Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pellenes montanus (Emerton 1894) (Figs 41–46) Material examined.— Canada: Québec: BaieJames (Jamésie): 122 km NNE LaSarre [49°48’N, 78°55’W] 15.–22.vi.1997, flight interception trap in a burned Black spruce forest, 1Ψ, P. Paquin & N. Dupérré (CPAD); Parc des Grands Jardins, accès Doivert [47°41’N, 70°51’W] 13.–21.vi.2000, pitfall, 1ɗ 1Ψ, M. Larrivée (CNC). Diagnosis.— Males are characterised by the large tegular apophysis (TA) arising basally (Fig. 43) and the shape of the retrolateral apophysis (RTA) (Fig. 44). Females are characterised by the chevron pattern on the abdomen (Fig. 42), the presence of a median hoodlike pocket (arrow, Fig. 45) and the elongated, parallel spermathecae (S) (Figs 45– 46). Distribution.— From Québec (present records) to Alberta, with a record from Colorado. The few known specimens suggest that the species is boreal with a southern extension in the Rockies. Remark.— The Jamésie record given here comes from a naturally burned Black Spruce forest. The species was never collected again in any other habitat despite an intense sampling effort in that region. Larrivée et al. (2005) report the occurrence of the species in the province without details. On Jerzy Proszynski’s web site (Proszynski 2003), P. montanus is listed as a junior synonym of the Palearctic species P. lapponicus (Sundevall 1833), but that synonymy has never been officially published. Illustrations provided on this web site show small differences in the spermathecae between Palearctic and Nearctic specimens. We prefer to use P. montanus for specimens collected in North America until that question is formally addressed.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.031 | 0.005 |
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".