Bibliographic record
Abstract
Phenacoccus solani Material at UCD: Type material: holotype, U.S.A., California, Santa Clara County, Palo Alto, Stanford University campus, on Hemizonia rudis, coll. G.F. Ferris, 21.x.1916. One paratype on same slide as holotype. Non-type material identified by G.F. Ferris: U.S.A., California:- Glenn County, Orland, on roots of pigweed, coll. H.S. Smith, 15.x.1922, 3; Los Angeles County, Montebello, on Eucharis amazonica, coll. L.E. Meyers, 21.vii.1942, 2; Orange County, between Orange and Olive, on nutgrass, coll. R.J. Bumgardner, 11.x.1956, 2; Riverside County, Riverside, on injured tomato fruit, coll. Mr. French, ix.1924, 2; 3.4 mi. N.E. of Gilman Springs, on Artemisia absinthum, coll. D.R. Miller, 9.iii.1963, 2; Ventura County, on purslane, coll. A.H. Call, 1924, 2; Yolo County, Davis, on Sida hereaceae, coll. M.F. Benson, D.R. Miller & H.L. McKenzie, 2.vii.1964, 2; Florida, Alachua County, Gainesville, on Ambrosia actinifolia, coll. C.Q. Drake, vii.1918, 2. Material at CSCA: U.S.A., Arizona, Navajo County, Show Low, host not recorded, coll. D.M. Tuttle, 24.vii.1964, 1; California:- Fresno County, Fresno, on Lycopersicon sp., coll. G. Gaffney, 19.viii.2004, 3; Imperial County, Salton City, on Mangifera indica, coll. J. Barcinas, 9.i.1994, 3; Inyo County, Independence, on Ambrosia sp., coll. R.P. Allen, 28.vii.1965, 2; Lassen County, Milford, on Nicotiana sp., coll. Ogden, Pfeiffer & Rulofson, 15.vii.1992, 6; Modoc County, Cedarville, on roots of composite, coll. T.R. Haig, 21.v.1962, 1; Monterey County, King City, Oasis Road, on Vitis vinifera, coll. L. Bettiga, 19.v.2008, 9; Florida, Broward County, Fort Lauderdale, host not recorded, coll. B. Steinberg, 5.vi.1988, 3; ex Texas, intercepted at California, Needles Inspection Station, on Gossypium hirsutum, coll. K.R. Hansen, 16.viii.1985, 1; Utah, Tooele County, Knolls, on roots of Hermazoni a sp., coll. R.F. Wilkey, 10.vii.1964, 1; Washington, Walla Walla County, Walla Walla, on Achillea sp., coll. S. Nakahara, 29.v.1966, 4. Canada, British Columbia, White Lake, on Centaurea diffusa, coll. T.R. Cuda, 25.ix.1989, 2. Guam, Tamuning, on spider lily, coll. R. Quitugua, 18.xii.2006, 1. Israel *, Jordan valley, Patza’el, 32°02′39″N, 35°26′57″E, 270 m, on Capsicum annuum, coll. Z. Mendel, viii.2013, 3. Bet-Dagan, host not specified, coll. unknown, 15.vii.2007, 1;?ex Israel via U.S.A., New York, intercepted at California, San Francisco County, San Francisco, on Artemisia dracunculus, coll. D. Fulford, 22.x.2007, 1. Iran, Shiraz, on Vitis vinifera, coll. V. Roumi, viii.2009, 5. Brazil, Rio de Janeiro, on Citrus sp., coll. M. Rose, 13.iii.1973, 3. American Samoa *, Tutuila I., Ottoville, Tafuna, on Hymenocallis littoralis, coll. M. Schmaedick, 22.xi.2013, 6. Ex Australia via U.S.A., Oregon, intercepted at California, Hornbrook Inspection Station, on Citrus sinensis fruit, coll. Pastell, 16.viii.2000, 1. Japan *, Okinawa, Ginowan, Ganeko, on Ruellia brittoniana, coll. H. Tanaka, 30.viii.2011, 2. Turkey *, Adana, originally collected from Reşatbey on Gazania rigens, coll. A.F. Çalışkan, 27.ix.2012, subsequently laboratory reared on Solanum tuberosum, 2 measured specimens killed 19.vii.2013. Material at RUMF: Japan, Honshu, Yamaguti Pref., Yamaguti, reared on Solanum melongena, coll. Y. Higashiura,?. i.2011, 3.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 0.008 |
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".