MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3091412247 · doi:10.3897/zookeys.969.56214

Lost lovers linked at long last: elusive female Nanophyllium mystery solved after a century of being placed in a different genus (Phasmatodea, Phylliidae)

2020· article· en· W3091412247 on OpenAlexaff
Royce T. Cumming, Stéphane Le Tirant, Sierra N. Teemsma, Frank H. Hennemann, Luc Willemse, Thies H. Büscher

Bibliographic record

VenueZooKeys · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicFossil Insects in Amber
Canadian institutionsEspace pour la vie
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyZoologyGenusTaxonNew guineaTaxonomy (biology)Botany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

After successful laboratory rearing of both males and females from a single clutch of eggs, the genus Nanophyllium Redtenbacher, 1906 (described only from males) and the frondosum species group within Phyllium (Pulchriphyllium) Griffini, 1898 (described only from females) are found to be the opposite sexes of the same genus. This rearing observation finally elucidates the relationship of these two small body sized leaf insect groups which, for more than a century, have never been linked before. This paper synonymizes the frondosum species group with Nanophyllium Redtenbacher, 1906 in order to create a singular and clearly defined taxonomic group. Five species are transferred from the Phyllium (Pulchriphyllium) frondosum species group and create the following new combinations: Nanophyllium asekiense (Größer, 2002), comb. nov.; Nanophyllium chitoniscoides (Größer, 1992), comb. nov.; Nanophyllium frondosum (Redtenbacher, 1906), comb. nov.; Nanophyllium keyicum (Karny, 1914), comb. nov.; Nanophyllium suzukii (Größer, 2008), comb. nov. The only taxon from this species group not transferred from the frondosum species group to Nanophyllium is Phyllium (Pulchriphyllium) groesseri Zompro, 1998. Based on protibial exterior lobes, this species belongs in the schultzei species group as described in Hennemann et al. 2009 and is therefore excluded from further discussion here. The rearing of Nanophyllium also yielded the male Nanophyllium asekiense (Größer, 2002), comb. nov. thus, enabling comparison of this male to the other previously known Nanophyllium species. Two new species of nano-leaf insects are described within, Nanophyllium miyashitaisp. nov., from Morobe Province, Papua New Guinea, and Nanophyllium daphnesp. nov., from Biak Island, Papua Province, Indonesia. With such distinct sexual dimorphism in Nanophyllium between sexes, which have only now been matched up via captive rearing, illustrated within are numerous specimens which might represent the unknown opposite sexes of the many currently known species of Nanophyllium. Due to pronounced sexual dimorphism in Nanophyllium, only future captive rearing or molecular analysis will match up the many unknown sexes. To conclude, with the description of two new Nanophyllium species, dichotomous keys to species for known males and females are presented.

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)0.001
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.188 · 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

Citations22
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZooKeysSame topicFossil Insects in AmberFrench-language works237,207