MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6931134862 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.4505111

Wygomiris nanae Yasunaga 2012

2019· article· en· W6931134862 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCutaneous Melanoma Detection and Management
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSetaDorsumSmooth surfaceGenus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wygomiris nanae Yasunaga, 2012 (Figs 14–15, 140–143, 164–167) Wygomiris nanae Yasunaga, 2012: 20 (original description). Type material examined. HOLOTYPE: ♀, THAILAND: NAKHON NAYOK: Sarika (lodge garden), 14°18′39″N 101°18′00″E, at light, 13 Mar 2009, T. Yasunaga (AMNH _PBI 00379518) (DOAT). Additional material examined. VIETNAM: SON LA PROVINCE: Moc Chau, 940 m alt., 20°49′N 104°42′E, light trap, 19 Jun 1997, M. Tomokuni, 2 ♁♁ (NSMT); Dao Cao Pha, 420 m E of Ban Song, 21°09′39″N 103°35′46″E, 23 Jun 1997, M. Tomokuni, 1 ♀ (NSMT). Differential diagnosis. Most closely related to P. mingorum Schuh, 1984; distinguished by its uniformly dark brown body; smaller eyes; wider vertex; weakly shining, matte pronotum; densely distributed, silvery, reclining setae on hemelytron (Figs 161−163); tapered apical part of left paramere hypophysis (Fig. 188) and longer apical branches on endosoma (Fig. 190), in addition to developed female genital chamber (Fig. 191). Although YASUNAGA (2012) supposed W. nanae as the closest relative of W. indochinensis Schuh, 1984, W. mingorum is now considered to be sister to W. nanae, judging from the similar shape of endosoma bearing three apical branches. In external appearance, W. nanae can be readily distinguished from W. indochinensis and W. mingorum by the uniformly dark brown coloration and dense dorsal vestiture (Figs 161, 163); the latter two species have contrasting two-tone pattern (SCHUH 1984, YASUNAGA 2012) as seen in W. phormictes sp. nov. (Fig. 170). Redescription. Male. General coloration and shape similar to those of female. Macropterous; body almost uniformly chestnut or dark brown, elongate oval, comparatively large in size; dorsal surface rather matte, with simple, semierect setae, long, erect setae and wooly, reclining setae. Head tinged with red, weakly shining. Antenna reddish brown. Labium reddish brown, reaching apex of mesocoxa. Pronotum somewhat roughened, with uniformly distributed, simple, semierect setae; collar pruinose, narrower than base of antennal segment II; scent efferent system widely ivory white, with a median knob. Hemelytra somewhat lighter than pronotum and scutellum, with uniformly distributed, silvery, reclining setae and sparsely distributed, simple, long, erect setae; membrane smoky brown. All coxae and legs brown, partly tinged with red; meso- and metacoxae lighter.Abdomen shiny chestnut brown, partly reddish except for posterior margin of each sternum (Fig. 161). Male genitalia (Figs 186–190): Pygophore with distinct PS (Fig. 186). Left paramere with apically tapered hypophysis (Fig. 188); endosoma three-branched, with a wide membranous area along secondary gonopore (Fig. 190). Measurements (♁♁/ ♀♀, mm) [holotype from Thailand]. Total length of body 3.43–3.78 / 3.43 [3.60]; head width including eyes 0.72–0.75 / 0.71 [0.71]; vertex width 0.30 / 0.33 [0.33]; lengths of antennal segments I–IV 0.25–0.26, 0.93, 0.60, 0.48 / 0.24 [0.19], 0.87 [0.90], 0.57 [0.57], 0.51 [?]; labial length 1.20–1.22/ 1.08 [1.20]; basal width of pronotum 1.09–1.16 / 1.19 [1.08]; maximum width across hemelytron 1.32–1.35 / 1.49 [1.39]; and lengths of metafemur, tibia and tarsus 1.09–1.14, 1.65, 0.30 / 1.10 [1.13], 1.59 [1.50], 0.29 [0.30]. Biology. Unknown; all available specimens were collected by UV lightings around arable lands or secondary forests. Distribution. Thailand (Nakhon Nayok) (YASUNAGA 2012), Vietnam (Son La) (this paper).

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.004

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)Same topicCutaneous Melanoma Detection and ManagementFrench-language works237,207