A revision of the genus Halectinosoma (Copepoda: Harpacticoida: Ectinosomatidae): the H. herdmani (Scott & Scott) group of species
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ectinosomatid material was examined from extensive collections around the British Isles and from several additional world localities and museum collections, permitting a revision of the genus Halectinosoma. This paper redescribes H. herdmani and describes five new species: H. bodotriaensissp. nov., H. pilosumsp. nov., H. britannicutnsp. nov., H. itoisp. nov. and H. huysisp. nov. These species, together with H. tenerum (Sars) and H. kunzi Lang, are referred to the ‘herdmani species group’, on the basis of close similarity. H. herdelongata (Marcus) is synonymized with H. herdmani. H. elongatum (Sars), previously regarded as incertae sedis, is also redescribed. Despite a superficial resemblance to the herdmani group of species, H. elongatum was found to be morphologically quite distinct. H. intermedium (Nicholls) was found to be a synonym of H. elongatum. The species H. finmarchicum (T. Scott) is discarded; the original description was found to be based largely on material of H. elongatum but mistakenly included the female fifth leg from H. angulifrons (Sars). A key for the identification of females of the herdmani group of species is provided.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".