Laena brunkei Schawaller & Bellersheim 2023, sp. n.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Laena brunkei sp. n. (Figs 2, 18) Type material. Holotype: ♁, N Vietnam, Cao Bang Prov., Pia Ouac NP, summit road, 1800 m, 17–18.V.2019, leg. A. J. Brunke & H. Schillhammer, NHMW. Paratypes. Same data as for holotype, 1 ex. NHMW, 1 ex. SMNS.— China, Guizhou, Fanjing Shan, 1800–2000 m, 5–11.VI.2014, leg. C. Reuter, 1 ♀ SMNS. Description. Body length 3.7–4.7 mm, dorsal surface light brown without metallic reflection. Eyes weakly prominent. Antennomere 1 unusually enlarged. Pronotum round, widest across before middle, posterior margin similar wide as the anterior one; with large and confluent punctures, distance 0.5–1 puncture diameters, some punctures with short erect setae; surface convex and shining, disc without impressions; lateral margins not beaded; posterior corners rounded; prothoracic hypomera with similar punctures as on pronotum, but without visible setation. Elytra ovate with irregular punctation, not arranged in regular rows and intervals, punctures large as on pronotum but not confluent, punctures adjacent to suture forming two irregular rows; some punctures with short erect setae; lateral intervals without setiferous pores; surface shining. Apex of elytra not prolonged. All femora without teeth or sharp angles. Tibiae of both sexes simple, without peculiarities. Apicale of aedeagus triangular with rounded apex (Fig. 18). Diagnosis. L. brunkei sp. n. shares with L. burckhardti Schawaller, 1998 from Thailand and L. kresli Schawaller, 2014 from Laos (known only from the type loacalties) the small body size, the unarmed femora and the elytra with irregular punctation without separation into punctural rows and intervals. Additional species with irregularly punctured elytra are so far unknown in southeastern Asia. L. brunkei sp. n. can be separated from both by lacking elytral setiferous pores, and by rough and confluent pronotal punctures. The aedeagi of these three species are similar, compare the figures in Schawaller (1998, 2014). See also figures and diagnosis of L. honba sp. n. below. Etymology. Named in honour of Adam J. Brunke (Ottawa), one of the collectors of the type series.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.031 | 0.014 |
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".