MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6968356286 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.15218548

Empis (Enoplempis) holoptica Sinclair, Brooks & Cumming, 2025, sp. nov.

2025· article· en· W6968356286 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine Biology and Ecology Research
Canadian institutionsCanadian Food Inspection Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHolotypeCoveRange (aeronautics)White (mutation)Paratype

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Empis (Enoplempis) holoptica sp. nov. urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act: 6A0608ED-9CCF-4F1E-8DC8-D7E1E4D58F9E (Figs 319, 325, 330) Type material. HOLOTYPE ♂, labelled: “CAL: No.Calif.Coast / Range Pres. [39°42′N 123°39′W], 5 mi. N/ Branscomb, Mendo. Co/ v-26/27-[19]76/ R. Wharton coll.”; “ HOLOTYPE / Empis (Enoplempis) / holoptica Sinclair,/ Brooks & Cumming [red label]” (EMEC). PARATYPES: USA. California: El Dorado County: Blodgett Forest, 13 mi. E Georgetown [38°54′N 120°39′W], 31.v.1974, black lite trap, 2200, 24454, JAP (1♂, EMEC). Humboldt County: 4 mi. E Shelter Cove [40.04°N 123.96°W], 21–22.v.1976, R. Wharton (1♂, EMEC). Mendocino County: Angelo Coast Range Reserve [39.7082°N 123.6515°W], 31.v.1980, E.I. Schlinger (1♂, EMEC); Empire Camp Rest Area S of Cummings on Hwy 101 [39.8267°N 123.5947°W], 18.v.1978, DDW (1♂, CAS); same data as holotype (3♂, 1♀, EMEC); same data except, 24–25.v.1976 (2♀, EMEC); same data except, 25.v.1976, E. Rogers (6♂, 4♀, EMEC); same data except, 25–27.v.1976 (1♂, EMEC); same data except, 25.v.1976, JAP (10♂, 1♀, EMEC); same data except, 24–25.v.1976, R. Coville (1♂, EMEC); same data except, Szerlip (1♂, EMEC); NCCRP, 3 mi. N Branscomb, 1400 ft, 17.v.1975, JAP (1♂, EMEC); same data except, E. White (2♂, EMEC); same data except, J. Benson (1♂, EMEC); same data except, 18–21.v.1984, E. Schlinger (1♂, EMEC); same data except, 5–6.v.1989, MT, S. O’Keefe (1♂, EMEC); 1 mi. N Piercy [39°58′N 123°47′W], 20–23.v.1976, R. Wharton (1♂, EMEC); same data except, J.A. Chemsak (1♀, EMEC); same data except, bl. light, Dietz, Chemsak & Powell (1♀, EMEC); 1 mi. SE Piercy, 20–21.v.1976, JAP (1♀, EMEC). Tehama County: 1 mi. SE Log Springs Sta. [39.817°N 122.773°W], 25.v.1981, L. Bezark (1♂, CNC). Diagnosis. This species is distinguished from other species of the subgenus by the grey body (Fig. 319) and males are holoptic, with hindleg unmodified, hind tibia with long dorsal setae, and phallus gradually arched apically with roughened surface distant from narrow apex (Fig. 325). Description. Wing length 4.8–5.6 mm. Male. Similar to E. (En.) californica sp. nov., except as follows: head holoptic. Antenna dark. Thorax with antepronotum with 4 or more pairs of dark setae. Scutum with 2 posterior npl, with several shorter anterior npl. Scutellum with pair of long apical sctl, with 1 pair of outer marginal setae. Legs long, slender, orange brown, apex of tibiae and tarsi darker brown; coxae without dense greyish pruinescence (Fig. 319). Fore tibia with 1–2 erect anterodorsal setae, length longer than width of tibia; anterior face with short appressed setae. Fore tarsomere 1 slender with short dorsal setae, with fine dense ventral setae; tarsomeres 2–5 with biserial row of spine-like ventral setae; tarsomeres 1–4 with apicolateral pair of spine-like setae, longer than width of segment. Mid tibia with 2 erect posterodorsal setae on basal half; biserial row of strong ventral setae, length slightly shorter than width of tibia. Mid tarsomere 1 without long dorsal setae; tarsomeres 1–5 with biserial row of spine-like ventral setae; tarsomeres 1–4 with apicolateral pair of spine-like setae, longer than width of segment. Hind femur slender without modified setae and processes; fine ventral setae, nearly as long as width of femur (Fig. 319). Hind tibia without processes or modified setae; long dorsal setae along most of tibia, length mostly twice width of tibia; long, fine erect ventral and anterior setae about as long as width of tibia (Fig. 319). Hind tarsus swollen, with 1–3 long dorsal setae, similar to tibia, with strong ventral setae; tarsomeres 2–5 similar to fore tarsus. Wing with veins mostly complete (except Sc), well sclerotized, except CuA+CuP weakened apically, reaching wing margin as fold. Terminalia (Fig. 325): epandrium and cerci brown, phallus orange brown and shiny. Cercus subtriangular, with nearly straight dorsal margin, tapered posteriorly with rounded apex; setae shorter than width of cercus. Subepandrial process extending on either side of phallus. Epandrial lamella elongate, longer than height, nearly parallel-sided; posterior margin slightly expanded dorsally, rounded, bearing long setae ventrally, mostly shorter than width of epandrium. Hypandrium narrow, strap-like, expanded medially, with pointed posteriorly margin; without setae. Phallus with basal half not strongly expanded, tapered apically, gradually arched beyond cerci; apex slender, not expanded, with roughened surface distant from apex, opposite cerci; ejaculatory apodeme two-thirds length of epandrium, Y-shaped, with lateral apodemes positioned near ventral margin. Female. Similar to male, except as follows: frons broader, wider than anterior ocellus; hind tibia with 4–6 strong anterodorsal and posterodorsal erect setae. Abdominal pleural membrane without darkened, expanded region; tergite 8 and syntergite 9+10 with pruinescence. Geographical distribution and seasonal occurrence (Fig. 330). Empis (En.) holoptica sp. nov. is known from northern and central California. Adults have been collected in May. Etymology. This species is named for the holoptic condition of the males, which is rare in the subgenus. Nuptial gift presentation. Form unknown.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.090

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0240.016

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.223 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)→Same topicMarine Biology and Ecology Research→French-language works237,207→