Jacotella whartoni Paschoal 1983
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Jacotella whartoni Paschoal, 1983 b Material examined: USA, WASHINGTON: female holotype, Olympic National Park, in subalpine fir litter, 75. vii.1973, R.A. Norton, in OSAL. Comments: The described species of Jacotella known from in and near Canada are most easily recognized by the clump of 4 setae on strong apophyses at the posterior end of the notogaster (Figs. 20–21); h1 and to a lesser extent p1 are whip-like. Species of Aleurodamaeus (Aleurodamaeidae) also have long, whip-like setae, but not in a cluster, and they have a convex notogaster. Jacotella is similar to Adrodamaeus in having small ridges on the anterolateral margin of the notogaster and is similar to Joshuella in having lost seta h2. Joshuella bicentenaria Paschoal has h1 and p1-2 on strong apophyses, but these apophyses are widely spaced and, like other Joshuella, this species apparently has only 6 pairs of genital setae (not visible on specimens examined) and the notogastral cerotegument in longitudinal rows. Three very similar species of Jacotella have been described from North America and have been distinguished by the size and spacing of the apophyses of the posterior setae: widely spaced in J. enoplura, tightly grouped with enlarge h 1 apophyses in J. whartoni, and intermediate in J. quadricaudicula (see Paschoal 1983b). The tephritid fruit fly Tephraciura latecuneata (Munro) was originally proposed under the mite-preoccupied name of Jacotella.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.006 |
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".