Gyrophaena (Gyrophaena) chippewa Seevers 1951
Bibliographic record
Abstract
15. <i>Gyrophaena</i> (<i>Gyrophaena</i>) <i>chippewa</i> Seevers Figs 14, 96–99; Map 11 <i>Gyrophaena chippewa</i> Seevers, 1951: 705; Moore and Legner 1975: 428. <b>Description.</b> Body length 2.0– 2.7 mm, narrowly oval; head and pronotum usually rufotestaceous; elytra testaceous to light brown, mottled with small irregular darker spots; abdomen rufo-testaceous, apical portion of abdomen sometimes darker. Punctation: vertex of head with about eight large umbilicate punctures on each side, pronotum with two irregular median rows of large punctures and scattered punctures elsewhere, elytra with fine and dense punctures. Microsculpture: reticulate throughout. Antennae as illustrated (Fig. 14). Pronotum 1.3 times as wide as long. MALE: tergite 8 with two lobe-shaped lateral teeth and one or two small median teeth (Fig. 98); sternite 8 broadly rounded apically (Fig. 99). Medi- an lobe of aedeagus with long tubular and tapering tubus bearing one long ventral projection near crista apicalis (Fig. 96), flagellum slightly projecting from the tip of elongate dorsal projection of internal sac (Fig. 96). Paramere as illustrated (Fig. 97). FEMALE. Unknown. <b>Map ΙΙ.</b> Collection localities in New Brunswick, Canada of <i>Gyrophaena chippewa</i> <b>Bionomics. Macrohabitat:</b> mixed forest. <b>Microhabitat:</b> on gilled mushrooms. <b>Collecting period:</b> August. <b>Collecting method:</b> sifting mushrooms and aspirating specimens. <b>Distribution</b> (Map 11). <b>CANADA: New Brunswick</b>; UNITED STATES: Michigan, North Carolina, and Wisconsin.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
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.
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".