MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6912588869 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.6142705

Prochyliza nigricoxa Melander & Spuler 1917

2014· article· en· W6912588869 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFreshwater macroinvertebrate diversity and ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLarvaTibiaNew guineaLife history

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Prochyliza nigricoxa (Melander & Spuler, 1917) Piophila nigricoxa Melander & Spuler 1917: 64. Type locality: USA (Washington). Lectotype (♂) designated by Steyskal (1968) and paralectotypes (4 ♂ and 5 ♀) designated by Ozerov (2003) in Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History. Material examined. 1 ♂ (CNC): Canada, Alberta, Sulfur Mountain; 28.vii.1967; leg. J. R. Vockeroth; det. J. F. McAlpine. 1 ♀ (CNC): Canada, Alberta, Cameron Lake; 17.vi.1956; leg. E. E. Sterns. Diagnosis. The following combination of characters is distinctive of P. nigricoxa: lower two- to three quarters of the frons orange; gena orange; front coxa darkened (Fig. 5 A); mid and hind tibiae entirely yellow; mid tibia and hind coxa of males not ornamented. Male sternites 5 to 8 as in Fig. 2 G. Remarks. The species identity was confirmed by Steyskal (1968) and Ozerov (2003), after studying the type specimens. Biology. The larvae are necrophagous. Feeding larvae have been collected on the bone marrow of a human femur, and reared under laboratory conditions on chicken wings, oxtails, beef liver and cheese (Skinner et al., 1988). Distribution. Nearctic; originally recorded from Washington, Idaho and Montana, USA (Melander & Spuler 1917), it is widely distributed throughout North America (McAlpine 1977).

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.174 · 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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)→Same topicFreshwater macroinvertebrate diversity and ecology→French-language works237,207→