MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2153558686 · doi:10.4039/n10-025

Braconid parasitoids (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) of Nearctic<i>Choristoneura</i>species (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae), with a summary of other parasitoid families attacking<i>Choristoneura</i>

2010· article· en· W2153558686 on OpenAlexafffund
José Fernández-Triana, John Huber

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Entomologist · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicHymenoptera taxonomy and phylogeny
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources CanadaUniversity of Guelph
FundersNatural Resources Canada
KeywordsBraconidaeIchneumonidaeBiologyTortricidaeParasitoidHymenopteraEulophidaeLepidoptera genitaliaZoologyBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Illustrated identification keys are given for the superfamilies/families of insect parasitoids and the subfamilies, genera, and species of Braconidae reared from species of Choristoneura Lederer in the Nearctic Region. Goniozus floridanus (Ashmead) (Chrysidoidea: Bethylidae) represents the third superfamily of Hymenoptera, and Colpoclypeus florus (Walker) (Hymenoptera: Eulophidae) is added to the list of Chalcidoidea recorded from Choristoneura . Fifty species of Braconidae in 18 genera and 9 subfamilies are recorded parasitizing 11 Choristoneura species; almost half belong to the Microgastrinae. Eight braconids (16%) were found for the first time as parasitoids of Choristoneura . The first host record is given for Oncophanes californicus (Ashmead) (Hormiinae). Known insect parasitoids of Choristoneura spp. in the Nearctic Region include 230 species in 106 genera, about 75% of which attack only 1 or 2 Choristoneura species each. An additional 36 species are considered incorrectly associated with Choristoneura , an error rate of 14%. The Banchinae (Ichneumonidae, especially Glypta Gravenhorst), Pimplinae (Ichneumonidae), and Microgastrinae (Braconidae) made up the greatest proportion of parasitoids. No parasitoids have yet been recorded from five Nearctic Choristoneura species.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.356
Threshold uncertainty score0.853

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations20
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian EntomologistSame topicHymenoptera taxonomy and phylogenyFrench-language works237,207