MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6911877466 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.14286041

Perilampus arcus Yoo & Darling 2024, sp. nov.

2024· article· en· W6911877466 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicIchthyology and Marine Biology
Canadian institutionsRoyal Ontario Museum
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIridescenceHolotypeScapeFrench hornPedicelHead (geology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Perilampus arcus Yoo & Darling sp. nov. Figs 20, 21 Type locality. USA, West Virginia, Hardy County, 3 mi NE Mathias. Type material. Holotype. “ WEST VIRGINIA: Hardy Co. 3 mi NE Mathias 38.9098, -78.8881, 14–31. VII. 2007, Malaise David R. Smith ”. The holotype is point-mounted (Female ROME 189051, USNM). BOLD: AEE 7608 / ITS 2. ROM Online Collection. Paratypes. Canada: 1 male. Ontario: 1 male. Norfolk Co., Normandale Fish Hatchery, 42°43'08"N, 80°20'23"W: (1 male: ROME 198214 - CNC; BOLD: AEE 7608; ITS 2). USA: 5 females. Kentucky: 1 female. Jessamine Co., S. of Nicholasville, 37°47'04"N, 84°34'11"W: (1 female: ROME 158551 - ROME; BOLD: AEE 7608). West Virginia: 4 females. Hardy Co., 3 mi NE Mathias, 38.9098, -78.8881: (4 females: ROME 185944 - USNM; BOLD: AEE 7608; ITS 2; ROME 189050 - USNM; ITS 2; ROME 189052 - USNM; BOLD: AEE 7608; ITS 2; ROME 189131 - USNM; ITS 2). Material examined. Canada: 2 females, 1 male. USA: 6 females, 1 male. (Suppl. materials). Etymology. The specific epithet is the Latin noun arcus (arch), in reference to the steeply curved parascutal carina. Description. Female (Fig. 20). Length: 2.7–4.0 mm. Color: head iridescent greenish blue or violet; mesosoma and metasoma iridescent greenish blue or violet; clypeus ventral margin black (Fig. 20 I); antenna with scape and pedicel weakly iridescent greenish blue or violet, flagellum brown or black, lighter ventrad and distad. Head (Fig. 20 G – J): in dorsal view transverse, width slightly greater than twice length, HW / HL 2.1–2.2. Frontal carina: in anterior view straight to weakly sinuate below midlevel of eye; in dorsal view gradually narrowed V shape around median ocellus, FC / MOD 1.5–1.6; distance from lateral ocellus short, FCLO / LOD 0.5–0.6. Scrobal cavity (Fig. 20 H): in anterior view wide, SW / HW about 0.5. Ocelli (Fig. 20 G): a line between anterior margin of lateral ocelli reaching anterior margin of median ocellus. POL / OOL 1.6–1.9. Ocellar ratios LOD: POL: OOL: LOL 1, 2.5–2.9, 1.6–1.8, 0.8–1.0. Vertex: with strong to weak transverse striations, without large piliferous punctures. Parascrobal area: in lateral view gradually narrowed towards lower eye margin; width narrow, PSW / EL 0.2–0.3; sculpture strongly to weakly striate, without large piliferous punctures. Gena (Fig. 20 J): mostly striate along outer eye margin with narrow and short smooth area, striate behind. Malar space: MSL / EH about 0.2. Lower face (Fig. 20 H, I): with setae sparse or dense and narrowly distributed laterad torulus, and usually sparse below. Clypeus (Fig. 20 I): CW / CH 1.3–1.4; ventral margin concave; setae evenly distributed, or with small bare area without setae medially. Mesosoma (Fig. 20 B – F, K, L): Lateral panel of pronotum: slightly narrower than prepectus, LPP / PPT 0.7–0.8; usually with small triangular flange below level of mesothoracic spracle in posterior oblique view (Fig. 20 D, arrow). Mesofemoral depression: usually smooth, rarely weakly rugulose or weakly imbricate ventrad (Fig. 20 L). Mesoscutum: punctures angulate, with narrow and weakly coriarious interspaces (Fig. 20 B); lateral lobe smooth or weakly punctate along notaulus (Fig. 20 C); parascutal carina steeply curved, often weakly flanged (Fig. 20 E, arrow). Mesoscutellum: apex with inner margins gradually (Fig. 20 K) or abruptly diverging; punctures angulate, with narrow and weakly coriarious interspaces. Axilla (Fig. 20 F): in lateral view imbricate dorsad and carinate ventrad. Axillula: smooth dorsad. Fore wing: stigma small, 2.0–2.5 × as wide as postmarginal vein. Male (Fig. 21). Length: usually smaller, 3.1–3.5 mm. As in female, except: Color: mesonotum sometimes with weak cupreous iridescence. Frontal carina: distance from lateral ocellus shorter, FCLO / LOD 0.3–0.4. Scape (Fig. 21 G, H): pits dense, covering about 0.4 × scape length. Diagnosis. The steeply curved parascutal carina often with a flange distinguishes P. arcus from the majority of the species of the P. hyalinus species complex (Figs 20 E, 21 B cf. Figs 16 E, 17 B). Perilampus sirsiris also has a similar parascutal carina (Figs 6 F, 7 B), but it is always steeply curved in P. arcus and usually angulate in P. sirsiris (Fig. 20 E cf. Fig. 6 F). Perilampus arcus also differs from P. sirsiris by having the lateral panel of pronotum with a small triangular flange in posterior oblique view (Fig. 20 D, arrow cf. Fig. 6 D, E) and a male scape with a densely pitted surface (Fig. 21 G, H cf. Fig. 7 F, G). In addition to the shape of the parascutal carina, sparser setae on the lower face usually distinguish P. arcus from P. seneca (Figs 20 I, 21 C cf. Figs 16 I, 17 C), which also has a small triangular flange on the pronotum (Figs 16 D, 17 B) and a densely pitted male scape (Fig. 17 G, H). Distribution (Fig. 25 E). Southeastern Canada and eastern USA, possibly southcentral USA: Canada (Ontario), USA (Arkansas, Kentucky, Ohio, West Virginia, Wisconsin). Host association. Unknown. Remarks. This species is supported by both genes (Fig. 1, Suppl. material 5), and there are five BINed specimens on BOLD (AEE 7608) from eastern Canada and USA. A single female was collected in Arkansas, indicating that the range of P. arcus may include the southern USA.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.009

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)→Same topicIchthyology and Marine Biology→French-language works237,207→