MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2768015155 · doi:10.4289/0013-8797.119.4.565

The Mealy Plum Aphid and Its Congeners: A Synonymic Revision of the Prunus-Infesting Aphid Genus Hyalopterus (Hemiptera: Aphididae)

2017· article· en· W2768015155 on OpenAlexaff
Colin Favret, Naresh M. Meshram, Gary L. Miller, Juan M. Nieto Nafría, Andrey V. Stekolshchikov

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Entomological Society of Washington · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect-Plant Interactions and Control
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersHokkaido UniversityU.S. Department of Agriculture
KeywordsAphididaeAphidBiologyBotanyTaxonomy (biology)HemipteraSynonym (taxonomy)AphisGenusHomopteraPEST analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The three species of Hyalopterus Koch cause economic damage to various stone fruit trees of the genus Prunus L., H. pruni (Geoffroy), H. amygdali (Blanchard), and H. persikonus Miller et al. Although the third species was established recently, it has been suggested that one of the twelve older synonyms of the first two may be applicable to the third. We undertook a synonymic revision of the nominal species of Hyalopterus to clarify the taxonomy and nomenclature of the genus. The three valid species of Hyalopterus are affirmed to be H. pruni (the mealy plum aphid), H. amygdali, and H. arundiniformis Ghulamullah, stat. nov. We determined that H. mimulus Börner and H. persikonus are junior synonyms of H. arundiniformis, syn. nov., and that Brachysiphum kobachidzei Rusanova is not a synonym of H. amygdali but a valid species of Aphis, stat. nov., comb. nov. Aphis amygdalipersicae Mosley is likely a senior synonym of Brachycaudus helichrysi (Kaltenbach), syn. nov.; to maintain current usage, we establish the former as a nomen oblitum with respect to the latter. Finally, several other nominal species were unevaluable and are therefore listed as nomina dubia.

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)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Citations6
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Entomological Society of WashingtonSame topicInsect-Plant Interactions and ControlFrench-language works237,207