MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6893947156 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.5699999

Strumigenys pergandei Emery 1895

2021· article· en· W6893947156 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInsect and Arachnid Ecology and Behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNearctic ecozoneDeciduousTaxonomy (biology)HolotypeOrnithologySynonym (taxonomy)Foraging

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Strumigenys pergandei Emery, 1895 Distribution. Canada to USA; in eastern USA from Georgia to NY and west to Iowa; in western USA occurs in Kansas. Comments. Morphologically similar to S. angulata, S. pergandei has elongate non-trap jaw mandibles. Strumigenys pergandei is a wide-ranging species that is more commonly collected in northern states and does not extend into Florida. It is often found nesting and foraging within nests of other ants e.g., Camponotus, Formica, and Aphaenogaster. Strumigenys pergandei may form unusually large colony sizes (> 700 workers) compared to other Nearctic natives that typically have around 30 workers (Wesson & Wesson 1939; Brown 1964). In Canada it has been collected several times in the province of Ontario (Guénard et al. 2017). Brown (1964) took the first collection in Kansas (Lawrence). Strumigenys pilinasis Forel, 1901 (Note: senior synonym of ohioensis) Distribution. USA; in eastern USA from Florida to New York and west to Missouri; in western USA occurs in Kansas, Oklahoma, and Texas. Comments. One of the most widespread and commonly collected Nearctic Strumigenys, S. pilinasis often nests in cavities such as hollowed nuts on forest floors (Duffield & Alpert 2011). DuBois (1985) reports two colonies collected on the Ozark Plateau in two counties (Cherokee and Jefferson) were found nesting in rotten wood in a deciduous forest. This species has been collected multiple times in Texas, but only a single series is known from Oklahoma (Latimer County). The single specimen identified as S. pilinasis in the Field Museum database from Colorado is not S. pilinasis but is here described as S. collinsae (FMNHINS 0000 119 056). Material examined: USA, Oklahoma, Latimer Co., 34.835035, -95.31025, 224 m, 15 May 1983, 9 workers & 1 queen, coll. K. Stephan, [ABS]; USA, Texas, Houston Co., Big Slough Wilderness, 31.487537, -95.117138, 68 m, 9 May 1988, litter, 4 workers, coll. R. Anderson, 12760, [TAMUIC]; USA, Texas, Angelina Co., 2 miles south of Lufkin, 31.298494, -94.737509, 79 m, 24 Mar 1984, Riparian Mosses on Stream Bank Litter, 12 workers, coll. Walter Suter, #84-247, [ABS]; USA, Texas, Lamar Co., Camp Maxey, Osmuda bog, 33.848745, -95.538077, 165 m, 15 Sep 2003, malaise, 1 alate queen, coll. Godwin SF, [SHSU]; USA, Texas, Nacogdoches Co., 12 miles southwest of Nacogdoches, 31.496515, -94.798552, 74 m, 13 May 1983, 15 workers, coll. Byers and Jenks, [ABS]; USA, Texas, Nacogdoches Co., 12 miles southwest of Nacogdoches, 31.496515, -94.798552, 74 m, 11 Feb 1984, 2 queens & 2 workers, coll. Walter Suter, [ABS]; USA, Texas, Sabine Co., 14 Kilometers east of Hemphill, 31.339698, - 93.707155, 97 m, 11 May 1988, litter, 2 workers, coll. R. Anderson, #12764, [TAMUIC]; USA, Texas, San Jacinto Co., Big Creek Scenic Area, 30.518456, -95.085363, 91 m, 9 Sep 1999, 1 worker, coll. J.L. Cook & J.B. Martin, [SHSU]; USA, Texas, San Jacinto Co., Big Creek Scenic Area, 30.518467, -95.079755, 86 m, 18 Dec 1999, 1 worker, coll. J.L. Cook & J.B. Martin, [SHSU].

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.004

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.222 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)→Same topicInsect and Arachnid Ecology and Behavior→French-language works237,207→