Nomenclatural notes on the names Gaeolaelaps and Geolaelaps (Acari: Laelapidae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The genus-group names Geolaelaps and Gaeolaelaps (Acari: Laelapidae) are in widespread use in the formal taxonomic literature of acarology, for a genus or subgenus of predatory soil mites. They are also in use in the literature of ecology and agriculture, especially in discussions of the biological control of western flower thrips, Frankliniella occidentalis (Pergande), and sciarid larvae and gnats of the genus Bradysia, in greenhouse vegetables and ornamentals (Zhang, 2003). Examples of usage in mite taxonomy are Karg (1971), Evans & Till (1979) and Casanueva (1993) (Gaeolaelaps), and Karg (1979, 1993) and Xu & Liang (1996) (Geolaelaps). Examples of usage in ecology and agriculture include House et al. (1987) (Gaeolaelaps) and Gillespie & Quiring (1990) (Geolaelaps). There are many other examples of usage of both of these names in both print and internet documents, and there is considerable confusion surrounding their spelling and authorship. The purpose of this note is to resolve that confusion.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.013 |
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".