To be or not to be a tibial comb: A discussion on the (past) use of tibial armature in tribal/subtribal organization in Cholevinae (Coleoptera: Leiodidae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Detailed studies of microstructure has recently been shown to provide phylogenetic signals at several supraspecific levels within leiodid coleopterans, as well as in other insects. The tribe Ptomaphagini (Leiodidae: Cholevinae), with a Holarctic-Neotropical-Oriental distribution, has been characterized, among other things, by having a comb of equal-sized, flat spines around the apex of the tibiae of all legs, with a row of spines extending along the outer edge of the protibiae in the subtribes Baryodirina and Ptomaphaginina (but not in Ptomaphagina). A pattern similar to the one in Ptomaphaginina also occurs in the Neotropical cholevine tribe Eucatopini, and this has been used to indicate a phylogenetic relationship between the two tribes (but recent phylogenetic studies have not supported such a close relationship). We here review and revise the presence and structure of periapical (here called an ‘apical crown’) and marginal (here called an ‘external comb’) combs of spines on tibiae in Ptomaphagini, using other cholevines (with and without apical tibial combs) for comparison. We find a phylogenetic signal in an apical crown of tibial spines not interrupted at the outer spur, which seems to be an additional synapomorphy of Ptomaphagini, differing from the pattern in Eucatopini and remaining cholevines with an apical comb of spines, in which the comb is interrupted. We highlight differences not previously noticed between the apical protibial armature of Ptomaphaginina and Eucatopini.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".