Telmatophilus americanus LeConte 1863
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Telmatophilus americanus LeConte, 1863 NEWFOUNDLAND: St. John’s, Oxen Pond Botanical Park, September, 2000, S. Lilly, Biology 4150 (1, MUN). NEW BRUNSWICK: Albert Co.: Mary’s Point, August 21, 2003, C.G. Majka, coastal marsh (1, CGMC); York Co.: Canning-Scotchtown, June 25, 2003, R.P. Webster, oak forest, at light (1, RPWC). NOVA SCOTIA: Cumberland Co.: Amherst, June 6, 1993, J. Ogden (1, NSNR); Amherst, June 24, 1994, J. Ogden (1, NSNR); Amherst Marsh, July 24, 1989, J. Ogden, marsh plants, sweep netting (6, NSNR); Amherst Marsh, June 11, 1993, J. Ogden, marsh plants, sweep netting (1, NSNR); Pictou Co.: McLellan’s Brook, June 16, 1988, E. Georgeson (1, NSMC). Telmatophilus americanus is newly recorded in insular Newfoundland, New Brunswick and Nova Scotia (Fig. 1). It has previously been recorded in Canada from British Columbia to Québec, south to Colorado, Indiana, and New York in the United States (Bousquet 1991; Downie and Arnett 1996). It is found on the flowers of Sparganium spp. (Sparganiaceae) (Hatch 1961; Leshen and Skelley 2002). Blatchley (1910) also reported it from arrow arum (Peltandra virginica L., Araceae). Both Sparganium fluctuans (Morong) B.L. Robins and S. angustifolium Michx. (Sparganiaceae) occur in the area of the Oxen Pond Botanical Park where T. americanus was collected in Newfoundland (Todd Boland, pers. comm.).
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.030 | 0.007 |
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".