Empis (Enoplempis) arrecta Sinclair, Brooks & Cumming, 2025, sp. nov.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Empis (Enoplempis) arrecta sp. nov. urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act: 71628C2A-6DAB-49C3-9510-B557646C1836 (Figs 15, 16, 23–25, 40) Type material. HOLOTYPE ♂, labelled: “Calif: TulareCo./ Johnsondale [35°58′N 118°32′W] 2/ mi. E. IV-27- 64”; “ Prunus / subcordata”; “ C.A. Toschi / collector”; “ HOLOTYPE / Empis (Enoplempis) / arrecta Sinclair,/ Brooks & Cumming [red label]” (EMEC). PARATYPES: USA. California: Mariposa County: Yosemite Valley [37°44′N 119°34′W], 27.v.1921, E.C. Van Dyke (2♂, CAS); same data except, 26.v.1921 (1♂, CAS); same data except, 20.v.1921 (1♂, CAS); same data except, 11.vi.1921 (1♂, CAS). Tuolumne County: 4 km S Mather, Middle Fork Cpgd [37°51′N 119°51′W], Middle Fork Tuolumne River, 24.v.1969, PHA (1♂, 1♀, USNM). Diagnosis. This species is distinguished from other species of the E. (En.) arrecta species group by a single narrow process on the male hind tibia, hind tibia distinctly broadened apically (Figs 15, 16) in both sexes, scutum with three brownish vittae and male cercus very slender with short, horizontal truncate posterior lobe at base. Description. Wing length 5.0– 5.2 mm. Male. Similar to E. (En.) diokra sp. nov., except as follows: head with eyes separated on frons by width of anterior ocellus. Frons linear, slightly expanded above antennae. Thorax with brownish vittae along acr row and dc rows in anterior view. Legs with hind femur slightly expanded preapically, with 3 slender, curved finger-like processes, middle process with blacked apex; apex with preapical row of 5–6 flattened, black, curved posteroventral setae, anterior setae longer and straighter; preapical anterior seta not developed (Figs 15, 16). Hind tibia arched with narrow base and expanded distal half; anteroventral digitiform process long, projecting obliquely to posterior side of tibia; process with black lateral setae, longest apically; without posteroventral process; with seta dividing in half posteroapical comb; apical half of tibia with anterodorsal and posterodorsal setae less than width of tibia (Figs 15, 16). Hind tarsus with tarsomere 1 slightly inflated, half width of tibia. Abdomen with pregenital segments mostly unmodified;posteroventral corner of tergite6 with broad, membranous rounded notch; sclerites of segment 8 fused. Terminalia (Figs 23–25): dark reddish brown, shiny, except epandrium with some pruinescence; cercus shiny and yellowish brown. Cerci fused medially; erect, slender, projecting dorsally with thick peg-like setae near and on apex; anterior margin with several thickened subapical setae; base with horizontally projecting truncate lobe with setae more than twice width of lobe; without prolonged hooked lobe. Subepandrial process very short, slightly longer than twice basal width. Epandrial lamella subrectangular, higher than long; broadly fused with cercus anteriorly with rounded lobe opposite base of cercus; posterior margin without knob-like projection; setae similar to cercal setae. Hypandrium more than half height of epandrium; apex rounded, with shallow notch medially; without setae. Phallus with outer expanded sheath on basal half; apex of sheath with pair of lateral lobes with apex and inner margin jagged, tooth-like; anterior margin of basal sheath prolonged to apex of phallus, tapered and flattened, with jagged, tooth-like lateral margin and pair of obliquely projecting sickle-shaped lobes with tooth-like margin; phallus projecting from posterior margin of basal sheath, extending to slightly beyond epandrium margin; apical half of phallus with setae and spiny projections along posterior face (Figs 24, 25); ejaculatory apodeme slightly more than half-length of epandrium, T-shaped, with lateral apodemes ventrally. Female. Similar to male, except as follows: frons slightly broader than width of anterior ocellus; hindleg without modified setae and processes; hind tibia expanded apically, hind tarsomere 1 slightly inflated. Geographical distribution and seasonal occurrence (Fig. 40). Empis (En.) arrecta sp. nov. is only known from central California. Adults have been collected from April to June. Etymology. The species name is from the Latin for upright, in reference to the form of the male cercus in this and similar species. Nuptial gift presentation. Form unknown.
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) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.023 | 0.017 |
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".