<i>Idiotypa clavata</i> (Provancher, 1888) (Hymenoptera: Diapriidae), new generic placement for a misclassified species
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 1888, Provancher (1889) described Camptoptera (as "Camptotera") clavata from a male and a female collected at Ste. Gertrude, Quebec, though he did not note the actual number of specimens examined.Presumably it was only two.He also did not designate a primary type.Girault (1911) borrowed what was thought to be the unique specimen of C. clavata, labelled "Camptotera clavata Prov.1598", but it arrived badly damaged so he could only state that it definitely did not belong to Mymaridae.Girault remounted the fragments remaining-initially stated to be "a single fore wing and several tarsi"; later in the same description corrected to "these notes are based on a fore wing and tibiae and tarsi of two legs"-in Canada balsam on a slide and described the fore wing venation and leg remnants before returning the specimen to the sender, Abbé V.A. Huard, Musée de l'Instruction Publique, Quebec [City].Girault's designation must be construed as a lectotype designation according to ICZN Article 73.1.3and Recommendation 73F: "Where no holotype or syntype was fixed for a nominal species-group taxon established before 2000, and when it is possible that the nominal species-group taxon was based on more than one specimen, an author should proceed as though syntypes may exist and, where appropriate, should designate a lectotype rather than assume a holotype."Gahan and Rohwer (1917) correctly treated Girault's "type" as a lectotype.At my request, J. Perron, retired curator of the Provancher Collection, searched for the Girault slide and noted that it had been lost.So nothing at all remains of the lectotype.However, he found another specimen labeled in Provancher's hand as C. clavata (Fig. 1) and sent it to me for study.It is unquestionably one of the syntypes because its label number #616 (Fig. 1) corresponds to catalogue number 1598 of Provancher's personal collection, which is the number of the lost type seen by Girault (J.-M.Perron, personal communication).It is a species of Trichopria (Diapriidae) (Figs.12345), similar to T. virginica (Ashmead) (L. Masner, personal communication).Peck (1963) catalogued the literature on C. clavata.Both he and Burks (1979) had treated the species as unplaced within Chalcidoidea, even though Girault (1911) had stated "The fore wing . . .has the venation of a Pteromalid".The question is whether Girault's brief description of those remnants actually fits that of a North American species of Pteromalidae.If the Code is scrupulously followed, only Girault's redescription of the lectotype can be used to determine the correct identity of Camptoptera clavata.Provancher's original description must be disregarded, because it did not explicitly include a type designation,
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 0.007 |
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".