MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2765981418 · doi:10.11646/zootaxa.4337.2.1

Tegoribatidae of North America, with proposal of Protectoribates gen. nov., and new species (Acari, Oribatida, Tegoribatidae)

2017· article· en· W2765981418 on OpenAlexaff
Valerie M. Behan‐Pelletier

Bibliographic record

VenueZootaxa · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicStudy of Mite Species
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOribatidaBiologySetaAcariGenusEcologyNearctic ecozoneHabitatType speciesSpecies descriptionKey (lock)AcariformesZoologyTaxonomy (biology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The oribatid mite family Tegoribatidae has been represented in continental North America by the genera Tegoribates and Tectoribates. Herein, I describe a new genus of Tegoribatidae from North America, Protectoribates, and two new species: Protectoribates occidentalis sp. nov., from forest habitats in western North American, and Tegoribates walteri sp. nov., from forest habitats in California, based on adults and immatures. The descriptions of adults of the type species of Tegoribates, T. subniger Ewing, and other North American species, T. americanus Hammer and T. bryophilus Woolley, are expanded and immatures of T. americanus are described for the first time. Immatures of Protectoribates are apheredermous whereas those of Tegoribates are eupheredermous, though retaining centrodorsal setae. Scutozetes Hammer 1952 is transferred from Tegoribatidae to Ceratozetidae after re-examination of type material. I provide a revised diagnosis for Tegoribates and a key to tegoribatid genera and species for North America. Finally, I provide a revised diagnosis for Tegoribatidae based on world genera.

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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.189 · 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

Citations5
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZootaxaSame topicStudy of Mite SpeciesFrench-language works237,207