Resolution of some taxonomic and nomenclatural issues in a recent revision of Ceraeochrysa (Neuroptera: Chrysopidae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With the purpose of promoting nomenclatural stability, this paper addresses a number of errors, omissions, and controversial conclusions in a recent revision of the green lacewing genus Ceraeochrysa by Freitas et al. (2009). 1. Valid species, new combinations and synonymies: (a) We identified Ceraeochrysa chiricahuae Freitas and Penny (in Freitas et al. 2009), Chrysopa forreri Navás, and Chrysopa intacta Navás as subjective synonyms. Thus, Ceraeochrysa intacta, a species that was previously synonymized under Ceraeochrysa placita (Banks), becomes the valid name of the species [New status, new combination]. Chrysopa forreri is now synonymized under Cer. intacta, not Cer. placita [New synonymy]. And, Cer. chiricahuae becomes a junior synonym of Cer. intacta, not a valid species of Ceraeochrysa [New synonymy]. (b) We enumerate specific internal and external features of the Chrysopa cornuta Navás type that identify it as conspecific with Ceraeochrysa caligata (Banks), not Ceraeochrysa cincta (Schneider) as proposed by Freitas et al. (2009). Thus, Ceraeochrysa cornuta (Navás), which has priority, is reinstated as the valid name [Reinstated status, reinstated combination], and Ceraeochrysa caligata (Banks) is reinstated as a junior subjective synonym of Cer. cornuta, not a valid species [Reinstated synonymy]. (c) We provide documented evidence for reinstating three synonymies that Freitas et al. had reversed [Reinstated synonymies]: (i) Allochrysa parvula Banks is a junior subjective synonym of Ceraeochrysa lineaticornis (Fitch); (ii) Chrysopa columbiana Banks is a junior subjective synonym of Ceraeochrysa lineaticornis (Fitch); (iii) Chrysopa rochina (Navás) is a junior subjective synonym of Ceraeochrysa cincta (Schneider). 2. Generic assignments: (a) Visual evidence is provided for the placement of Ceraeochrysa laufferi (Navás) in Ungla. Therefore, Ungla laufferi (Navás) is reinstated as the valid name [Reinstated combination]. (b) We question Freitas et al.’s rationale for including Cer. placita (Banks) and Cer. intacta (Navás) (as Cer. chiricahuae Freitas and Penny) in the genus Ceraeochrysa; female and larval features of the two species differ markedly from those used to characterize Ceraeochrysa species. As an alternative that recognizes the uncertainty surrounding the generic placement of these species and that avoids additional, unnecessary name changes, we propose including the caveat “genus incertae sedis” with the names, as follows: Ceraeochrysa placita (Banks), genus incertae sedis, and Ceraeochrysa intacta (Navás), genus incertae sedis. 3. Type designations: (a) Errors concerning the Chrysopa furculata Navás type in the Muséum national d’Histoire naturelle, Paris (MNHN), are corrected, and doubts raised by Freitas et al. (2009) concerning the identification of this specimen as the holotype are removed. (b) The earlier designation of the Chrysopa rochina (Navás) type in the MNHN as the lectotype (not holotype) is verified.
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 | 0.015 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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".