MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3112020284 · doi:10.22543/0090-0222.2363

Reinstatement of Andrena vernalis Mitchell (Hymenoptera: Andrenidae) from synonymy with A. ziziae Robertson

2020· article· en· W3112020284 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Zachary M. Portman, Ian G. Lane, Gabriella L. Pardee, Daniel P. Cariveau

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Great Lakes Entomologist · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinnesota Environment and Natural Resources Trust FundNorth Carolina State University
KeywordsBiologyHymenopteraZoologySensuEcologyHabitatGenus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Andrena (Micrandrena) ziziae Robertson, 1891 (Andrenidae) is a well-known species found in a variety of habitats in the eastern and central United States and adjacent southern Canada. Andrena (Micrandrena) vernalis Mitchell, 1960 was described from five female specimens in the eastern United States and was synonymized with A. ziziae by Ribble in 1968. Recently collected specimens from throughout Minnesota have revealed that A. ziziae sensu Ribble is actually two species, one of which matches A. vernalis. Here, we reinstate A. vernalis as a valid species and describe the previously unknown male. We provide diagnostic characters that separate A. ziziae and A. vernalis, as well as data on the geographic range and floral preferences of both species in Minnesota. Andrena vernalis appears to be restricted to high-quality remnant habitats, making it a species of potential conservation concern. These changes will require that previous work on A. ziziae be revisited to determine if A. vernalis is also present.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.161 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations9
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Great Lakes EntomologistSame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207