Bibliographic record
Abstract
CREMNOMYMAR Ogloblin, 1952 (Figs 98–108) Cremnomymar Ogloblin, 1952: 120. Type species: Cremnomymar fernandezi Ogloblin, 1952, by original designation. Annecke & Doutt, 1961: 6 (key), 31 (discussion); De Santis, 1979: 374 (catalogue); Fidalgo, 1982: 98 (comparison with Parapolynema); Yoshimoto, 1990: 14, 20 (key), 67 (distribution, diagnosis, species list); Huber, 2013: 57 (synonyms, discussion); Triapitsyn, 2024: 27 (description, distribution). Nesopolynema Ogloblin, 1952: 132. Type species: Nesopolynema caudatum Ogloblin, 1952, by original designation. Synonymy by Huber, 2013a: 57. Annecke & Doutt, 1961: 6 (key), 30 (comments); De Santis, 1979: 374 (catalogue); Yoshimoto, 1990: 13 (key), 65 (distribution, diagnosis, species list). Scolopsopteron Ogloblin, 1952: 127. Type species: Scolopsopteron kuscheli Ogloblin, 1952, by original designation. Synonymy by Huber, 2013a: 57. Annecke & Doutt, 1961: 6 (key), 30 (comments); De Santis, 1979: 373 (catalogue); Yoshimoto, 1990: 20 (key), 65 (distribution, diagnosis, species list). Oncomymar Ogloblin, 1957b: 414. Type species: Oncomymar dipteron Ogloblin, 1957, by original designation. Synonymy by Huber, 2013a: 57. Annecke & Doutt, 1961: 6 (key), 30 (comments); De Santis, 1979: 373 (catalogue); Yoshimoto, 1990: 64 (distribution, diagnosis, species list). Oncomyar [sic]: Yoshimoto, 1990: 20 (key). Parapolynema Fidalgo, 1982: 97. Type species: Parapolynema sagittifer Fidalgo, 1982, by original designation. Synonymy by Triapitsyn, 2024: 27. De Santis, 1989: 73 (catalogue); Yoshimoto, 1990: 14, 20 (key), 67 (distribution, diagnosis, species list); Fidalgo, 1991: 152 (discussion); Luft Albarracin et al., 2009: 11 (list); 14 (key); Huber, 2013: 65 (discussion); Luft Albarracin et al., 2014: 132 (key). Diagnosis. Face without faint subantennal sulcus ventral to each torulus and without a pit medially next to each torulus (Figs 98, 103); toruli separated by well over height of torulus from transverse trabecula; propleura abutting each other anterior to prosternum; fore wing with (Figs 100, 106) or without dark bands, with venation less than 0.2× wing length (Figs 100, 106) and marginal vein absent (105); propodeum with submedian carinae, either more widely separated from each other anteriorly (Fig. 101) or the carinae sometimes united posteriorly into a single carina, or only a single median carina present, sometimes only posteriorly (Fig. 107) or apparently entirely absent; propodeal seta on posteriorly facing tubercle near posterior margin of propodeum (Figs 101, 107, 108); petiole apparently attached posteriorly to gt 1 (Figs 102, 108). Remarks. Cremnomymar belongs to the Polynema group of genera. Cremnomymar species occur mainly on the Juan Fernández Islands. Those on Robinson Crusoe Islands (Masatierra Island) have diversified into very different looking species — a Hawaiian- Drososphila -like radiation though with far fewer species or, more appropriate for the Neotropical region, a Darwin’s finches radiation, writ small. The only feature uniting the Cremnomymar species is the propodeal seta on a distinct tubercle. The propodeal carina(e) character is variable. Head shape, body colour, wing length and shape are also diverse so it is understandable why Ogloblin classified the species in four genera and Fidalgo proposed another genus (Parapolynema) for species on mainland South America. Until a better understanding of the Juan Fernandez Islands Cremnomymar species is obtained we prefer not to treat the synonyms listed above as subgenera, partly also because Ogloblin based two of his genera on males, one on females and one (Cremnomymar itself) on both sexes. Neotropical hosts. Unknown. Important references. Huber (2013a), Triapitsyn (2024).
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.039 | 0.014 |
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".