Bibliographic record
Abstract
Myllaena procidua Casey, 1911 Figs 25, 64–66, Map 26 New Records. CANADA, New Brunswick, Carleton Co., Meduxnekeag River Valley Nature Preserve, 46.1888°N, 67.6762°W, 25.VI.2007 (1 ♀, RWC); Meduxnekeag River Valley Nature Preserve, 46.1942°N, 67.6832°W, 3.VII.2006, 9.VI.2008 (6 ♁, 4 ♀, 1 sex not determined, LFC, RWC). Northumberland Co., Nelson Hollow at “Kelley Channel”, 46.5433°N, 66.1842°W, 11.VIII.2006 (1 ♀, RWC); Amostown at Miramichi River, 46.5339°N, 66.2095°W, 11.VIII.2006 (1 ♁, RWC). Queens Co., Bayard at Nerepis River, 45.4426°N, 66.3280°W, 25.V.2008, 30.V.2008 (3 ♁, 2 ♀, LFC, RWC). Restigouche Co., Jacquet River Gorge PNA at Jacquet River, 47.8197°N, 66.0835°W, 23.VI.2008 (1 ♁, NBM). York Co., 1.5 km N of Durham Bridge at Nashwaak River, 46.1408°N, 66.6179°W, 15.VI.2008 (1 ♀, RWC). Bionomic Notes. In New Brunswick, adults occurred along river (clear water) margins among cobblestones set in sand and fine gravel at water’s edge, or among gravel at the edge of the water. Adults were located by turning over cobblestones and larger 28 29 30 Figures 25–30. 25 Myllaena kaskaskia 26 M. procidua 27 M. vulpina 28 Euvira micmac 29 Leptusa carolinensis 30 Neotobia alberta [25-27, apical part of abdomen removed]. Scale = 1 mm Map 26. Collection localities in New Brunswick, Canada of Myllaena procidua. pebbles. Little was previously known about the habitat association of this species. In New Brunswick, adults were collected during May, June, July, and August. Collection method: hand collecting (turning over cobblestones and pebbles). Distribution in Canada and Alaska. QC, NB (Klimaszewski 1982; Gouix and Klimaszewski 2007). Comments. The male of M. procidua was unknown at the time of its description (Klimaszewski 1982). A number of males of this species were captured and we illustrate for the first time the median lobe of the aedeagus in dorsal and lateral view (Figs. 64 and 65). The male median lobe of aedeagus of M. procidua is very similar to that of M. kaskaskia and M. vulpina. Th ese are shown in Figs. 61 and 62 (M. kaskaskia) and Figs. 67 and 68 (M. vulpina) for comparison. However, the shape of the female spermatheca differs significantly and is a much better diagnostic character for separation of these three species (Figs. 63, 66, and 69).
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 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".