Lesteva schoenmanni Shavrin 2017, sp.n.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lesteva (s.str.) schoenmanni Shavrin, sp.n. (Figs. 21–22, 25) Type material examined: Holotype ♂ [The last abdominal segment was glued under the beetle; a plastic card with a preparation of the aedeagus in Canadian balsam was pinned under the card with specimen]: CHINA: HUBEI PROVINCE: ‘CHINA: Hubei, 15.10.2004 | Shennongjia Forest Distr. | 25 km W pass Muyu - | Shennongija | 1650 m, leg. Schönmann | & Wang (CWBS 536)’ , ‘HOLOTYPE | Lesteva (s.str.) | schoenmanni | Shavrin A.V. det. 2016’ (NMW). Paratypes, 3 ♀: same data as the holotype, with my label ‘PARATYPE | Lesteva (s.str.) | schoenmanni | Shavrin A.V. det. 2016’ (2 ♀: NMW; 1 ♀: cS). Description. Measurements (n=4): WH: 0.65–0.69; LH: 0.46–0.51; LA (holotype): 1.91; LE: 0.20¯0.25; LT: 0.11¯0.13; LP: 0.67–0.75; WPMax: 0.75–0.79; WPMin: 0.52–0.60; LEl: 1.30–1.35; WE: 1.30–1.35; WA: 1.30¯1.33; LAed: 0.85; TL: 3.75(holotype)–3.95. Body and apical parts of femora black (one paratype with very indistinct transverse macula in middle portion of each elytron); antennomeres 1¯7, femora and tibiae reddish brown; basal part of antennomeres 1¯7 and antennomeres 8¯11 reddish yellow; mouthparts and tarsi yellow. Punctation of head moderately large and coarse, more or less regular, denser on infraorbital ridges; punctation of pronotum dense and deep, interspaces between punctures in middle portion as diameter of 1¯2 of nearest punctures; scutellum with dense small punctation; punctation of elytra distinctly larger than that on pronotum; abdomen with very dense and small punctation. Forebody covered by moderately dense and long slightly outstanding goldish pubescence; abdomen with thin long brown pubescence. Body glossy; forebody without microsculpture; abdominal tergites with well distinct isodiametric microsculpture. Habitus as in Fig. 25. Head 1.3̄1.4 times as wide as long, with large convex eyes, with slightly convex middle portion between weak depressions; eyes sligthly less than twice as long as temples, gradually narrowing from hind margins of eyes toward neck; ocelli large, distance between ocelli slightly shorter than distance between ocellus and posterior margin of eye. Antennae reaching one third of elytra when reclined; measurements of antennomeres (length/width, holotype): 1: 0.22 × 0.08; 2: 0.15 × 0.05; 3: 0.17 × 0.05; 4¯8: 0.16 × 0.06; 9¯10: 0.16 × 0.07; 11: 0.25 × 0.08. Pronotum convex, slightly as wide as long and head, widest in anterior third, gradually narrowed toward base; middle part of disc with wide indistinct longitudinal impressions beginning from anterior third portion, and with small moderately deep medio-lateral impressions. Elytra as wide as long, 1.8̄1.9 times as long as pronotum, with slightly rounded hind margins, with distinct transverse impression in basal third. Metatarsus long, one and half times shorter than metatibia, with tarsomere I as long as tarsomeres IĪIV, about as long as apical tarsomere. Abdomen about same width as elytra; tergite IV with two large tomentose spots. Male. Apical margin of abdominal sternite VIII with widely rounded emargination. Aedeagus (Fig. 21) with large basal part and strongly narrowed median lobe toward small rounded apex; parameres moderately wide, slightly widened apically, with three lateroapical and one apical setae; endophallus with two elongated parallel fields of thorns in median part and with two groups of apical thorns. Aedeagus laterally as in Fig. 22. Female. Apical margin of abdominal sternite VIII straight. Comparative notes. Based on the shape of the forebody and general shape of the aedeagus, L. schoenmanni sp.n. is similar to L. pulcherrima (see above), but differs by the smaller body and coloration without metallic reflex, by the narrower and longer median lobe of the aedeagus and narrower parameres. Distribution. The species is known from Shennongjia Forestry District, north-western Hubei. Etymology. The species is named after coleopterologist Heinrich Schönmann (Wien), a specialist on Hydrophilidae, one of collectors of the type specimens. Bionomics. The specimens were collected between limestone slabs and boulders near a small river (3-5 m in width) in densely forested calcareous mountains W of the Shennong ([CWBS 536]).
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.005 |
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".