Rediscovery of the Desert Sand‐skipper <i>Croitana aestiva</i> Edwards (Lepidoptera: Hesperiidae): morphology, life history and behaviour
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Croitana aestiva Edwards is one of Australia's most poorly known butterflies. Previously it was known from a total of eight specimens collected in 1966 and 1972 in the MacDonnell Ranges west of Alice Springs in central Australia. The species was not positively recorded for the next 35 years; however, in February 2007 a population was rediscovered during targeted surveys. Subsequent biological studies were conducted from 2007 to 2010. A reappraisal of adult morphology show that four character states are unique to C. aestiva . Eggs are creamy‐white and subcircular, with 21–29 longitudinal ribs. First‐instar larvae are creamy‐white, with a dark head capsule and prothoracic plate. Fourth‐ and fifth‐instar larvae have a dark green medial band, a pale lateral band on each side of the body, and a distinct, highly setose, brown anal plate. The pupae are mainly orange‐brown, darkening anteriorly, with a highly sculptured pupal cap. The larval food plant is the grass Neurachne tenuifolia (Poaceae), which is also endemic to central Australia. Shelters for all larvae and the pupa are among the leaf sheaths and stems near the base of the tussock. Adults are opportunistic feeders on a wide variety of nectar‐producing plants, and are active throughout the day. Males use patrolling and perching behaviour to locate receptive females at a range of encounter sites, including the larval food plant and hilltops. Oviposition occurs during late morning, and eggs are laid on the upper surface of blades of the food plant. Comparison of the immature stages of C. aestiva with its congeners indicates many similarities in general morphology, but there are pronounced behavioural differences such as upward‐orientated shelters.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".