MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6950058787 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.4505681

Lasioglossum (Dialictus)

2020· article· en· W6950058787 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicFern and Epiphyte Biology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScutellumReticulateGenusAnterior surfaceHead (geology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Identification keys to the western red-tailed species of Lasioglossum (Dialictus) Key to females 1. Tegula enlarged, reaching or nearly reaching scutellum, with inner posterior margin straight or concave, often punctate (Fig. 91A)........................ L. hunteri (Crawford, 1932) and similar species 1 – Tegula ovoid, impunctate, and clearly not reaching scutellum (Fig. 91B)........................................ 2 1 L. parvum-tegulare species complex; not treated further herein. Specimens from desert and mountain regions are not likely true L. hunteri. 2. Head (except clypeus and postgena) and mesonotum entirely covered in dense, yellowish, thickly plumose hairs which (unless worn) largely obscure the surface underneath (Fig. 92); face relatively long (length/width ratio ~0.84).......................................................................................................... 3 – Head and mesonotum with thick hairs sparse or absent, or if more extensive, then hairs bright white and at least center of scutum largely exposed (Fig. 67A); face length variable ................................ 4 3. Thick hairs short and scale-like (Fig. 92A); body length 4.5–5 mm (sand dunes of eastern United States and Canada)................................................................................. L. vierecki (Crawford, 1904) – Thick hairs long (Fig. 92B); body length 5.5–6 mm (mountains of California and western Nevada)........................................................................................................... L. cembrilacus sp. nov. 4. Mesonotum and mesepisternum entirely covered in strong tessellate to finely reticulate microsculpture, with fine, sparse punctures (i=1–4 pd) which are often obscured by microsculpture (Fig. 93A) (Mexico)........................................................................................................................... 5 – Mesonotum and/or mesepisternum usually shiny and distinctly punctate at least in part (Fig. 93C); if covered in strong microsculpture, then more densely punctate (Fig. 93B) (widespread).............. 6 5. Frons punctures large (about as large as paraocular area punctures) and coarse, approaching a rugulose condition (Fig. 94A); T1 anterior surface shiny (Fig. 95A) (widespread throughout most of Mexico)......................................................................................................... L. tessellatosum sp. nov. – Frons punctures small (about half the size of paraocular punctures) and fine, at most very weakly rugulose above antennae (Fig. 94B); T1 anterior surface weakly coriarious (Fig. 95B) (Yucatan Peninsula) .......................................................................................................... L. meteorum sp. nov. 6. T1 with numerous erect hairs evenly distributed across anterior face; acarinarial fan absent (Fig. 96A) and/or metasomal terga with extremely narrow, abruptly downcurved rims usually with dense apicolateral fringes of long, plumose hair (Fig. 97A) ............................................................. 7 – T1 anterior face with erect hairs absent at least medially, usually limited to lateral margins; acarinarial fan present, although often weakly developed (Fig. 96B); metasomal terga with broad, flat rims with apicolateral fringes of short hair (Fig. 97B) .................................................................................... 13 7. Scutum shiny and moderately sparsely punctate submedially (i=1–2 pd) (Fig. 93C); face short (length/width ratio 0.88 or less)......................................................................................................... 8 – Scutum entirely finely and densely punctate (i ≤ 1 pd) and often dull (Fig. 93B); face long (length/ width ratio 0.88 or more) ................................................................................................................. 10 8. Propodeum with strong V-shaped oblique carina (Fig. 98A); T1 anterior face with no appressed hairs................................................................................................... L. testaceum (Robertson, 1897) – Oblique carina absent (Fig. 98B); T1 anterior face with some appressed hairs ................................ 9 9. Metasomal terga with extremely narrow, abruptly downcurved rims usually with dense apicolateral fringes of long, plumose hair (Fig. 97A); frons shiny with distinctly separated punctures (Fig. 94C); T1 anterior face with numerous long appressed hairs forming weak acarinarial fan .......................... ............................................................................................................................ L. cactorum sp. nov. – Metasomal terga with broad, flat rims with sparse apicolateral fringes of short, simple hair (Fig. 97B); frons densely reticulate-punctate (Fig. 94A); T1 anterior face with sparse, short appressed hairs laterally not forming distinct fan .................................................................. L. miltolepoides sp. nov. 10. Metasomal terga always, and scutum often mostly shiny; middle tibial spur and anterior hind tibial spur minutely serrate, appearing simple (Fig. 99A) (mountain species)..........................................11 – Metasomal terga and scutum entirely dull; middle tibial spur and anterior hind tibial spur finely pectinate with teeth nearly half the width of the rachis (Fig. 99B) (desert species)........................ 12 11. Malar space as wide or wider than scape; supraclypeal area much longer than broad; scutum with slightly sparser punctures, with numerous interspaces up to 1 puncture diameter or slightly more, and more extensively shiny on average (Utah to Colorado)........................ L. griswoldi Gibbs, 2009 – Malar space less than width of scape; supraclypeal area only slightly longer than broad; scutum with denser punctures, with only a few interspaces up to 1 puncture diameter, and less shiny on average (sometimes completely dull) (California to British Columbia)............. L. tuolumnense Gibbs, 2009 12. T4 tomentum limited to narrow basal band; T2–3 with basolateral tomentum covering much less than half length of segment (Baja California to Arizona)................... L. petrellum (Cockerell, 1903) – T4 with sparse tomentum throughout; T2–3 with sparse basolateral tomentum covering about half length of segment laterally (New Mexico to Nuevo Leon)............................ L. droegei Gibbs, 2009 13. Forewing with all hairs white, often difficult to see; membrane hyaline; veins (excluding subcosta) usually pale amber (Fig. 100A) ....................................................................................................... 14 – Forewing with distinct, dark hairs in apical half or more; membrane sometimes infuscated; veins often dark brown (Fig. 100B).......................................................................................................... 26 14. Punctures of frons crowded (not all punctures are round), the surface thus appearing relatively dull (Fig. 94A), usually distinctly smaller and denser than punctures of paraocular area; and/or T1 anterior surface coriarious (Fig. 95 B–C)......................................................................................... 15 – Punctures of frons about the same size and density as punctures of paraocular area, with at least narrow shiny interspaces, the surface thus appearing shiny (Fig. 94 C–D); T1 anterior surface shiny (Fig. 95A) ........................................................................................................................................ 18 15. Supraclypeal area mostly or entirely tessellate (Fig. 101A); postgena mostly dull and/or lineate (Fig. 102A) ...................................................................................................................................... 16 – Supraclypeal area (Fig. 101B) and postgena (Fig. 102B) mostly smooth and shiny ...................... 17 16. Scutum mostly shiny with most punctures separated by about one puncture diameter (Fig. 75A); discs of terga black to reddish brown with metallic blue-green reflections.... L. rufornatum sp. nov. – Scutum mostly tessellate with all punctures separated by much less than one puncture diameter (Fig. 8A); metasoma usually entirely red to orange; if dark brown, then discs of terga not metallic ............................................................................................ L. arenisaltans sp. nov. (in part) 17. Mesepisternum rugose in dorsal half or more, with thin, sparse hair (Fig. 36B); T1 anterior surface shiny (Fig. 95A); ocelli slightly enlarged, separated by much less than 1 ocellar diameter (Fig. 103A) ..................................................................................... L. eophilus (Ellis, 1914) (in part) – Mesepisternum with crowded punctures but not rugose, with abundant tomentum (Fig. 11B); T1 anterior surface at least weakly coriarious (Fig. 95B); ocelli normal, separated by nearly 1 ocellar diameter (Fig. 103B)......................................................................................... L. argammon sp. nov. 18. Forewing with two submarginal cells (rarely with three in one wing); size very small (body length ~ 3.5 mm; intertegular distance ~ 0.67 mm).......................................................... L. perditum sp. nov. – Forewing with three submarginal cells; size usually larger (body length ~ 4 mm or more; intertegular distance ~ 0.73 mm or more) ............................................................................................................ 19 19. Metapostnotal rugae usually not reaching posterior margin within 1 or 2 ridge widths (Fig. 104A); scutum often sparsely punctate on both sides of parapsidal lines (i=1–4 pd); dark spiracular spots present on T2–4 (Fig. 105A)............................................................................................................ 20 – M

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 score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.082

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0240.007

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.161 · 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
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)Same topicFern and Epiphyte BiologyFrench-language works237,207