MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6930757945 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.15021255

Euura groenlandica

2025· article· en· W6930757945 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSepsis Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHolotypeThorax (insect anatomy)LarusHead (geology)Seta

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

326 Euura groenlandica (Malaise, 1933) Amauronematus groenlandicus Malaise, 1933: 3–4. Diagnosis Most similar to Euura obscuripes (toeniata group) and E. variator (variator group) and synonymy with one of these species cannot be excluded. Except for its mostly black femora, the colouration of the holotype of groenlandicus is most similar to Euura obscuripes specimens DEI-GISHym19806 (Abisko, Torne Lappmark, Sweden) and DEI-GISHym84010 (Finnmark, Norway). Similarly to DEI-GISHym19806 (but not DEI-GISHym84010), the thorax of the holotype is noticeably wider than the head in dorsal view, which we have not observed in E. variator (as wide as head or only slightly wider). Malar space is about 2.3–2.5 times as long as diameter of front ocellus (1.9–2.1 times in DEI-GISHym84010), which is as in the opacipleuris group, but the shape of sawsheath does not fit this group. Based on the shape of serrulae and length of setae (rather short), the lancet (only tip visible in the holotype) seems to be most similar to some specimens of E. obscuripes (DEI-GISHym19904, DEI-GISHym12101: the other checked E. obscuripes specimens have longer setae). Although, overall, the holotype of groenlandicus seems to fit best with E. obscuripes, the combination of mostly black femora, extensively pale head and thorax, and long malar space suggest that it may be a different species. Sequencing of nuclear genes might be required to decide more confidently on the status of E. groenlandica and its group affinity. In the absence of unequivocally determined specimens, we remove Euura groenlandica from the list of Palaearctic taxa. Benson (1962) did not examine the holotype of groenlandicus and based his concept of the species on specimens from Greenland that were compared with the holotype. Apparently, the specimens were mostly black, because Benson (1962) found them to be very similar to E. hyperborea, while the groenlandicus type is extensively pale. Benson (1962) synonymised carbonarius with groenlandicus, but we consider carbonarius to be a synonym of E. obscuripes. Therefore, the European records of E. groenlandica by Benson (1962) and Lindqvist (1959d; under the name Amauronematus carbonarius) might refer to E. obscuripes or some other similar Euura. Type material examined Holotype Amauronematus groenlandicus GREENLAND – Wollaston Forland • ♀; Landingsdalen; 74.47° N, 19.13° W; 28 Jul. 1929; Knaben leg.; ZMUN. Host plants Not definitely known. Smith (1979) wrote “ Salix (?)”. Genetics COI No data. Nuclear No data. Distribution and material examined Nearctic. Only one specimen studied, from Greenland.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.073
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.243 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)→Same topicSepsis Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→