BUTTERFLIES (PAPILIONOIDEA AND HESPERIOIDEA) OF CALAKMUL, CAMPECHE, MÉXICO
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We collected 423 species of diurnal butterflies (Rhopalocera) during 250 days of observations from March 1997 through January 2000 in the region of Calakmul, Campeche, Mexico. We present a list of 428 species recorded for Calakmul. This is the first reported list of butterflies for the state of Campeche, and it includes 290 new records for the state, 374 new records for Calakmul, and 1 new record for Mexico: Monca telata. Museum records were found for 5 additional species: Caria melino, Cissia labe, Tmolus echion, Emesis lupina lupina, and Calephelis azteca. The accumulation curve of species estimates that 457 species should be present in Calakmul, which suggests the list presented is 93% complete. We found that medium, tropical, semi-evergreen forest is the richest (371 species); more than a quarter of the butterflies of the Calakmul region were found exclusively in this forest. We also found the southern area slightly more abundant in species (82%) than the northern area (79%). Additionally, a comparison was made of the list generated for Campeche to lists from previous studies for Quintana Roo, Tikal-Guatemala National Park, and Belize. The comparison shows that 70%, 58%, and 54% of the butterfly species in Calakmul also are found in Tikal, Quintana Roo, and Belize, respectively.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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".