Bibliographic record
Abstract
Parametriocnemus lundbeckii (Johannsen) Figs 27A–F Diagnosis. Labrum as in Fig. 27A; SI seta plumose; premandible with 2 apical teeth; antenna (Fig. 27B) 5-segmented, 3 rd segment is shorter than 4 th, LO large enveloping the 3 rd, AR 1.2–1.4; mandible (Fig. 27C) with 3 inner teeth, 2 nd lateral slightly recessed; mentum (Fig. 27D) with two median teeth, and 4 + 1 tiny lateral teeth (occasionally worn off), lateral margins extended posteriorly as a dorsal plate with a black spot (Fig. 27E); ventromental plates raised distally and ending just past setae submenti; posterior end of abdomen as in Fig. 27F; procercus with 7 apical setae; anal tubules tapering, as long or slightly longer than posterior parapods. Notes. The lava is in agreement with species description given by Simpson & Bode (1980: 56) and larvae reared from another project. This species is similar to the Nearctic P. eoclivus, but the latter has larger antennal LO that extend to segment 4, also AR is higher, (1.9–2.0). The larva of the Palearctic Parametriocnemus stylatus (Kieffer) is very similar to P. lundbeckii. In the Holarctic key (Cranston et al. 1983) the mentum shown (fig. 9.54 A) for this species, correctly interprets the VM plate on the left side, but the “second plate” added on the right side is actually a dorsomental plate connected to the posterolateral extension of the mentum. Ecology and habitat. Larvae occur in clean streams of piedmont and mountains. This species is not tolerant of high turbidity or low oxygen (Simpson & Bode 1980). Sampling sites. We found the larvae inhabiting streams in all the provincial parks and districts located in our study area. Nearctic distribution. Canada: Alberta, Québec, Saskatchewan, first record for Ontario. Greenland. USA: Alabama, Arizona, California, Florida, Georgia, Michigan, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, South Carolina, Texas.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.004 |
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".