MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3187018999 · doi:10.3897/asp.66.e31681

The Female Abdomen of Ovipositor-bearing Odonata (Insecta: Pterygota)

2008· article· en· W3187018999 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Klaus‐Dieter Klass

Bibliographic record

VenueArthropod Systematics & Phylogeny · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicFossil Insects in Amber
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of TsukubaDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftUniversity of Alberta
KeywordsOdonataOvipositorGeologyZoologyBiologyPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The exoskeleton and musculature of the middle and posterior abdomen in female Calopteryx virgo are described (segmentsIVff), including parts of the midabdominal nervous system. Based on a sample of 16 species of Odonata with a plesiomor-phic morphology of the ovipositor (various Zygoptera, Epiophlebia, and Aeshnidae) the range of variation in the abdominalexoskeleton is documented, and a preliminary list and table of 79 characters are assembled. Abdominal muscles in Odonataare surveyed based on data from the literature. Topographic homologies between Odonata and other Insecta are discussed,with a focus on the female genitalic region and the terminal abdomen, and with consideration of previous ontogenetic stud-ies. The results are used for including outgroup scorings into the character list for Odonata. Odonata conform with manyNeoptera (e.g., Notoptera, pygidicranid Dermaptera) in the location of the female genital opening between or behind the gonapophyses VIII bases, contrasting with the VIIth-segmental openings in other Neoptera (e.g., Dictyoptera, Ensifera, ‘advanced’ Dermaptera), Archaeognatha, and Zygentoma. The gonangulum in most Odonata consists, like in Archaeognatha and some Dermaptera, of two separate sclerites; this contrasts with the one-piece condition of the gonangulum in other Dicondylia and Epiophlebia. The interpretation of terminal appendages in Odonata as the true cerci is supported by musculature data, and it is shown that previous counter-arguments are invalid. While Epiophlebia is in many characters highly peculiar among Odonata, the abdominal characters provide no resolution for the relationships between Epiophlebia, Zygoptera, and Anisoptera. The monophyly of Zygoptera receives considerable support.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.193 · 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

Citations9
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArthropod Systematics & PhylogenySame topicFossil Insects in AmberFrench-language works237,207