Biphallapodema polydentata Papp, 2014, sp. n.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Biphallapodema polydentata sp. n. (Figs 28–38) Type material. Holotype male (HNHM, body in a good quality canada balsam preparation, abdomen and genitalia prepared and kept in a plastic microvial with glycerol): CONGO: Brazzaville, ORSTOM park, J. Balogh & A. Zicsi - soil traps around leaf-compost, No. 211, 18. XI. 1963, 2 days. Paratypes (HNHM): 1 male (abdomen and genitalia prepared and kept in a plastic microvial with glycerol): ibid., S. Endrődy—Younga— 30. XII. 1963, excrement trap, No. 561. 2 males, 1 male 1 female, 2 females, 1 male (complete bodies in canada balsam preparations): same data; 1 male (pinned, abdomen and genitalia prepared and kept in a plastic microvial with glycerol): same data. Description. Measurements in mm: body length 1.21 (holotype), 1.15–1.62 (paratypes); wing length 1.12 (holotype), 1.10–1.32 (paratypes); wing width c. 0.45 (holotype), 0.44–0.51 (paratypes). Male. Sternite 5 (Figs 28–29) with a pair of short blunt medio-caudal emarginations, which bear broad processes of 11–12 long flat pegs each. Synsternite (Fig.30) as described under the genus. Figure 31 is to illustrate the whole epandrial complex with hypandrium and cercal parts and subepandrial sclerite. The fusion of the two halves is ventrally actually more broad, as given on the Figure 32. Surstylus (Fig. 35) with broad blunt apical part (in contrast to B. oligodentata). Basiphallus (Fig. 34) less robust, its epiphallus thicker than in B. oligodentata. Base of postgonite seems less strongly fused to ventral branch of connecting sclerite (Fig. 33), postgonite with a comparatively long sharp anterior apical process, caudal process also sharp in lateral view. Female genitalia with round epiproct, which bears a pair of short thick setae (Fig. 36). Hypoproct (Fig. 37) subtriangular, its medial part more sclerotised, and a larger part than its apical half strongly sclerotised with short hairs, and bears a pair of long thick setae subapically. Cercus long (Fig. 36); with 3 pairs of long apical and subapical setae, apical seta tends to be incurved. Spermathecae (Fig. 38) longer than broad (contrary to B. oligodentata), with a narrowed proximal part, but sclerotised ducts are very similar to the other species with their distal bulb. Etymology. The specific epithet of this new species (‘polydentata’ = numerous teeth) refers to the highnumbered (11–12 each) pegs on the pair of processes on male sternite 5.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.113 | 0.080 |
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".