MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6912092821 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.3789123

Eurrhypini Leraut & Luquet 1983

2010· article· en· W6912092821 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicLepidoptera: Biology and Taxonomy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryCanadian Food Inspection AgencyRoyal Alberta MuseumCalgary Laboratory ServicesNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdenylylationSubfamilyStaring

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Eurrhypini 994 * R Mimoschinia rufofascialis (Stephens, 1834) Jun – Jul m b G T: Munroe (1972b) L: Bowman (1951), Munroe (1972b) C: CNC, NFRC, OLDS, UASM 46.6. Evergestinae Small to medium-sized (10–35 mm wingspan) moths with relatively broad, usually triangular forewings and fan-shaped hindwings. Th ey are superficially similar to species in the subfamily Pyraustinae; no easily observed characters separate them from all of the other Crambidae. Larvae are web makers that feed on Brassicaceae and Capparidaceae. Approximately 140 species of Evergestinae are known worldwide, with the center of diversity in the Holarctic region. Th irty-seven species are known from North America; 11 of these are reported from AB. Th e group was revised by Munroe (1973a). 995 * R I? Evergestis pallidata (Hufnagel, 1767) Jun – Jul m b g Purple-backed Cabbageworm T: Munroe (1973a) L: Bowman (1951), Munroe (1973a), Pohl et al. (2004b) C: CNC, NFRC, PMAE, UASM 996 R Evergestis simulatilis (Grote, 1880) Jul M B – T: Munroe (1973a) L: Bowman (1951),? Munroe (1973a) C: CNC, NFRC, UASM 997 * R Evergestis vinctalis Barnes and McDunnough, 1914 May – – G T: Munroe (1973a) L: Bowman (1951) C: UASM 998 * R Evergestis obscuralis Barnes and McDunnough, 1914 Jun M – – T: Munroe (1973a) L: Bowman (1951), Munroe (1973a) C: CNC 999 * U Evergestis funalis (Grote, 1878) L Aug M – – T: Munroe (1973a) L: None C:?UASM 1000 R Evergestis subterminalis Barnes and McDunnough, 1914 Jul M – – T: Munroe (1973a) L: Bowman (1951), Munroe (1973a) C: CNC, NFRC, UASM 1001 * R Prorasea simalis Grote, 1878 M Jul – – G T: Munroe (1973a) L: Kearfott (1905), Bowman (1951) C: UASM 1002 R Prorasea praeia (Dyar, 1917) May – Jun M – G T: Munroe (1973a) L: Munroe (1973a) C: CNC 1003 R Cylindrifrons succandidalis (Hulst, 1886) Jul – – G T: Munroe (1973a) L: Bowman (1951) C: NFRC, UASM 1004 R Orenaia trivialis Barnes and McDunnough, 1914 Jul M – – T: Munroe (1973a) L: Munroe (1973a) C: CNC 1005 * R Orenaia alticolalis (Barnes and McDunnough, 1914) L Jun M – – T: Munroe (1973a) L:? Munroe (1973a) C: CNC, NFRC 46.7. Pyraustinae A large group of mostly small to medium-sized (most 10–35 mm wingspan, with a few species up to 60 mm) moths with broad, triangular forewings and fan-shaped hindwings. Most species have long narrow bodies, with the abdomen usually extending beyond the anal angles of the hindwings. Larvae of most species are leaf webbers or stem and fruit borers; a number of species are important crop pests, including the European Corn Borer (Ostrinia nubilalis). Approximately 7400 species of Pyraustinae are known from all regions of the world. The center of diversity is in temperate and tropical Asia. Th ree hundred and sixty-nine species are known in North America; 49 of these are reported in AB. The Pyraustine tribe Pyraustini was revised by Munroe (1976a, 1976b). The remaining North American species are placed in the tribe Spilomelini. Th e higher taxonomy of the Spilomelini was revised by Munroe et al. (1995), which is followed here. The Spi- lomelini is in need of species-level revision, but some genera have been given modern treatment by Munroe (1952, 1955, 1956a, 1956b, 1956c, 1966, 1973b).

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.148

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0440.023

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)→Same topicLepidoptera: Biology and Taxonomy→French-language works237,207→