MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200053233 · doi:10.3897/jhr.87.63533

Molecular analysis reveals Latonius planus Kononova to be a derived species of Trissolcus Ashmead

2021· article· en· W4200053233 on OpenAlexaff
Cristina Vasilița, Ovidiu Alin Popovici, Elijah J. Talamas, Norman F. Johnson, Lubomír Masner, Francesco Tortorici, Lucian Fusu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hymenoptera Research · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicHymenoptera taxonomy and phylogeny
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyOvipositorScelionidaeIntraspecific competitionGenusZoologyMolecular phylogeneticsTaxonomy (biology)PhylogeneticsBotanyHymenopteraParasitoidGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The monotypic genus Latonius Kononova, 1982 (Platygastroidea, Scelionidae), was described from a single female specimen collected in southern Ukraine. It somewhat resembles Trissolcus Ashmead but has a distinctive claval formula. The only species in the genus, Latonius planus Kononova, 1982, is lacking any details regarding biology, sexual dimorphism, intraspecific variability, or distribution. Based on recently collected specimens the present study clarifies the position of Latonius within the Telenominae, provides a comprehensive description accompanied by high quality images, and compares Latonius and Trissolcus. Five molecular markers were amplified, and sequences of L. planus were analyzed using a data set for the molecular phylogeny of Telenominae (Taekul et al. 2014) and a molecular phylogeny of Trissolcus (Talamas et al. 2019). We dissected the metasoma, tarsi, antennae, and ovipositor and performed SEM imaging. The genera Latonius and Ioseppinella Mineo, O’Connor & Ashe, 2010, are treated as junior synonyms of Trissolcus and the type species of Latonius and Ioseppinella are considered to be conspecific (syn. nov.).

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Hymenoptera ResearchSame topicHymenoptera taxonomy and phylogenyFrench-language works237,207