MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6931187863 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.5223061

Krombeinius almokha Darling 2021, n. sp.

2021· article· en· W6931187863 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicArtificial Intelligence in Games
Canadian institutionsRoyal Ontario Museum
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHolotypeDorsumVertex (graph theory)Orbit (dynamics)Simple eye in invertebratesSulcus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Krombeinius almokha Darling n. sp. Figure 1, Appendix 1 Material examined. Holotype. “ Yemen: Abyan, Al Kowd, 13°5'0"N, 45°22'0"E, June 2002, light trap, A. van Harten, S. Al Haruri ”, “DNA voucher D#5235 UCR, JM Heraty”, “Anchored Enrichment #I24018“, “Digital Image Voucher 2019, Royal Ontario Museum”. The holotype is point-mounted and one hind leg was removed for DNA analysis (Female: ROME176884, ROME). Etymology. The specific epithet is a reference to the Yemeni port of Al Mokha, which was responsible for bringing coffee to the world. Noun in apposition. Description. Female: length 3.8 mm. Black, except: mandible reddish-brown, femora and tibiae brown, tarsi yellow; with long white setae throughout. Wings hyaline, veins darkened. Head (Figs 1A, D, E, F): wider than pronotum, in dorsal view transverse, width about twice length; in frontal view rounded, width:height = 1.2; scrobes narrow, maximum width 0.4× head width; posterior ocelli equidistant from anterior ocellus and eye margin, POL long, about twice OOL; inner orbits smooth and shining, with long dense setae, developed as low scrobal walls, with 2 strong costae (Fig. 1F); outer orbits smooth; ocular-ocellar region without costae radiating from ocelli, shagreened inside ocellar triangle; vertex with weak costae at posterior margin; scrobal cavity deep and broad, delimited by short frontal carina; frontal carina not reaching level of toruli, smoothly curved; malar region short and smooth, without sulcus or costae convergent on clypeus, length of malar space only 0.2× eye height; clypeus transverse, width:height = 1.5, almost completely covered with long setae, smooth only along supraclypeus; clypeus delimited laterad by weak sutures, smooth and shining with sparse setae on weak raised median callus, upper margin not indicated by distinct epistomal suture, tentorial pits indistinct, lower margin with denser setae, apex weakly emarginate; supraclypeus smooth, height 0.6× clypeus height, strongly convex along midline, without distinct channels for reception of antenna; antennal torulus situated above lower ocular line. Mandibles 3:2 dentate, left mandible with bifurcate tooth. Antenna (Fig. 1F): scape narrowly linear, length about 7× maximum width; pedicel length about 1.5× width, and subequal in length funicular segments F2‒F7; anellus 0.43× length of Fl; F1shorter, subquadrate, width about 1.5× length, F2‒7 transverse, wider than long, transverse, length 0.6‒0.7× width; clava 0.33× length of funicle, with distinct apical process. Mesosoma (Figs 1C, G): pronotum bicarinulate and narrowed along midline, PN:MSC = 0.23, weakly rugose, lateral pronotum with very weak callus; midlobe of mesoscutum and scutellum regularly punctate; sidelobes of mesoscutum smooth along notauli, with dense setae, reticulate laterad; scutellum acuminate, SC/MSC = 1.27, in lateral view convex, apex high, subvertical and only weakly produced over propodeum, underside with shallow crenulate grooves; propodeum about twice [approximately 1.7×] as long as metanotum along midline, with deep crenulate groove along anterior margin and double row of foveae along midline, submedian areas delimited by deep foveae dorsad and laterad, weakly imbricate, callus reticulate-rugose; metanotum with foveae along anterior and posterior margins; prepectus 0.5× width of adjacent pronotum (Fig. 1C), with about 8 rounded piliferous foveae, margins smooth, with a smooth posterior band, sculpture similar to but stronger than lateral pronotal panel; axilla punctate above, smooth below; axillula large, upper margin carinate, distinctly separated from scutellum, narrowly triangular and extended more than half way to apex of scutellum, smooth; petiole short and transverse, without a raised scale. Fore wing venation (Fig. 1B): marginal vein short, only slightly longer than postmarginal vein, submarginal vein 4× marginal vein, postmarginal vein 0.85× marginal vein, stigmal vein 0.4× marginal vein, and stigmal vein 0.5× postmarginal vein; stigmal vein thick, making almost a 90-degree angle with marginal vein, stigma gradually expanded, with 3 sensilla. Metasoma (Fig. 1H): T2 smoothly concave, weakly coriarious in concavity, with setae laterad, laterotergite smooth; border between T2 and T3 indicated by weak suture; T3 quadrate, length 0.98× width along T2, smooth and shining, covered with setae except along T2 border, smooth area wider along midline; T4‒8 exposed, not covered by T3, which is an artifact of preservation. Ovipositor not examined. Male: Unknown. Diagnosis. Krombeinius almokha is the only species of the genus with the body festooned with large and dense white setae (Fig. 1A). It is also the only species with a smooth malar region, without oblique costae (Fig. 1E). Most species have distinct costae (Darling 1998, figs 1, 2; Darling 1997, figs 1, 7, 12), with these much shorter only in K. srilanka (Darling 1988, figs 10, 11). In addition, K. almokha and K. srilanka have relatively shorter marginal veins than all other species except K. saunion, the postmarginal vein approximately 0.85× the length of the marginal vein in these three species versus 0.5‒0.7× in all other species (Darling 1995, figs 17‒22). The scutellum of K. srilanka is also much more strongly vaulted over the propodeum than in K. almokha (Darling 1988, fig. 13 cf. Fig. 1A). Krombeinius almokha differs from the only other Afrotropical species, K. lerouxi in many additional characters. Krombeinius lerouxi is larger and more robust, 6 mm in versus 4 mm in length; the inner orbits are smooth versus costate; and the scutellum is elongate and vaulted over propodeum (Rasplus 1987, figs 1‒3). Remarks. This is only species of Krombeinius known from a dry desert or steppe region; the other species are only known from tropical rainforests. It is interesting to speculate that the dense, white setae are an adaptation to the hot, potentially desiccating habitat where the holotype was collected.

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: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.090

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0270.009

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.223 · 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
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)Same topicArtificial Intelligence in GamesFrench-language works237,207