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)
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it