Bibliographic record
Abstract
Phanaeus vicinus Martínez, 1944: 187. Available name. Type specimen: Holotype: male (BOLIVIA / Dep. Sta. Cruz / Sta. Cruz de la Sierra / F.Monrós-leg. / Coll. Martínez: ’, ‘ Phanaeus (Meg.) / vicinus / ♂ / sp. n. / A.Martinez-det.19 44 ’, ‘ HOLOTIPO ♂ ’, ‘MACN-En / 1545’, ‘ FICHADO ’), genital capsule and right wing dissected and glued to paper card (wing not illustrated by us), MACN (Figure 6 A–B). Type locality: Bolivia: Santa Cruz de la Sierra department. Nomenclatural history: In 1944 Martínez published what he thought to be a new Bolivian species of Megaphanaeus closely related to C. bonariensis, which he named Phanaeus vicinus. Years later, Martínez & Pereira (1967) synonymized Phanaeus vicinus with P. bonariensis, giving the same confusing explanation that they had given for the synonymy between P. lancifer and P. septentrionalis (see section above on Scarabaeus lancifer): while P. argentinus would certainly not represent a valid species, it could be proved in the future to be a valid subspecies of P. bonariensis. In their review of Coprophanaeus, Edmonds & Zídek (2010) endorsed this synonymy without discussing it. Martínez (1944) stated the holotype of P. vicinus, the only specimen on which his description was based, was deposited in his personal collection, which today is divided in two distinct institutions: Martínez’s holotypes and allotypes are deposited at the Museo Argentino de Ciencias Naturales ‘Bernardino Rivadavia’, Buenos Aires, while paratypes and non-type material are housed at the Canadian Museum of Nature, Ottawa, via Henry F. Howden’s collection. The holotype of P. vicinus (Figure 6 A) was found by us in MACN and its labels’ information are given above.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".