MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412471043 · doi:10.4289/0013-8797.127.1.30

Nomenclatural Changes and New Geographic Distribution Records for New World Species of Dacnusni (Hymenoptera: Braconidae)

2025· article· en· W4412471043 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Robert R. Kula

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Entomological Society of Washington · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicHymenoptera taxonomy and phylogeny
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBraconidaeHymenopteraDistribution (mathematics)GeographyZoologyBiologyParasitoidMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nomenclatural changes are provided for species of Dacnusini that occur in the New World. Chorebus aquaticus Muesebeck, 1950 is a new junior synonym of Chorebus astigmus (Ashmead, 1901). The status of specimens in the type series for Rhizarcha astigma Ashmead (treated herein as C. astigmus) is clarified. Dacnusa alaskensis (Ashmead, 1902) is returned from Chorebus Haliday. Chorebus posticus (Haliday, 1839) is reported from the Nearctic Region for the first time from the U.S. (Kansas, New Mexico, North Carolina); it is also reported within the Palearctic Region from Denmark for the first time. Chorebus astigmus is reported from the Palearctic Region for the first time (Czech Republic, England, Germany); it is also reported within the Nearctic Region from Mexico and Utah for the first time. The new distribution records for those two species represent their first documentation as having a Holarctic distribution. Additional new country, state, and provincial distribution records are reported for Chorebus crassitelus (Provancher, 1886) (Manitoba, North Carolina), Chorebus harringtoni (Ashmead, 1902) (Canada), Chorebus laeviceps (Cresson, 1872) (Kansas, Ohio), and Coelinius hopkinsii Ashmead, 1893 (Missouri).

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.314
Threshold uncertainty score0.267

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 teacher head, 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 venueProceedings of the Entomological Society of WashingtonSame topicHymenoptera taxonomy and phylogenyFrench-language works237,207