Acleris effractana (Hübner, 1799) - a Holarctic Tortricid
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The discovery by Leraut (2003) of the existence of a species closely related to Acleris emargana (Fabricius, 1775) is confi rmed. It is shown that this was already known to lepidopterists in the fi rst half of the 19th century, but like many Acleris names later regarded as only a form, the name Acleris effractana (Hubner, 1799) is the oldest name for the species. A neotype for A. effractana is designated. A. effractana is shown to have a Holarctic distribution, with occurrence only in the northern part of Europe. A. emargana blackmorei Obraztsov, 1963 (syn. n.) and Acleris stettinensis Leraut, 2003 (syn. n.) are synonyms of A. effractana (Hubner). A. effractana is compared with A. emargana (Fabricius, 1775). Details of the variation in adults, biology and distribution of these two species are presented, and adults and genitalia are illustrated. Zusammenfassung. Die Entdeckung der Existenz einer mit Acleris emargana (Fabricius, 1775) nahe verwandten Art durch Leraut (2003) wird bestatigt. Es wird nachgewiesen, dass diese Tatsache bereits Lepidopterologen der ersten Halfte des 19. Jahrunderts bekannt war, wobei der Name Acleris effractana der alteste ist, aber wie viele andere Acleris-Namen spater nur als Form behandelt wurde. Ein Neotypus fur A. effractana wird hier designiert. A. effractana weist eine holarktische Verbreitung auf und ist in Europa auf die nordlichen Regionen beschrankt. A. emargana blackmorei Obraztsov 1963 (syn. n.) and Acleris stettinensis Leraut, 2003 (syn. n.) sind Synonyme von A. effractana. A. effractana wird mit A. emargana verglichen und die Variation, Biologie und Verbreitung beider Arten werden beschrieben sowie Imagines und Genitalien abgebildet.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".