Teratognathini Silveira, the priority family-group name for Ancyloscelidini Engel and Michener (Hymenoptera: Apoidea: Apidae: Eucerinae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The genus Ancyloscelis Latreille, 1829 (Hymenoptera: Apidae), a taxon restricted to the Neotropics and southern Nearctic (Michener 1942, 2000, 2007; Schaller and Roig-Alsina 2021; Melo 2022), has been difficult to place precisely within the higher classification of bees (Roig-Alsina and Michener 1993; Aguiar et al. 2019; Freitas et al. 2020), and even the genus name has a confusing history (see Michener 1942). Michener (1944) placed it together with Exomalopsis Spinola, 1853 within the Exomalopsini Vachal, 1909, and Michener and Moure (1957) later expanded this tribe to include ten additional genera, with Ancyloscelis the sole member of one of the five distinct sections they recognized (reviewed by Silveira 1993). Later, Jesus S. Moure (cited in Roig-Alsina and Michener 1993) suggested that the placement of Ancyloscelis should be within Emphorini Robertson, 1904, a position supported in that work. However, Roig-Alsina and Michener (1993) concluded that it differed enough from other members to recognize two subtribes, proposing Ancyloscelina Roig-Alsina and Michener, 1993 containing only the type genus, with the remaining Emphorini recognized at that time (i.e., Diadasia Patton, 1879, Diadasina Moure, 1950, Melitoma Lepeletier and Serville, 1828, and Ptilothrix Smith, 1853) placed in subtribe Emphorina Robertson, 1904. Michener (2000, 2007) and others (Silveira et al. 2002, Rodrguez and Roig-Alsina 2004) continued to recognize Ancyloscelis within Emphorini, but subtribal classifications were not used in those works.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".