MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Earliest Fossil Mosquito (Diptera: Culicidae), in Mid-Cretaceous Burmese Amber

2004· article· en· W2179268078 on OpenAlexaff
Art Borkent, David A. Grimaldi

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of the Entomological Society of America · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicFossil Insects in Amber
Canadian institutionsRoyal British Columbia Museum
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProboscisBiologyBurmeseCretaceousGenusSetaSister groupZoologySternaExtant taxonPaleontologyPhylogenetic treeEvolutionary biologyClade

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Burmaculex antiquus new genus, new species, is described from a single partially preserved adult female in Burmese amber. The fossil has several plesiomorphic features, indicating that it is the sister group of all other fossil and extant Culicidae: a relatively short proboscis, the palpi extending beyond the apex of the proboscis, a clypeus with several setae, and the palpus without scales. Antennal and mouthpart structure suggest the female of this fossil species was a vertebrate blood feeder. The age of Burmese amber has been estimated as between Upper Albian to Turonian, 100–90 million years ago but the origins of the Culicidae are likely significantly older. The sister group of the Culicidae are the Chaoboridae, known as Jurassic fossils, and the Culicidae therefore must be equally as old. Although fossil adults of the two families may not be distinct at this early stage of evolution, the immatures would likely provide distinguishing features.

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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Citations62
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of the Entomological Society of AmericaSame topicFossil Insects in AmberFrench-language works237,207