MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406591488 · doi:10.11646/zootaxa.5570.3.6

Contributions to the knowledge of Olixon Cameron, 1887 (Hymenoptera, Rhopalosomatidae): a new species and new records of the genus for northeastern Brazil

2025· article· en· W4406591488 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Gabriel Luiz Celante, Adhan Gabriel Carvalho, André L. Martins, Mayara Medeiros Bulbol, A. S. Brito, Adenir Vieira Teodoro, Benoit Jean Bernard Jahyny

Bibliographic record

VenueZootaxa · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHymenopteraBiologyGenusIdentification keyEcologyMale genitaliaZoology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The genus of solitary wasps Olixon Cameron, 1887 is currently represented by 29 species, distributed across the African, Australian and American continents where it is present from southeastern Canada to central-eastern Argentina for the latter. Its presence in India is also attested. Despite the many genus records published for the Neotropical region, northeastern Brazil is still one of the least represented regions for the genus. Here we describe and illustrate Olixon caju Celante, Martins & Bulbol, sp. nov., based on specimens of both sexes collected in a Restinga vegetation located in the coastline of the state of Sergipe, Brazil. In this work the description was carried out based on a male, with, additionally, the description and illustration of the genitalia. We provide an updated identification key for the seven New World species and present a distribution map for the three known species that occur in Brazil including new distribution records for Olixon testaceum Cameron, 1887 in northeastern Brazil.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZootaxaSame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207