An outlook on larval morphology of Copelatinae diving beetles with phylogenetic considerations (Coleoptera: Adephaga, Dytiscidae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The larvae of 12 species of Copelatinae, Copelatus alternatus Sharp, 1882, C. caelatipennis princeps Young, 1963, C. glyphicus (Say, 1823), C. japonicus Sharp, 1884, C. masculinus Rgimbart, 1899, C. nakamurai Guorguiev, 1970, C. oblitus Sharp, 1882, C. parallelus Zimmermann, 1920, C. tenebrosus Rgimbart, 1880, Exocelina australiae (Clark, 1863), E. ferruginea (Sharp, 1882), and Liopterus haemorrhoidalis (Fabricius, 1787) are described or redescribed, including for the first time a detailed chaetotaxy analysis of the cephalic capsule, head appendages, legs, last abdominal segment and urogomphi. A provisional parsimony analysis based on larval characteristics of 13 copelatine species was conducted using the program TNT, which reinforces the monophyletic origin of the Copelatinae. Copelatinae larvae stand out from the remaining Dytiscidae based on several synapomorphies, including the unusual shorter length of the mesothoracic legs. Legs and urogomphi morphology suggest that Copelatinae larvae studied evolved a creeping way of life. The provisional phylogenetic analysis presented in this study provides some arguments for the validity of the taxonomic status of the genera Liopterus Dejean, 1833 and Exocelina Broun, 1886.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".