Drasterius grandicollis Horn 1829
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Drasterius grandicollis Horn (1871, Transactions of the American Entomological Society, 3: 299–324) was described from a single specimen collected in ‘‘ California.’’ No collector or precise locality is attributed to this specimen. Through the 1880s and 1890s, Horn continued to receive material from ‘‘Lower California,’’ now Baja California, and worked on the fauna of that region (Horn 1894–1896, Proceedings of the California Academy of Sciences, 4: 302–449, 5: 225–259, 6: 367–381). Yet, he never listed this species from the peninsula or nearby regions. Yet, apparently no additional specimens of this species were obtained or are available in surviving collections. Taxonomic treatment of the species of Drasterius by LeConte (1884, Transactions of the American Entomological Society, 12: 1–32.) and catalogers through Schenkling (1925, Elateridae I. Coleopterorum Catalogus, 88: 1–264. Berlin) retained grandicollis in this genus. However, this and other species were transferred to Aeolus Eschscholtz when Becker (1961, Canadian Entomologist, 93: 161–181) stated that those species listed under Drasterius in Leng’s catalog (1920, Catalogue of the Coleoptera of America, north of Mexico. John D. Sherman, Mt. Vernon, New York) should be so treated. Our examination of the type of D. grandicollis revealed that Horn’s assignment of this species to Drasterius does not fit the contemporary taxonomic concept of that genus. The holotype of D. grandicollis was found to lack the salient characteristics to retain its assignment in either Drasterius or Aeolus. Rather, the specimen possesses the traits to support a reassignment to Conoderus Eschscholtz as C. grandicollis (Horn) (new combination) and an association with C. sordidus (LeConte) and C. robustus (Horn). Although Conoderus is a large and morphologically diverse genus requiring review, grandicollis fits the generic description of the genus given by Johnson (1995, Coleopterists Bulletin, 49: 59–71). Along with C. sordidus and C. robustus, this small group of species shares the following combination of traits within the genus: pronotum densely and doubly punctured with a field of fine punctures and intermixed coarser punctures approximately 2× larger in diameter than the fine punctures; lateral margin strongly sinuate before pronotal hind angles; pronotal hind angles bicarinate, with mesal carina very short, occasionally obsolescent; femur of front leg smoothly rounded on anteroventral angles; tarsomere 4 bearing a large fleshy ventral lobe; elytral apices conjointly rounded. Within the genus, C. grandicollis is readily recognized by its smaller size (6– 7 mm), coarsely punctured pronotum and elytral striae, ovate elytra lacking humeri, apterous metanotum, and pallid coloration. The style of pronotal sculpture is indicative of Heteroderes which Van Dyke (1932, Proceedings of the California Academy of Sciences, 10: 291–465) treated as a subgenus of Conoderus. Three specimens, one from each of three localities were submitted for determination by W.H. Clark, Albertson’s College of Idaho, Caldwell (ACIC). These specimens represent a new country record and bear the following labeling: MEXICO: Baja California Norte, 1 km SE [of] San Telmo mine, Lt 29°35' Lng 114°46', 300 mEl, ethylene glycol pitfall trap, 5.vii.91 24.v.92, W.H. Clark, E.M. Clark, P.E. Blom collectors (1, ACIC); 6 km NE [of] La Bocana, Lat. 29°42'N, Long 114°50'W, Elevation 400 m, pitfall trap ethylene glycol 19.iii.91 5.vii.91, W.H., M.H., C.J., & K.D. Clark, & J.E. Luther collectors (1, ACIC); 9 km NW [of] Rancho Santa Ines, Lat 29°46'N, Long 114° 46'W, El. 550 m, pitfall trap #13 ethylene glycol 22.iii.91 – 17.vii.91, W.H., M.H., C.J., & K.D. Clark, & J.E. Luther collectors (1, PJJC). This note is publication # 3203 of the South Dakota Agricultural Experiment Station.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 0.003 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".