MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2167585288 · doi:10.4039/tce.2013.23

A new trap-jawed ant (Hymenoptera: Formicidae: Haidomyrmecini) from Canadian Late Cretaceous amber

2013· article· en· W2167585288 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ryan C. McKellar, James R. N. Glasier, Michael S. Engel

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Entomologist · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInsect and Arachnid Ecology and Behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubfamilyCretaceousGenusHymenopteraPaleontologyTribeBiologyArboreal locomotionZoologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A new genus and species are described within the extinct tribe Haidomyrmecini, and tentatively placed within the subfamily Sphecomyrminae (Hymenoptera: Formicidae).Haidoterminus cippusnew genus and speciesexpands the distribution of the bizarre, exclusively Cretaceous, trap-jawed Haidomyrmecini beyond their previous records in mid-Cretaceous Burmese and French amber, and into Laurentia. The new material from the Grassy Lake, Alberta, Canada collecting locality also provides evidence that these highly specialised, likely arboreal, ants persisted for an additional 20 million years, reaching the Late Cretaceous. Morphological features ofH. cippus, such as the presence of an elongate antennomere II (pedicel), further support the argument that Haidomyrmecini may not actually belong within the subfamily Sphecomyrminae, and may warrant recognition at the subfamily level or inclusion as a highly autapomorphic clade within another subfamily. Despite the introduction of new fossil material, and the clarity of preservation in Canadian amber, the mystery of how Haidomyrmecini fed remains unsolved.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.405
Threshold uncertainty score0.815

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 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

Citations36
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian EntomologistSame topicInsect and Arachnid Ecology and BehaviorFrench-language works237,207