Towards elucidating species diversity of European inland<i>Strigamia</i>(Chilopoda: Geophilomorpha): a first reassessment integrating multiple lines of evidence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Strigamia centipedes are widespread in European forest soils. However, a complex and inconsistent taxonomy has developed over time. Based on a modern species concept, we evaluated multiple lines of evidence for speciation among inland populations of Strigamia from the Italian region to the Baltic region, across central Europe. Hypotheses of species delimitation were drawn independently from: (1) morphological differentiation, by means of model-based cluster analyses of 52 specimens, after controlling for allometry and sexual dimorphism; (2) syntopy of morphologically distinct individuals, assumed to be representatives of coexistent species, from > 700 sites; and (3) molecular differentiation, by various methods applied to cytochrome c subunit I sequences of the same 52 specimens. Diagnoses and geographical distributions were revised by re-examining > 2000 specimens and the entire literature. We found preliminary evidence for: a Strigamia acuminata species complex, widespread, including a candidate species from the Eastern Alps differing in the forcipules; a Strigamia carniolensis species complex, hitherto often called Strigamia crassipes, widespread south of the Alps but absent from Sicily; a Strigamia crassipes species complex, hitherto often called Strigamia transsilvanica, more widespread than previously known, including three candidate species co-occurring in the Western Alps and differing in body size and the number of legs despite little genetic divergence; and Strigamia engadina, exclusive to a narrow part of the Central Alps.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".