Cicindela purpurea subsp. purpurea Olivier 1790
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cicindela purpurea purpurea Olivier, 1790 There has long been confusion with regard to the presence of this species in Nova Scotia. It was listed as occurring in Nova Scotia by Bousquet (1991), Bousquet & Larochelle (1993), Leonard & Bell (1999), Acorn (2001), Goulet & Bousquet (2004), and Pearson et al. (2006), but not by Wallis (1961) or Freitag (1999). Maps in Pearson et al. (2006) show it as occurring in southern New Brunswick and throughout Nova Scotia. There are, however, no published records or voucher specimens that would substantiate its presence in the region. In the range map for the species in Leonard and Bell (1999, p. 127) a spot in south-central Nova Scotia is indicated. However, J. Leonard (pers. comm.) reports that he never examined a specimen from the province and cannot recall the source of this information. There are specimens of Cicindela limbalis in the CNC that were misidentified as C. purpurea and there is a dark specimen of Cicindela duodecimguttata in the NSMC (collected by D.C. Ferguson in Armdale, Nova Scotia in 1952) that was misidentified as C. purpurea by A.E. Brower (a lepidopterist). There are no specimens of this species from Nova Scotia in any collection in the Maritime Provinces or at the CNC. Neil (2004) found no evidence of the occurrence of the species in the province. Accordingly we conclude that past reports of this species occurring in Nova Scotia have been in error and it is removed from the faunal list of the province.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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".