Trassedia yanegai Miko and Trietsch 2018, sp. nov.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Trassedia yanegai Mikó and Trietsch sp. nov. (Zoobank LSID: urn:lsid:zoobank. org:act: 53D5E575-4ED3-4146-A7F2-19ECF032846E) Diagnosis Trassedia yanegai shares the short setae on the dorsal region of the cranium (shorter than the diameter of the median ocellus; Fig. 3C and D), the reduced anterior ocellar fovea that does not extend to the antennal scrobe (Fig. 3C and D), the punctate ocular impression along the inner orbit (io: Fig. 3C and D) and a wide Waterston’s evaporatorium that reaches the lateral 13 of the tergite (wop: Fig. 4A and B) with T. luapi and T. australiensis. Trassedia yanegai differs from these species in the lack of the notaulus, the lack of scutes on the vertex, the anteriorly gradually widening preoccipital sulcus (pof: Fig. 3C), the foveolate sternaulus (ster: Fig. 5C) and the large eyes (HW/IOS = 3.7, Fig. 3C). The female pedicel and F1 are brown and F2–F4 are whitish in T. yanegai, while the female pedicel and F1–F3 are yellow and F4–F9 are dark brown in T. luapi. Description Body length: 3.95 mm. Color hue pattern female: cranium, mesosomablack, F5–F9 black, F2–F4 white, scape, legs, pedicel, F1 ochre. Color intensity pattern female: pedicel, F1, fore leg, mesocoxa darker than rest of middle leg, hind leg, scape. Structure of scutes on head and mesosoma: scute surface on head and mesosoma flat, scutes indistinct. Head: HW:HH = 1.1. HW/IOS Female: 3.8. Maximum eye diameter versus minimum eye diameter: 1.2. Interommatidial seta length: interommatidial seta length less than facet diameter. Occipital carina medially: continuous medially. Seta length on dorsal region of cranium versus diameter of median ocellus: shorter. Scutes on vertex count: absent. Preoccipital furrow anterior extension: adjacent anteriorly to the posterior margin of the median ocellus. Preoccipital furrow anterior region versus posterior region sculpture: posterior region crenulate, anterior region smooth or finely reticulate. Preoccipital furrow anterior region width versus posterior region width: wider anteriorly than posteriorly. Female OOL: POL: LOL: 0.1:0.5:1.0. Preocellar pit count: absent. Carina delimiting antennal scrobe count: absent. Transverse striation on upper face count: present. Anterior ocellar fovea shape: fovea not extended ventrally into facial sulcus. Supraclypeal depression count: present. Ocular impression sculpture: punctate (fovea of ocellar impression are well separated from each other). Antenna: Female scape length versus pedicel length: 2.4. Female F1 length versus pedicel length: 1.1. Female ninth flagellomere length: F9 less than F7+F8. Mesosoma: Mesosoma shape: not compressed laterally, as wide as high or wider than high. Pronope count: absent. Anterior slope of mesonotum shape: Anterior slope of mesonotum at obtuse angle to dorsal surface of mesonotum in lateral view. Antero-admedian line count: present. Notaulus count: absent. Notaulus anterior origin versus anterolateral angle of mesoscutum (ball-and-socket articulation between pronotum and mesoscutum): Notaulus arises medially of anterolateral angle of the mesoscutum. Scutes on posterior region of mesoscutum and dorsal region of mesoscutellum count: present. Epicnemial carina count: complete. Sternaulus count: present. Sternaulus sculpture: scalloped. Anterior metapleural carina count: present. Carina limiting posteriorly antecosta count: present. Lateral propodeal carina count: present. Wings: Stigmal vein length versus pterostigma marginal length: stigmal vein longer than the pterostigma marginal length. Etymology The species epithet refers to Douglas Yanega (Senior Museum Scientist of the Entomology Research Museum, University of California, Riverside), who drew our attention to the holotype of the new species.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.006 |
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".