Corynoneura scutellata Winnertz
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Corynoneura scutellata Winnertz (Figs 21 A–C) Corynoneura scutellata Winnertz, 1846: 13; Boesel &Winner 1980: 502; Hirvenoja & Hirvenoja 1988: 217; Schlee 1968: 40. Material examined. CANADA, Manitoba, Lake Winnipeg: Victoria Beach, light trap, 17 males, 2 females, 9.vii. & 25.vii.1969, P.S.S. Chang; Pine Dock, light trap, 1 male, 10.vii.1969, P.S.S. Chang; 20 Mile Creek, light trap, 4 males, 26.viii.1971, N. Hooper. USA, Ohio: Knox County, Ballfield Marsh, 1 mile south of Bladensburg, 1 larval exuviae, 18.v.2001, M. Micacchion; Summit County, Steels Corners Wetland, 3 larval exuviae, 22.v.2001, M. Micacchion (ZMBN, MJB). Larva (n = 3–4) Coloration. Head yellowish. Antenna with basal and second segments yellowish, other segments light brown. Abdomen yellowish. Head. Capsule length 256–272, 263 µm, width 164–172, 167 µm; strongly sculptured. Postmentum 220– 228, 223 µm long. SII obvious, rising from small tubercle, SI and SIII not visible. Premandible 18–28, 22 µm long. Mentum as in Fig. 21 B. Mandible 55–69, 61 µm long. Antenna (Fig. 21 A), AR 0.91–1.1, 1.03. Lengths of flagellomeres I–IV (in µm): 204–236, 227; 101–105, 103; 105–117, 112; 4–6, 5. Basal segment width 15–18, 17 µm; length of blade at apex of basal segment 28–35, 30 µm. Length of antenna/length of head 1.71–1.74, 1.73. Abdomen. Length of anal setae 224–280, 245 µm. Procercus 10–12, 11 µm long, 10–12, 11 µm wide. Subbasal seta of posterior parapods split as in Fig. 21 C; 55–63, 59 µm long. Remarks. The male is described by Schlee (1968: 40). The Lake Winnipeg specimens are slightly smaller than mentioned by Schlee, with wing length of 0.83–1.00, 0.90 (6) and wing length/length of profemur of 3.32–3.58, 3.43. Two females which may belong to this species differ from C. porrecta sp. n. by having an AR of 0.51–0.52, slightly larger size, and having about 6 lateral lamellae on the coxosternapodeme. Distribution and ecology. The species is known in all regions except the Afrotropical region and North Africa (Oliver et al. 1990: 23; Saether & Spies 2011). Many records, however, need reexamination and Schlee (1968: 43) could only confirm findings from Finland, Germany and Austria. The reconfirmed findings are restricted to oligotrophic or, at most, mesotrophic waters. The species is characteristic for the littoral vegetation (Schlee 1968: 42).
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.002 |
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".