MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2127070576 · doi:10.4289/0013-8797-110.4.1111

Revision of the Stenodemini with a Review of the Included Genera (Hemiptera: Heteroptera: Miridae: Mirinae)

2008· review· en· W2127070576 on OpenAlexaff
Michael D. Schwartz

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Entomological Society of Washington · 2008
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicHemiptera Insect Studies
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMiridaeHeteropteraNomen dubiumBiologyMonophylyHemipteraZoologyCladisticsGenusChaetotaxyKey (lock)Phallus (fungus)EcologyPhylogenetic treeClade

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An argument is made for the monophyly of the tribe Stenodemini China 1943 based on a character discussion treating the pretarsus, metepisternal scent efferent system, external cuticular ultrastructure, male and female genitalia, metafemoral trichobothria, and external morphology of head and pronotum. As a result, a proposal is presented to subsume Pithanini Douglas and Scott 1865 with Stenodemini. A cladistic analysis of the nominate stenodemine genera based on 54 characters is conducted. The revised Stenodemini includes 32 genera. The following junior subjective generic synonyms are proposed: Notostiropsis Poppius 1914 = Ebutius Distant 1909; Penacoris Cavalho and Rosas 1966 = Stenodema Laporte 1832; and Trigonotyliscus Carvalho 1975 = Trigonotylus Fieber 1858. A lectotype is designated for Ebutius bellus Distant 1909. Chaetomiris Bliven 1973 is treated as a nomen dubium. A key to the genera and a diagnosis of each recognized genus of the reconstituted Stenodemini are presented. A list of the included species, with a summary of their distributions based on faunal regions is given for each genus. Selected photomicrographs, scanning micrographs, and illustrations of structural features of stenodemine genera are 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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.038
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations42
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Entomological Society of WashingtonSame topicHemiptera Insect StudiesFrench-language works237,207