Taxonomic review, morphometry, and phylogenetic analysis of Mahanarva (Ipiranga) Fennah, 1968 (Hemiptera: Auchenorrhyncha: Cercopidae)
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mahanarva (Ipiranga) Fennah, 1968, currently comprises nine described species. The subgenus is characterized by an inflated postclypeus with a convex profile, longer than wide tegmina, and male genitalia with a short, laterally compressed aedeagus with a pair of slender dorsal processes. In this study, a phylogenetic hypothesis based on morphological data is presented to test the monophyly of Mahanarva (Ipiranga) and infer the relationship between its species. We present the redescriptions of its species and the description of two new species, Mahanarva (Ipiranga) obliqua sp. nov. and Mahanarva (Ipiranga) nefasta sp. nov. , along with a dichotomous key for identification. Moreover we synonymized M. (I.) vittata and M. (I.) fortunata based on morphological characters and a principal component analysis. The PCA results suggested no differences on the morphospace between these species; however, cluster analysis resulted in three groups. These groups don’t show a geographic pattern structure or stable genitalic morphological differences. For phylogenetic analyses, a data matrix with 30 taxa and 56 characters was constructed. Based on the results of phylogenetic analyses, Mahanarva (Ipiranga) is recovered as paraphyletic and grouped with Mahanarva (Mahanarva) + Kanaima .
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 it