Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pterycombus Fries, 1837 Mead (1972) recognized two species within this genus: Pterycombus brama and Pterycombus petersii. To date P. brama is reported only from the Mediterranean and the North Atlantic (Canada to Gulf of Mexico and to northern South America; Iceland, British Isles and Norway to Gulf of Guinea); P. petersii is reported from the Indo-Pacific (South Africa to Japan and the central Pacific), the southeastern Atlantic (South Africa), and the southwestern Atlantic (southeastern Brazil) (Mead, 1972; Scott and Scott, 1988; Tomás et al. 1988; Figueiredo et al., 2002; Thompson, 2008). Several MZUSP specimens are damaged or not well preserved, but 12 were selected as in fair to good condition to be examined. The diameter of the eye was not considered by us as a useful parameter, as the variation in our specimens is much larger and does not agree at all with that of Mead (1972), probably because of the conditions of most of the old specimens; the same was found for the number of rays of the dorsal, pectoral and anal fins, the number of vertebrae and the actual size of the longest anal fin ray. On the other hand, the proportion of the longest dorsal fin ray in standard length showed a very conclusive difference (TABLE 4; FIG 11). Even so, two specimens could belong to either species (or even to a hybrid) as their measurements are intermediary between the two species (when the size is examined and compared with figure 48 of Mead (1972)). This latter figure is a graph displaying the “Relative height of (A) dorsal and (B) anal fin in young and adult Pterycombus brama and Pterycombus petersii ”, and clearly shows a degree of overlap in certain size classes (30 mm, for example). No adult of any Pterycombus species was ever documented to date in Brazilian waters. The presence of an undescribed species in the southern Atlantic, a possibility raised by Mead (1972), remains to be confirmed. With the present paper, the number of Southwestern Atlantic Bramidae species increased from seven to ten, one of the largest in the world and, to date, the only with both species of Pterycombus. Pterycombus MZUSP MZUSP MZUSP MZUSP MZUSP 61622 61623 (1) 61623 (2) 61572 61633 Measurements (mm) Standard length 108,93 84,23 60,13 78,74 110,59 Head 26,57 23,8 18,95 21,47 28,22 Eye, horizontal 8,86 7,81 6,89 7,61 9,91 Longest dorsal fin ray 68,4 51,48 34,23 43,17 62,51 Proportions (%) Eye on Head 3,0 0 3,0 5 2,75 2,82 2,85 Longest D ray/SL 0,63 0,61 0,57 0,55 0,57 ID Longest D Ray (1) brama brama brama brama brama Eye on head (2) brama brama petersii petersii petersii continued. Pterycombus MZUSP MZUSP MZUSP MZUSP MZUSP (1): Comparing with Mead’s graph (Fig. 48) (2): Comparing with Mead’s key (pg.93)
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.004 |
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".