New invader, old neighbour or new species? The curious story of the aphid <i>Longicaudinus corydalisicola</i> (Tao, 1962) (Hemiptera: Aphididae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
SummaryDetermining the geographical origin of a species is usually a difficult matter. Regarding aphids, there are many cases in which species have been described when found outside their original distribution areas. Citizen science can help to find and monitor them, while molecular analysis aids with their identification. However, this kind of study has limitations. In this work, we present a clear example of these difficulties. An aphid species, which initially could not be identified based on its morphological characteristics, had been recorded on species of Fumaria in the Iberian Peninsula. Subsequently, it has been found in native spontaneous cover crops in citrus orchards in Valencia and in other natural areas of Spain. Thanks to citizen science its presence could be confirmed also in Portugal and France. The analysis of the molecular sequence of the cytochrome oxidase I gene (COI) highlighted a match with a species native to Southeast Asia, Longicaudinus corydalisicola (Tao, 1962). The molecular identification was then confirmed by morphological studies. We carried out a comparison between morphological descriptions available in the literature and the Iberian samples. Colonies were monitored during 2023 and 2024 in the Eastern areas of the Iberian Peninsula to determine the species population dynamics. Its status, possible origin and presence in Europe, in an area far from its known distribution area to date, are discussed.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| 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".