Bibliographic record
Abstract
Derotanypus Roback, 1971 Derotanypus was established as a new genus by Roback (1971) with two species that had been known under various generic names. He also split the two species into separate subgenera. Later, Roback, in 1977, placed the genus as a subgenus of Psectrotanypus, because of similarities in morphological features of the larvae and pupae. The status of Derotanypus as a separate genus is now well established (Cranston & Epler 2013). The genus is restricted to northern and montane regions of the Holarctic (Roback 1978), and most of the records from Alaska bear this out, except for collections from Prince Wales Island (Roback 1971). The two species were common in tundra ponds near Barrow, with Derotanypus alaskensis (Malloch, 1919) being more abundant than the Derotanypus aclines (Sublette, 1964) as noted in Bulter (1980a) and Lougheed et al. (2011). Notably, Roback (1977) also suggested that the specimens of D. aclines from Utqiagvik differed somewhat from those that Roback described in 1971 from the western United States. Roback (1971) reported D. alaskensis from Prince Wales Island, and we have found males from the Lena Point area near Juneau in late June. We also found two larvae in a tributary to the Totatlanika River between Denali National Park and Nenana in 2005 and Derotanypus larvae in three Arctic lakes near Utqiagvik, Wainwright, and Atqasuk in 2013 and 2014. Arctos (2023) has several references of larvae identified to genus from an unnamed lake in Central Alaska near the Alaskan/Canadian border. We found larvae of unknown species from an unnamed Arctic lake near Wainwright. The larvae of this genus are among the largest Tanypodinae found in North America (Roback 1978).
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".