Genera of Gymnodamaeidae (Acari: Oribatida: Plateremaeoidea) of Canada, with notes on some nomenclatorial problems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The taxonomy of the North American Gymnodamaeidae is currently intractable, because (1) the adults are covered in a thick, ornamented cerotegument that provides useful characters, but that obscures the cuticle; (2) many descriptions appear to be based on newly moulted or cleared specimens and are incomplete or contain misinterpretations; and (3) there is considerable disagreement in the literature about valid genera and generic limits, leading some authors to sink some or all of the North American genera into Gymnodamaeus s.l. Several nomenclatorial problems have added to the confusion. In this paper I use new diagnoses to demonstrate that seven previously described genera based on North American species can be separated from Gymnodamaeus s.s. and provide a key to distinguish them. I clarify the correct publication dates for Paschoal’s genera and after consultation with the original author, propose replacements for two of these generic names that are preoccupied: Donjohnstonella nom. nov. for Johnstonella Paschoal and Roynortonella nom. nov. for Nortonella Paschoal. New Canadian provincial distribution records are provided for Gymnodamaeus cf. ornatus Hammer (AB), Jacotella quadricaudicula (Jacot) (AB, ON), Joshuella agrosticula Paschoal (AB, YK), and Pleodamaeus plokosus (Woolley & Higgins) (AB). Finally, I discuss the similarity between the cerotegumental pustules in the Gymnodamaeidae and the epicuticular wax crystalloids on the leaves of plants such as the water lotus (Nelumbo nucifera Gaertn.) and suggest that they may have a similar water repellent “Lotus-effect.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".