Bibliographic record
Abstract
Afrosyrphus Curran, 1927 Type species Afrosyrphus varipes Curran, 1927, by monotypy. Differential diagnosis (adapted from Vockeroth 1969) Moderately robust, rather pilose species with extremely long, slender antennae, obscure abdominal markings and densely pilose hind legs. Face almost straight in profile, with low tubercle, densely pale pruinose laterally, with a shining, broad, dark median facial vitta. Eye apparently bare (with extremely short and scattered pile), holoptic in male. Antenna porrect or nearly so, with postpedicel longer than scape and pedicel together; arista bare, subbasal. Mesonotum dull, heavily pruinose; pleura dull, pruinose. Thoracic pile pale, unusually long but not obscuring ground colour. Subscutellar fringe very long and dense. Dorsal and ventral katepisternal pile patches narrowly joined posteriorly, clearly separated anteriorly. Metasternum bare. Hind coxa and hind trochanter with a pile tuft at median angle. Wing membrane with extensive bare areas on rather more than basal half, microtrichia on rest of membrane very fine but moderately dense. Ventral calypter with many fine, erect pale pile on posterior part of dorsal surface. Apical half of hind femur and hind tibia of both sexes with dense dorsal and ventral fringes of long, mostly dark pile. Abdomen unmargined, narrowly oval, long pilose. Distribution Afrotropical Region (see Fig. 2). Systematic remarks Vockeroth (1969) suggested a close relationship with Epistrophe based on adult morphology and male genitalia. Láska et al. (2000) described the puparium of Afrosyrphus based on the material from Kenya collected by Schmutterer and argued that Afrosyrphus is more closely related to Epistrophella based on the puparium morphology. Our unpublished target enrichment Syrphinae phylogeny supports both of these hypotheses, with Epistrophella sister to Afrosyrphus + Epistrophe.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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; 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".