Immigrant Tortricidae: Holarctic versus Introduced Species in North America
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In support of a comprehensive update to the checklist of the moths of North America, we attempt to determine the status of 151 species of Tortricidae present in North America that may be Holarctic, introduced, or sibling species of their European counterparts. Discovering the natural distributions of these taxa is often difficult, if not impossible, but several criteria can be applied to determine if a species that is present in both Europe and North America is natively Holarctic, introduced, or represented by different but closely related species on each continent. We use DNA barcodes (when available), morphology, host plants, and historical records (literature and museum specimens) to make these assessments and propose several taxonomic changes, as well as future areas of research. The following taxa are raised from synonymy to species status: Acleris ferrumixtana (Benander, 1934), stat. rev.; Acleris viburnana (Clemens, 1860), stat. rev.; Acleris pulverosana (Walker, 1863), stat. rev.; Acleris placidana (Robinson, 1869), stat. rev.; Lobesia spiraeae (McDunnough, 1938), stat. rev.; and Epiblema arctica Miller, 1985, stat. rev. Cydia saltitans (Westwood, 1858), stat. rev., is determined to be the valid name for the “jumping bean moth,” and Phiaris glaciana (Möschler, 1860), comb. n., is placed in a new genus. We determine that the number of Holarctic species has been overestimated by at least 20% in the past, and that the overall number of introduced species in North America is unexpectedly high, with Tortricidae accounting for approximately 23–30% of the total number of Lepidoptera species introduced to North America.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".