MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410816398 · doi:10.1093/isd/ixaf018

Erebidae systematics: past, present, and future—progress in understanding a diverse lepidopteran lineage

2025· article· en· W4410816398 on OpenAlexaff
Melissa S. Sisson, Nicolas Dowdy, Makani L. Fisher, Lawrence F. Gall, Paul Z. Goldstein, Nicholas T. Homziak, Christian Schmidt, Rebecca B. Simmons, Susan J. Weller, Reza Zahiri, Jennifer M. Zaspel, Alberto Zilli

Bibliographic record

VenueInsect Systematics and Diversity · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicLepidoptera: Biology and Taxonomy
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersNational Museum of Natural HistoryU.S. Department of AgricultureSmithsonian Institution
KeywordsSystematicsErebidaeLineage (genetic)BiologyEvolutionary biologyZoologyGenealogyHistoryTaxonomy (biology)Genetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Erebidae, the largest family of Lepidoptera with approximately 25,000 known species globally, forms the major clade of the superfamily Noctuoidea. Currently classified into 18 subfamilies, erebids display extraordinary morphological and behavioral diversity, with lineages that include adult wingspans ranging from 6 to 280 mm, ultrasonic anti-bat defenses such as sonar jamming, and caterpillars exhibiting a wide array of feeding strategies, including detritivory and specialization on toxic plants. Historically, their classification has been unstable, undergoing significant revisions due largely to advances in molecular phylogenetics. Recent phylogenomic studies have supported the monophyly of Erebidae and some of its subfamilies, although the composition of and relationships among many subfamilies remain unresolved. Understanding the taxonomy and phylogenetic structure of Erebidae is crucial for evolutionary biology, conservation, agriculture, and biosecurity, as many species are significant pollinators, pests, or key components of food webs. With environmental changes such as habitat loss and climate change intensifying, documenting erebid diversity is increasingly urgent. Research should prioritize tropical regions, where erebids are most diverse, and leverage techniques such as whole-genome sequencing and expanded taxon sampling of museum specimens to produce a stable, well-resolved classification of this ecologically significant family of Lepidoptera.

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)0.001
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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.213 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations6
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInsect Systematics and DiversitySame topicLepidoptera: Biology and TaxonomyFrench-language works237,207