Bonomiella columbae Emerson 1957
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bonomiella columbae Emerson, 1957 (Figs. 1, 3 and 5) Female: habitus as in fig. 1. Head almost as long as wide (CI = 1.01). Tergocentral setae: metathorax 6, tergites II–VIII 6, IX–X with 6–7 small and 14–17 very long setae, II–VIII flanked with 0–2 minute setae on each side. Abdominal sternal setae: II 2–3 and III-VI 3–5 long setae each side, VIII 4–7 minute setae located in the middle, flanked by 3–7 long setae on each side (total 14–20), subgenital plate with 8–10 anterior and 5–8 posterior setae, brush of sternite II with 1–5 short, brush of III with 6 short and spiniform setae, in addition to a minute one on one side. Anal fringe with 42 dorsal and 33 ventral setae (figs. 19–20). Body measurements: HL 0.300, HW 0.367, PW 0.340, MTW 0.505, AW 0.840, TL 1.921. Male: habitus as in fig. 3. Head slightly wider than long (cephalic index = 1.10). Tergocentral setae: metathorax 6, tergites II–VIII 6, IX–X 6–7 small and 3 very long setae. Sternal setae: II 4, III–IV 8, V–VI 6, VII–VIII 4. Genitalia: basal plate noticeably widened in the middle, parameres widened at their base, tapering gradually to apex (fig. 5). Body measurements: HL 0.255, OW 0.280, PW 0.220, MTW 0.350, AW 0.520, GL 0.310, GW 0.115, TL 1.180. Type host. Columba livia Gmelin, 1789. Specimens examined. 1 male and 1 female, Los Hornos, La Plata District, Buenos Aires Province, Argentina, 12-XI-1972, A. C. Cicchino. Remarks. This species has been reported from a number of countries around the world: USA (Emerson, 1957, 1962, 1972; Hill & Tuff, 1978); Canada (Galloway & Palma, 2008), Germany (Ribbeck, 1972), Ukraine (Fedorenko & Kharchenko 1976), Hungary (Rozsa, 1990), Poland (Złotorzycka & Lucińska, 1967; Złotorzycka 1976, Rem & Złotorzycka, 1976), Belgium (Hellenthal et al., 2004), Spain (Selva et al., 1987; Martín Mateo, 2002, 2006), Egypt (Selim et al., 1968), New Zealand (Pilgrim, 1976; Hill & Tuff, 1978; Pilgrim & Palma, 1982), southern Africa (Ledger, 1980), and Brazil (Ribeiro et al., 1998). Its probable presence in Argentina has been pointed out by Cicchino & Castro (1998: 102) and is here confirmed. See additional comments under B. insolitunguicolata.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.003 |
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".