Based on an examination of nearly 500 specimens collected from Kamchatka to California, we herein recognize Lycodes beringi as a valid species distinguished from L. diapterus by meristics and squamation. Lycodes beringi is distributed from southeastern Kamchatka through the Bering Sea, Commander and Aleutian Islands, Gulf of Alaska, and south along the North American west coast to Puget Sound, while L. diapterus ranges from the Pacific coast of Vancouver Island south along the U.S. west coast to southern California. In this report we document the morphological variation present in L. diapterus and L. beringi and designate a lectotype for L. beringi. We also provide diagnoses, descriptions, and distribution information for both forms, and compare them with closely related congeners, providing comments on the subgenus Furcimanus.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".