Bibliographic record
Abstract
Typhlodromips driggeri (Specht) Amblyseius driggeri Specht 1968: 681. Typhlodromips driggeri, Moraes et al. 1986: 140; 2004: 212. Neoseiulus driggeri, Chant & McMurtry 2003a: 17; 2007: 29. Typhlodromips assiniboin Chant & Hansell 1971: 728 (synonymy according to Denmark & Evans 2011). According to Denmark and Evans (2011), species of Typhlodromips have macrosetae on legs II, III and IV (and also on leg I, see above) and species of Neoseiulus have in general no macrosetae on legs I to III. The specimens here observed have macrosetae on all legs and is thus a Typhlodromips and not a Neoseiulus. According with the same authors, T. driggeri is a senior synonym of Typhlodromips assiniboin (Chant and Hanssel) placed by Chant and McMurtry (2007) in the genus Typhlodromips and not in the genus Neoseiulu s (oppositely to the species driggeri placed in Neoseiulus by these two authors). Demite et al. (2020) following Moraes et al. (1986, 2004) placed also this species in the genus Typhlodromips and according with those authors, this species is considered to be a Typhlodromips and not a Neoseiulus. According Chant & McMurtry (2007), this species belongs to the lugubris species group as seta Z1 is absent, and the calyx of the spermatheca is elongate, tubular. The biology of that species is totally unknown. It was collected in orchard in Northern America and Canada but was never recorded outside of Northern America. This is consequently the first report of that species from Slovenia and the first mention in Europe. Why this species is recorded in Slovenia as it was never recorded in other countries well investigated in Europe remain totally unknown. World distribution: Canada, USA. Specimens examined: 3 ♀♀ in total. Straža pri Raki (aasl 240 m, lat. 45°55’28”N, long. 15°24’26”E), 3 ♀♀ on Cucumis sativus L. (Cucurbitaceae), 19/VI/2018. Remarks: The measurements of the three adult females collected agree quite well with those provided by Specht (1968) for specimens collected in New Jersey in apple orchards and with Chant and Hansell (1971) for specimens from various places in Eastern Canada (Québec, Manitoba, Ontario), with only some slight variations (Table 1).
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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".