Review of Anaphes Haliday (Hymenoptera: Mymaridae) with key to species in Europe and a world catalogue
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Walter Soyka species of Anaphes Haliday are reviewed and placed in context among the remaining world species. An analysis of his descriptions and identification keys is presented, and discussed in light of a broader interpretation of intraspecific variation in Anaphes species than Soyka accepted. An illustrated diagnosis of Anaphes is given and the species in Europe considered to be valid are keyed-14 species in Anaphes (Anaphes) and 15 species in Anaphes (Patasson). The 244 names of world Anaphes are tabulated in various ways and their type localities, if known, are mapped. All available valid names and their synonyms, mostly from among the 155 nominal species described by Soyka, are catalogued, with details of type material and collecting information. A total of 167 synonyms are listed, 17 of which are synonyms proposed by earlier authors and 149 of which are proposed as new synonyms. Lectotypes are designated for Mymar ferreirei Soyka and Yungaburra acutiventris Soyka. Nine nomina dubia, 2 names of fossil species that most likely do not belong to Anaphes, 3 unavailable names and 20 species transferred to other genera are listed separately; among the latter, Anagrus foersteri (Ratzeburg) is transferred to Erythmelus Enock as E. foersteri (Ratzeburg), comb. n. Host records published from 1985-2015 are tabulated; most are from the literature but a few are from unpublished records found on slide mounted Anaphes specimens in various collections, mostly in Europe. The merits of classifying the available names of nominal species into an earlier classification with subgenera Anaphes (Anaphes) and Anaphes (Patasson) instead a later classification consisting of species groups within Anaphes (Anaphes) and Anaphes (Yungaburra) are discussed; the earlier classification is preferred.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.004 |
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".