Trouessartia quarta Gaud and Atyeo 1987
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Trouessartia quarta Gaud and Atyeo, 1987 (Figs. 18, 21C, D) Trouessartia quarta Gaud and Atyeo, 1987: 376, figs. 1g, 2g, 4g, 5g. Material examined. 8 males and 8 females (ZISP 7516–7531) from Hirundo rustica Linnaeus, 1758 (Passeriformes: Hirundinidae), CANADA, Manitoba, Winnipeg, 7 June 1999, coll. T.D. Galloway; 2 females (ZISP 13 871, 13 872) from Hirundo rustica erythrogaster (Boddaert, 1783), USA, Rhode Island, Jamestown, 5 July 1886, coll. unknown; 1 female (ZISP 13 873), same host species, MEXICO, Durango, Rio del Oro, 13 April 1902, coll. J.H. Batty; 2 males, 2 females (ZISP 13 87 4 –13877), same host species, PANAMA, Bocas del Torro Province, Almirante, 13 September 1927, coll. R.R. Benson; 3 males, 7 females (ZISP 14 0150–14 024), same host species, ARGENTINA, Corrientes Province, Estancia Ricón de Luna, 10 November 1961, coll. W.H. Partridge. Trouessartia quarta was originally described from the barn swallow, Hirundo rustica, in South East Asia (Malaise, Thailand) (Gaud & Atyeo 1987). These authors noted that it does not occur on the same host individuals together with T. microcaudata Mironov, 1983, a species of the minutipes group widely distributed on this host in the Old World, from Europe to South East Asia (Mironov 1983, 1996; Gaud & Atyeo 1987). The latter authors suggested that T. quarta is restricted to the Indo-Malayan region and considered a single specimen of this mite found on a museum skin of H. rustica from Cuba as accidental contamination. Our study of samples from Canada and additional museum material shows that T. quarta is also widely distributed on H. rustica in the New World, from Canada to Argentina.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.044 | 0.005 |
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".