Bibliographic record
Abstract
Laboulbenia philonthi Thaxt. MB#147868 Fig. 41A–B Proceedings of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences 28: 174 (Thaxter 1893). – Type: “ USA, Massachusetts, Belmont/Waltham, Waverley neighborhood, “ April 23, 1813 ” [sic], no collector, on Philonthus sp., slide FH 00313494 (5 adult thalli)”; FH. [lectotype designated in Haelewaters et al. 2015b: 468] Diagnostic features Often, cell I bears a blackish lateral swelling above the foot (Fig. 41A–B, arrows). Cell V oval, as long as cell IV, connected with septum III–IV. Outer appendage simple or branched, with the lower 2–3 cells short, inflated, and separated with thick blackened septa. Inner appendage profusely branched unilaterally above the basal cell, with branches similar to those of the outer appendage. Basal cells of inner and outer appendages similar. [Detailed descriptions: Thaxter 1896; Majewski 1994b; Santamaria 1998] Distribution and hosts Infects Col. Staphylinidae of the genus Philonthus and relatives (e.g., Spatulonthus, Paragabrius Coiffait, 1963, Oligotergus Bierig, 1937) from Europe: Spain, United Kingdom, France, the Netherlands, Italy, Germany, Austria, Czech Republic, Poland, Lithuania, Latvia, Greece; America: USA, Mexico, Guatemala, Uruguay, Argentina; Asia: Turkey and Korea (Majewski 2008). Recently recorded also from Ecuador (Proaño Castro & Rossi 2008), Trinidad & Tobago, Venezuela, Panama, Grenada, Canada (Haelewaters et al. 2015b), Bulgaria, Hungary (Rossi et al. 2019a), Slovakia (Rossi et al. 2019b), Slovenia (Rossi & Christian 2020), and Belgium (De Kesel et al. 2020). Collections examined from Denmark On Philonthus salinus Kiesenwetter, 1844 (Col. Staphylinidae Staphylininae) DENMARK – Nordvestsjaelland (NWZ) • Flasken nord for Reersø; 55°31.965′ N, 11°9.831′ E; PG35; 26 Jan. 2014; JP 605; JP det.; ZMUC C-F-123094. – Sydsjaelland (SZ) • Østerskov ved Langebaek; 54°59.572′ N, 12°6.715′ E; UA19; 3 Jan. 2019; JP 1301; JP det.; ZMUC C-F-123835. Remarks First record from Denmark. Because of its presence in the surrounding countries, the finding of L. philonthi in Denmark is far from surprising. The bulging of cell I is not found in all the thalli reported in the literature; so far we lack explanations of what factors favour its presence.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.052 | 0.010 |
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".