Psilochorus pullulus Hentz 1850
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Psilochorus pullulus (Hentz, 1850) Figs. 118–127, 194 Theridion pullulum Hentz, 1850 Pholcus pullulus Thorell, 1877 Psilochorus pullulus Simon, 1893 Types. USA, Alabama. Unable to locate Hentz's type specimen or specimens examined by Thorell or Simon. Specimens examined. 26 ɗ, 43 Ψ; USA, Alabama, Baldwin County, 1 ɗ, Hammock woods, Dixie Graves Pkwy, Lagoon, A F Archer, 12-Sep-1948, AMNH; Arkansas, Washington County, 1 Ψ, Wasington County, 10-Apr-1957, AMNH; 2 ɗ, 7 Ψ, Cove Creek Valley, 15 mi S of Prarie Grove, Boston Mtns, M Hite, MCZ 27173, 01-Feb-1957, MCZ; 2 ɗ, 7 Ψ, Cove Creek Valley, 15 mi S of Prarie Grove, Boston Mtns, M Hite, MCZ 27181, 30-Dec-1956, MCZ; Georgia, Fulton County, 5 ɗ, 5 Ψ, Atlanta, May 1899, AMNH; Pickens County, 1 ɗ, 1 Ψ, Jasper, 26-Jul-1903, AMNH; Kansas, Decatur County, 2 ɗ, 2 Ψ, Sappho[Sappa] Lk, nr Oberlin, H & L Levi, 02-Jun-1959, AMNH; Minnesota, Hennepin County, 1 ɗ, 2 Ψ, Agriculture College of Minnesota, J H Comstock, 25-31-Mar-1903, AMNH; North Carolina, Carteret County, 1 Ψ, Bogue Banks, R D Barnes, MZC 29862, 02-Jul-1952, MCZ; Oklahoma, Comanche County, M 3 Ψ, East Range; near Sitting Bear Creek, Cushing P E, 09-Jul-2004, DMNS ZA.7371; 1 ɗ, Same locale, Francis M, 09-Jul-2004, DMNS ZA.7372; 2 Ψ, Fort Sill, W. Range, rocky outcrop N. of Man Dam Pond, Cushing P E, 10-Jul-2004, DMNS ZA.7210; 1 Ψ, Quanah Range; just W. of Quanah Mtn. & on border w/ Wichita Mtns Nat'l Wildlife Refuge, Francis M, 31-May-2004, DMNS ZA.7375; 5 Ψ, Quanah Range; Rock Creek, Cushing P E, 31-May-2004, DMNS ZA.7374; 1 ɗ, same locale, Francis M, 11-Jul-2004, DMNS ZA.7367; 1 Ψ, same locale, Francis M, 31-May-2004, DMNS ZA.7370; 1 Ψ, West Range; Engineer Pond, Cushing P E, 10-Jul-2004, DMNS ZA.7368; 2 ɗ, same locale, Cushing P E, 30-May-2004, DMNS ZA.7373; Texas, Cameron County, 1 ɗ 1 Ψ, Harlingen, S M, 11-Nov-1934, AMNH; Travis County, 2 ɗ, F, Austin, Durden B & C, 14-Sept 1968,-DMNS ZA.664; 2 Ψ, Austin, Vogel B, 11-Oct-1968, DMNS ZA.659; 1 ɗ, Austin, Vogel B, 6-Nov-1968, DMNS ZA.666; 1 ɗ, Austin, Vogel B, 2-Sept-1968, DMNS ZA.668; 1 ɗ, Austin, Vogel B, 9-Aug-1968, DMNS ZA.670; 2 ɗ, Austin, Vogel B, 26-Aug-1968, DMNS ZA.658; 1 Ψ, Brack, Field Lab, Austin, Vogel B, 5-Jun- 1969, DMNS ZA.661. Diagnosis. Specimens may be distinguished by: males spur truncated (Fig. 118), procursus short (Fig. 122), MEP of the epigynum lacking ridges (Fig. 123), PEP projection wide with the dmPEP not touching (Fig. 124), carapace length ≥ 9 mm. PLATE 15. Figures 118–127. Psilochorus pullulus (Hentz). 118–122. Male. 118. Dorsal view of chelicerae. 119. Lateral view of chelicera. 120–121. Dorsal view of bulb apophysis. 122. Lateral view of procursus. 123–127. Epigynum. 123. Anterior view. 124. Ventral view. 125. Posterior view. 126. Dorsal view. 127. Lateral view. Male: (N=5) Total length: 2.36 ± 0.32; carapace length: 0.91 ± 0.09; carapace width: 0.92 ± 0.06; leg 1: 14.71 ± 1.72 (4.06 ± 0.51 + 0.36 ± 0.02 + 4.34 ± 0.60 + 5.01 ± 0.62 + 0.94 ± 0.09); tibia 2: 2.69± 0.26; tibia 3: 2.10 ± 0.22; tibia 4: 3.10 ± 0.30. 16–18 leg I tarsal segments; femur1/carapace length: 4.44 ± 0.44; RT at 10.7–15.6%; DT at 6.6–8.1%. Color typical for the genus. Spur large, originating from the proximal half of the chelicerae (Fig. 119), slightly curved in dorsal view, end truncate (Fig. 118). Procursus short, thick, distal area with a dorsal tab which extends almost to the end, end squared or oblique (Fig. 122). Bulb apophysis thick for 2/3rds of its length, then extending to a point on the prolateral side, retrolateral tab very small or not present (Figs. 120, 121). Female: (N=5) Total length: 2.64 ± 0.32; carapace length: 0.94 ± 0.07; carapace width: 0.97± 0.06; leg 1: 12.92 ± 2.51 (3.54 ± 0.74 + 0.35 ± 0.05 + 3.81± 0.70 + 4.29 ± 0.98 + 0.93 ± 0.08); tibia 2: 2.45 ± 0.44; tibia 3: 1.88 ± 0.39; tibia 4: 2.89 ± 0.45. 16–19 leg I tarsal segments; femur1/carapace length: 3.74 ± 0.58; RT at 10.5–16.1%; DT at 7.2–9.7%. Color typical for the genus. No AEP. MEP rounded in posterior view (Fig. 125), large indentation around PEP projection in ventral view (Fig. 124). PEP triangular, with large, wide PEP projection, dmPEP not touching. Pore plates oval, well separated, on exterio-lateral side of PEP tubes (fig. 126). Remarks. Because specimens could not be located which were identified or examined by Hentz, Thorell or Simon, the identification of P. pullulus is made off of specimens examined and identified by W. Gertsch. See P. i m i t a t u s above. Distribution. Eastern Kansas, east to Florida and north into Canada.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".