Limnioides melicerta Weisse 1848
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Limnias melicerta Weisse, 1848 Figs 1A,B; 4C Cephalosiphon limnias Ehrenberg, 1853 Limnias corniculata Ehrenberg, 1853 Limnias annulatus Bailey, 1855; name amended to annulata to agree with feminine genus name Limnias doliolum Schoch, 1868 Melicerta cubitti Cubitt, 1871; text refers to M. annulata, but plate 98 labels as M. cubitti Limnias granulosa Weber, 1888 Limnias melicerta melicerta: Koste, 1978 Types: None designated Type locality: Afrossimov Estate, St. Petersburg, Russia. Other material: Specimen Preparation ANSP 1527. Diagnosis. Base of tube clear, switching abruptly to a series of clear, stacked rings. Ventral antennae short; dorsal nodules present (n = 7 in 3 rows: 2,3,2). Dorsal gap in corona ciliation approximately equal to neck width. Trophi: rami asymmetrical; uncus with 3 strong main teeth. Measurements: Total body length, ≤1550 µm; corona width, 160 µm; height, 70 µm; tube width (at top), =100 µm; amictic egg, 130–242 x 40 –98 µm. See also Koste (1978). Geographic range: Apparently cosmopolitan: Africa (Democratic Republic of the Congo), Australia, Europe (France, Germany, Ireland, Russia, U.K.), India, North America (Canada, U.S.A., Mexico), South America (Brazil, Ecuador), Thailand. Ecology: pH, 4.1–8.9; bicarbonate, 57–305 mg /L; calcium, 5–38 mg /L; magnesium, ≤ 20 mg /L, conductivity, 81–686 µS/cm2, temperature, 18–32 °C; colonizes a wide variety of substrata such as glass, charophyte algae (Chara, Nitella), aquatic mosses (Fontinalis, Sphagnum), and vascular hydrophytes including Ceratophyllum, Elodea, Eriocaulon, Lemna, Ludwigia, Myriophyllum, Nuphar, Nymphaea, Potamogeton, Ranunculus, and Utricularia (Bailey 1855; Francez 1984b; Kellicott 1888; Koste, 1978; Sarma et al. 2017; Wallace 1977; Yang & Hochberg 2018; pers. obs.). Edmondson (1944) suggests that flat surfaces provide suitable substrata. Comments. The etymon of this species (G., meli, honey + G., keras, horn) is apparently in reference to the color that the tube of this species may take. Male and diapausing embryos undescribed. Construction of the ringed tube (rings ~5-10 µm in height) is by an elaborate behavior of the animal (Wright 1954).
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 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".