MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6931561296 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.5327876

Procecidochares atra

2010· article· en· W6931561296 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCarcinogens and Genotoxicity Assessment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHistorical recordRange (aeronautics)West virginiaScutellumWhite (mutation)Canyon

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Procecidochares atra (Loew) Fig. 89 Distribution. Foote et al. (1993, map 60) showed the range of this species to extend from southeastern Canada (Nova Scotia, Ontario) throughout the midwestern and northeastern United States (south to Virginia and west to Kansas), with single records from Georgia and northern Florida, and four records from Idaho, Utah and Colorado. Foote (1967) also cataloged it from Mexico (northern Sonora and Chapingo). Sutton et al. (2003) reported P. atra from the Appalachian Mountains of North Carolina and Tennessee, and Sutton & Steck (2005) reported that it is present in the panhandle of Florida. A few records reported below further verify and extend the known distribution of P.atra in the southern United States to Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana and Texas. The data point on the Foote et al. (1993) map in Colorado was based on a male (USNM USNMENT00214379) from Westcliffe, 10 Jun 1926, E.G. Anderson, which is not P.atra. It has the two large triangular hyaline areas between the wing bands similar in size, and the scutellum has one white setula basal to the basal seta, characters not occurring in P. atra. It may be P. anthracina Doane. The other three western United States records are questionable and need confirmation. The record from Sonora in Foote (1967) is presumably based on the record of Wulp (1899a: 408, as Oedaspis atra) who reported four specimens (probably in the BMNH) collected by Morrison. They are doubtfully P. atra if Wulp’s figure of the wing (Tab. XI, fig. 29) is accurate, as the subapical hyaline triangle is broader than the one between the two bands on the middle of the wing. The record from Chapingo (presumably the locality in the state of Mexico) was based on an unknown source, but also is suspect. Material examined. Alabama: Gulf Crest, 4 Nov 1916, A. H. Sturtevant, 1♀ (USNM USNMENT00214424); Spring Hill, 26–27 Oct 1916, A. H. Sturtevant, 1♂ (USNM USNMENT00214274); Mobile Co., Kushla, 1–8 Nov 1916, A. H. Sturtevant, 1♀ (USNM USNMENT00214341); same, 2 May 1920, 1♀ (USNM USNMENT00214421); Saraland, 26–27 Oct 1916, A. H. Sturtevant, 1♂ (USNM USNMENT00214410). Georgia: Dawson Co., Amicalola Falls, 2300 ft., 20 May 1972, G.W. Byers & N. Penny, 1♀ (UKaL). Louisiana: Baton Rouge, 21 Mar 1947, W. W. Wirth, 1♂ (USNM USNMENT00214395). Mississippi: Claiborne Co., Port Gibson, 5.4 mi. NNE, 23 Apr 1972, G.W. Byers & party, 1♀ (UKaL). Missouri: Blackwater, 4 Jun 1981, J. R. Schrock, 1♀ (UKaL). Tennessee: Knox Co., 17 May 1957, 1♀ (USNM USNMENT00214414); same, 29 May 1957, 1♀ (USNM USNMENT00214413). Texas: Victoria Co., Victoria, 8 Oct 1908, J. D. Mitchell, 1♀ (USNM USNMENT00214353).

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.085

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0250.008

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)Same topicCarcinogens and Genotoxicity AssessmentFrench-language works237,207