Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aconurella Ribaut Remarks. Although this genus was not previously recorded from Pakistan, one species (indica) described from Pakistan and India in Cicadula by Pruthi (1930) and two other species described from Pakistan (karachiensis and lobata) in Chiasmus by Ahmed et al (1988), belong in the genus and are considered to be junior synonyms of the widespread A. prolixa (Lethierry), previously recorded from Europe and Africa (Nast, 1972). Despite the poor original figures of the latter two species their ocelli are shown as marginal (as in Aconurella) whereas they are dorsal in Chiasmus (compare Figs 9 a and 10a), and the original figure of the aedeagus is as in Aconurella species (Figs 9 k-m). Therefore these species were not compared to Aconurella species but to other Chiasmus species and distinguished from them based on the male pygofer. Also, for A. lobata a continuous pygofer comb is figured, as found in Aconurella prolixa and although in A. karachiensis this comb is not described or figured the pygofer figure appears to us to be incorrectly drawn in its posterior part. The aedeagal figures of both species also match A. prolixa. The head markings in A. prolixa are variable (see Figs 9 a–d) and we have seen examples of this species with vertex markings similar to the original figures of lobata and karachiensis. Therefore taking the above similarities into consideration we conclude that the latter species are junior synonyms of A. prolixa. After examination of paratypes of A. neosolana Rao & Ramakrishnan (BMNH), described from India, we also consider this species a synonym of A. prolixa (see below). In addition to indica, dealt with above, three other species of Aconurella occur in India, i.e., A. solana Ghauri, A. montana (Distant) and A. erebus (Distant) (= A. montanus macropterous (Pruthi), synonymised by Ghauri, 1974: 555). Of these, at least one (A. erebus) appears distinct from A. prolixa based on its discontinuous pygofer comb. Aconurella prolixa (Lethierry) (Plate 1, g; Fig. 9). Cicadula indica Pruthi. Syn. nov. Chiasmus lobata Ahmed & Qadeer. Syn. nov. Chiasmus karachiensis Ahmed & Qadeer & Malik. Syn. nov. Aconurella neosolana Rao & Ramakrishnan. Syn. nov. Material examined. Pakistan: holotype 3 (genitalia only), paratype 3 of Chiasmus karachiensis, no data; 53, 23Ƥ, Mithi, 7.viii.07. India: 13, 2Ƥ, Raghubendra, Nagar (A P), 13.v.1987 (paratypes of A. neosolana) (BMNH). Remarks. Specimens were compared to the figures given by Ribaut (1952, figs 99–105). A specimen from Uzbekistan, Tashkent (BMNH) is also figured (Fig. 9 l) to show the similarity of the aedeagus from both regions. See also generic remarks. Cicadula indica was described from Murree and Dalhousie Hills, Punjab and throughout India. The original figures and those of Pruthi’s material by Datta (1972) are good enough to place this species as a synonym of prolixa. Chiasmus lobata was described from a holotype male and one paratype, from: Karachi, grass, 10.xi.1985 (ZMUK); no type specimens could be found. Chiasmus karachiensis was described from the holotype male and paratype from: Karachi, grass, 1.xi.85, Qadeer (ZMUK). Paratypes are also present in the BMNH (see Material examined).
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.038 | 0.010 |
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 it