MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2949694603 · doi:10.11646/zootaxa.4615.1.1

A review of West Palaearctic Hoplocampa species, focussing on Sweden (Hymenoptera, Tenthredinidae)

2019· review· en· W2949694603 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Andrew Liston, Marko Prous, Hege Vårdal

Bibliographic record

VenueZootaxa · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinistère de l'Énergie et des Ressources Naturelles
KeywordsBiologyTenthredinidaeSynonym (taxonomy)TaxonZoologyHymenopteraKey (lock)Taxonomy (biology)BotanyEcologyGenus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fourteen Hoplocampa species have been recorded in the West Palaearctic. We provide an illustrated key to these species, together with H. tadshikistanica, which is so far only known from Tadshikistan, but could occur in the West Palaearctic. The suitability of genetic sequencing for identification, particularly of larvae, is discussed. COI barcoding reliably distinguishes all European species which have been sampled (only H. phantoma lacks data), except for H. fulvicornis and H. minuta, which can be identified using nuclear sequences. Distributions in the Fennoscandian countries are outlined, with particular reference to Sweden. Hoplocampa chrysorrhoea is recorded for the first time in Scandinavia, from southern Sweden. Lectotypes are designated for twelve nominal taxa: Allantus ferrugineus Panzer, 1802, Hoplocampa chrysorrhoea var. nigrita Enslin, 1914, H. fabricii W. F. Kirby, 1882, H. oertzeni Konow, 1888, H. pectoralis Thomson, 1871, Hylotoma ferruginea Fabricius, 1804, Tenthredo alpina Zetterstedt, 1838, T. brevis Klug, 1816, T. chrysorrhoea Klug, 1816, T. crataegi Klug, 1816, T. plagiata Klug, 1816, and T. rutilicornis Klug, 1816. Hoplocampa minuta forma dudai Gregor, in Gregor Bata, 1942 is a new synonym of H. fulvicornis (Panzer, 1801).

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.145
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.149 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations8
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZootaxaSame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207