MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Present status and re description of Iranibarbus or<em> Luciobarbus barbuls</em> Heckel 1849 a valid Cyprinidae species of Iran

2017· preprint· en· W2755197332 on OpenAlexaff
Jalal Valiallahi, Brian W. Coad

Bibliographic record

VenuePreprints.org · 2017
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicFish Biology and Ecology Studies
Canadian institutionsCanadian Museum of Nature
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCyprinidaeBarbusBiologySubspeciesFreshwater fishEcologyZoologyFisheryFish <Actinopterygii>

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Western Iran Barbus species, are scientifically, environmentally and economically important. Some of them are the largest riverine freshwater species, that will grow in size and weight to 170 cm, and 120 kg respectively. These species although are vulnerable species but there is scarce information on taxonomy or present environmentally status of these exclusive species. Luciobarbus barbulus is one of the uniquely significant large species. In order to find new record on present status of large Barbus species a sampling program carried out in western Iran, during the resent year since 2013 to now. The validity of Luciobarbus barbulus a Cyprinid fish, which several authors have synonymies with different species is reaffirmed. This species overlaps in distinction with L. mystaceus, L scheich, and other similar species. In this study re description of L.barbulus is given. Our study reviled that Luciobarbus barbulus(Heckel 1846) is valid species and differ from L. mystaceus, L scheich, L. kersin, L. pectoralis, L. rajanorum. L. barbulus is not a subspecies of Luciobarbus mystaceus (Heckel 1846). This species differs from L. mystaceus in having thick and very wide fleshy lip, inferior mouth and slightly shorter head. In Luciobarbus barbulus head is more inferior. The details of differences between these species are given. This species is one of stable growing fish without dimorphism, that retain it’s shape from a fingerling species to a giant fish. The details on new record, new photo of this exquisite species and other precious large Luciobarbus species are given.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.172
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.137 · 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

Citations3
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePreprints.orgSame topicFish Biology and Ecology StudiesFrench-language works237,207