Reevaluation of <scp>Blapimorpha and Opatrinae</scp> : addressing a major phylogeny‐classification gap in darkling beetles ( <scp>Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae: Blaptinae</scp> )
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
Abstract The taxonomic concepts of Blapimorpha and Opatrinae (informal and traditional, morphology‐based groupings among darkling beetles) are tested using molecular phylogenetics and a reassessment of larval and adult morphology to address a major phylogeny‐classification gap in Tenebrionidae. Instead of a holistic approach (family‐level phylogeny), this study uses a bottom‐up strategy (tribal grouping) in order to define larger, monophyletic lineages within Tenebrioninae. Sampling included representatives of 27 tenebrionid tribes: Alleculini, Amarygmini, Amphidorini, Blaptini, Bolitophagini, Branchini, Cerenopini, Coniontini, Caenocrypticini, Dendarini, Eulabini, Helopini, Lagriini, Melanimini, Opatrini, Pedinini, Phaleriini, Physogasterini, Platynotini, Platyscelidini, Praociini, Scaurini, Scotobiini, Tenebrionini, Trachyscelini, Triboliini and Ulomini. Molecular analyses were based on DNA sequence data from four non‐overlapping gene regions: carbamoyl‐phosphate synthetase domain of rudimentary (CAD) (723 bp), wingless ( wg ) (438 bp) and nuclear ribosomal 28S (1101 bp) and mitochondrial ribosomal 12S (363 bp). Additionally, 15 larval and imaginal characters were scored and subjected to an ancestral state reconstruction analysis. Results revealed that Amphidorini, Blaptini, Dendarini, Pedinini, Platynotini, Platyscelidini and Opatrini form a clade which can be defined by the following morphological features: adults—antennae lacking compound/stellate sensoria; procoxal cavities externally and internally closed, intersternal membrane of abdominal ventrites 3–5 visible; paired abdominal defensive glands present, elongate, not annulated; larvae—prolegs enlarged (adapted for digging); ninth tergite lacking urogomphi. To accommodate this monophyletic grouping (281 genera and ∼4000 species), the subfamily Blaptinae sens. nov. is resurrected. Prior to these results, all of the tribes within Blaptinae were classified within the polyphyletic subfamily Tenebrioninae. The non‐monophyletic nature of Terebrioninae has already been postulated by previous authors, yet no taxonomic decisions were made to fix its status. The reinstatement of Blaptinae, which groups ∼50% of the former Tenebrioninae, helps to clarify phylogenetic relations among the whole family and is the first step towards a complete higher‐level revision of Tenebrionidae. The Central Asian tribe Dissonomini (two genera, ∼30 species) was not included in Blaptinae due to a lack of representatives in the performed phylogenetic analyses; however, based on morphological features, the tribe is listed as a potential addition to the subfamily.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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