MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2289779520 · doi:10.11646/zootaxa.4087.1.1

Revision of the Genus Physiphora Fallén 1810 (Diptera: Ulidiidae: Ulidiinae)

2016· article· en· W2289779520 on OpenAlexaff
E. P. Kameneva, V. A. Korneyev

Bibliographic record

VenueZootaxa · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect behavior and control techniques
Canadian institutionsMinnow Environmental (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyGenusKey (lock)LarvaZoologyIdentification keyBotanyTaxonomy (biology)Ecology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The genus Physiphora includes at least 29 species, most of them occurring predominantly in the Afrotropical Region and a few species native to the other regions of the Old World. At least P. alceae (Preyssler 1791) and P. clausa (Macquart 1843) are subcosmopolitan species unintentionally introduced into the Australasian, Nearctic, and Neotropical Regions. Twelve new species from the Afrotropical Region are described: P. hendeli sp. n., P. igniceps sp. n., P. kirki sp. n., P. maraisi sp. n., P. meyi sp. n., P. opalizana sp. n., P. orinigra sp. n., P. polita sp. n., P. rugosa sp. n., P. spriggsi sp. n., P. steyskali sp. n., and P. virens sp. n. Detailed illustrated descriptions and a key for identification are provided for all the species of Physiphora. Analysis of the new and previously known biological data shows that larvae of most Physiphora species are saprophagous associated with rotting tissues of palms (apparently infested by the palm weevils), giant Euphorbia, and even baobabs and poplars. Some species are attracted to (and as larvae possibly can develop in) the dung of ungulates. The following synonymy is established: Physiphora clausa (Macquart 1843) = Physiphora hainanensis Chen in Chen & Kameneva 2007: 24, syn. n.; Physiphora flavipes (Karsch 1888) = Chrysomyza africana Hendel 1909, syn. n., = Cliochloria senegalensis Enderlein 1927, syn. n.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.222
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations8
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZootaxaSame topicInsect behavior and control techniquesFrench-language works237,207