Taxonomic Catalog of the Brazilian Fauna: The Brazilian acarofauna (Arachnida: Holothyrida, Ixodida, Mesostigmata, Opilioacarida, Sarcoptiformes, and Trombidiformes)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT The diversity of organisms is one of the most fundamental questions in sciences. Here, we inventory species distributed in 273 families of mites from Brazil. Taxonomic information is provided for all 88 superfamilies in Brazil, accompanied by relevant publications for the families, including notes on their identification and importance. However, despite recent taxonomic improvement in a few groups, particularly in Mesostigmata (Dermanyssoidea, Phytoseioidea and Uropodoidea), Ixodida (Ixodoidea), Sarcoptiformes (Analgoidea, Galumnoidea, Oppioidea, Oripodoidea, Phthiracaroidea, Pterolichoidea and Sarcoptoidea) and Trombidiformes (Arrenuroidea, Bdelloidea, Cheyletoidea, Eriophyoidea, Hygrobatoidea, Pygmephoroidea, Tarsonemoidea, Tetranychoidea, Trombiculoidea and Tydeoidea), knowledge remains limited for most other taxa. This limitation underscores the urgent need for taxonomic revisions and improvements in describing new species. Based on groups of host-specificity, we estimate nearly 50,000 species of mites occurring in Brazil, but the diversity could be greater. This enormous gap in our taxonomic knowledge of mites suggests that greater investment in training and hiring acarologists, is essential. In this context, the Taxonomic Catalog of the Brazilian Fauna (TCBF) should serve as a key platform for compiling, updating, and disseminating taxonomic data, ensuring that mite diversity in Brazil is systematically documented and accessible for future research and conservation efforts.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".