MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6912360174 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.5059365

Pseudodryinus parisiensis Peinado & Nel & Waller 2006, sp. n.

2006· article· en· W6912360174 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAmphibian and Reptile Biology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSimple eye in invertebratesTarsus (eyelids)OcciputSecond toeClawHead (geology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pseudodryinus parisiensis sp. n. (figs 1–7) Diagnosis: Mandible with four teeth; palpal formula 5/2; maxillary palpomeres long; rudimentary tarsal claw of front leg present; enlarged tarsal claw of front leg with a subapical tooth, as long as fifth tarsal segment, both bearing lamellae; front tarsal segments 2 and 3 with a strong hook; tibial spur formula (1/1/2); ocelli present; occipital carina complete; mesosomal segments not fused; notauli clearly visible on mesoscutum; epicnemium visible; fore wing cells C, R, 1Cu and 2R1 closed, cells 1R1, 1M and 2Cu distally closed by nebulous veins; cells 2Rs, 2M, and 3Cu present but distally opened. The combination of tibial spur (1/1/2) and palpal (5/2) formulae is diagnostic for the new species. Description. Body and legs brown yellow; body 4 mm long; head hypognathous, longer than wide; eyes oval, large, occupying nearly the whole length of the head; three ocelli between eyes, making an obtuse equilateral triangle, the median one distinctly larger; occiput short, vertical, and dorsally bordered by a carina; frons occupied by a depression that ends in clypeus; OL = 12; POL = 9; OOL = 30; OPL = 10; TL = 15; antenna with 10 bare segments; scape robust; pedicel and flagellum cylindrical, progressively shortening, with segments in the following proportions 28:10:40:30:22:19:15:14:14:11; antenna much shorter than body, approximately 3.3 times as long as head (length of head measured dorsally from occipital carina behind the ocelli to distal apex of the mandibles): 203:61; maxillary palp with four visible segments but with a distinct angle between second and third visible palpomeres, implying the presence of a not visible basal palpomere, visible palpomeres long and thin, in the following proportions 15:20:20:15; labial palp two–segmented; head broader than pronotum; neck robust; mandibles with three strong teeth and a smaller basal one, third tooth smaller than second and fourth. Mesosomal segments delimited by sutures, not fused; mesosoma partly hidden by legs; pronotum apparently bare; notauli complete; propodeum strongly depressed near petiole; epicnemium visible (Olmi 1992, 1993). Fore wing 1.8 mm long; pterostigma narrow; only three cells are closed by tubular veins, i.e. cells C, R, 1Cu and 2R1; cell 1R1 closed but bordered anteriorly and basally by tubular veins, posteriorly and distally by nebulous veins; cells 1M and 2Cu both bordered basally by a tubular vein and by nebulous veins on their three other sides; cells 2Rs, 2M, and 3Cu open with their anterior and posterior sides bordered by nebulous veins; anal margin of wing not visible; wing covered with short and dense bristles on whole surface. Hind wing narrow not fully visible; four hamuli on anterior edge at ¾ of distance from base to wing apex, with only vein Sc+R present; wing covered with short and dense bristles on whole surface. Legs. Front leg very long, with a terminal chela; the two arms of chela of equal length; first arm (enlarged tarsal claw) with a small subapical tooth and at least one row of lamellae, and distinctly shorter than front tibia; apex of enlarged tarsal claw pointed and curved, sheltered in the terminal “cup” of the other branch of chela (fifth tarsomere); this “cup” is nearly circular with a rather large diameter, it is covered with lamellae as is the inner face of the fifth tarsomere; fifth tarsomere with a complete series of long spines on its outer face; arolium present between the two arms of the chela, rather long; second tarsal claw atrophied, very small, half length of arolium; front tarsal segments 2 and 3 both with a strong hook turned upside–down, both hooks bearing five long bristles at their extremity; fore leg segments in the following proportions: 5:3:12:12:5:1:1.5:6:9 for coxa:trochanter:femur:tibia:tarsomeres 1–5 respectively; mid leg segments in the following proportions: 12:13:56:60:46:13:13:5:16; hind leg segments in the following proportions: 40:15:75:97:40:20:15:5:12; tibial spur formula 1/1/2; median and posterior legs with an apical pair of claws separated by an arolium. Abdomen with a clearly visible ovipositor; two antepenultimate segments ventrally with four very long bristles (sensillae?). Material. Female holotype specimen PA 2378 1/2, in the same piece of amber with a specimen belonging to the Mantodea, mounted in Canada balsam, in collection De Ploëg and Indivision Langlois –Meurine, deposited in Muséum National d'Histoire Naturelle, Paris. Specimens collected in Le Quesnoy all bear the letter PA for Paris (meaning Paris Basin). Locality deposit. Le Quesnoy, Chevrière, region of Creil, Oise department, France. Geological age. Earliest Eocene, Sparnacian, level MP7 of the mammal fauna of Dormaal. We have demonstrated that the amber is autochthonous and very different from the Baltic amber in age, chemical composition and origin (Feugueur 1963; De Ploëg et al. 1998; Nel et al. 1999). Remarks. The recent Dryinidae are parasitoids of Hemiptera: Auchenorrhyncha. Fossil Cicadellidae and Fulgoroidea are rather diverse and frequent in the ëOiseí amber. Etymology. The species is named after the city of Paris.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.192 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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