MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3086816245 · doi:10.3897/bdj.8.e54834

Coelosynapha, a new genus of the subfamily Gnoristinae (Diptera: Mycetophilidae) with a circumpolar, Holarctic distribution

2020· article· en· W3086816245 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jostein Kjærandsen, Alexei Polevoi, Jukka Salmela

Bibliographic record

VenueBiodiversity Data Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicDiptera species taxonomy and behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNorwegian Biodiversity Information Centre
KeywordsHolarcticGenusSubfamilyBiologyTaigaNearctic ecozoneEcologyDNA barcodingZoology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The subfamily Gnoristinae is one of the most diverse and taxonomically difficult subfamilies of Mycetophilidae, with new species and genera being described almost every year from various parts of the world. Through inventories of fungus gnats in the Nordic Region and Russia, a genus and species new to science was discovered, yet with links back to an illustration made by the late French entomologist Loïc Matile in the 1980s. DNA barcoding aligned it with yet another species new to science, distributed across Canada and documented through The Barcode of Life Data System (BOLD) by Paul D. N. Hebert and colleagues at the BOLD team. The new Holarctic genus, Coelosynapha gen. n. is described, consisting of two new species, the Palaearctic Coelosynapha loici sp. n. and the Nearctic Coelosynapha heberti sp. n. DNA-barcodes assign the two new species to distinctly separated (8.27% p-distance) Barcode Index Numbers (BINs) which are most closely aligned to unidentified species of Mycetophilidae from South Australia and Costa Rica on BOLD. The new genus shows morphological characteristics in between the two Holarctic genera Coelosia Winnertz, 1864 and Synapha Meigen, 1818 and further shows affinity to the southern continents genus Austrosynapha Tonnoir, 1929. The Palaearctic Coelosynapha loici sp. n., for which habitat requirements are best documented, is largely restricted to pristine, old-growth conifer (mostly spruce, Picea abies ssp. obovata) forests within the boreal vegetation zone, although it is also recorded from hummock tundra along the Anadyr River in Far East Russia.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.070
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.125 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiodiversity Data JournalSame topicDiptera species taxonomy and behaviorFrench-language works237,207