Revision of the nearctic species of the Cicindela sylvatica group (Coleoptera: Cicindelidae) / by Timothy Gordon Spanton. --
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Interspecific and intraspecific variation of C. longilabris Say \nand C. nebraskana Casey were studied by means of discriminant analysis \nof morphometric data and univariate analysis of qualitative characters \nof adult specimens. The geographic variation of male and female genitalic \nstructures of C. longilabris and C. nebraskana was studied and \ncompared with that of the Palearctic species of the sylvatica group: \nC. sylvatica Linnaeus, C. granulata Gebler, C. japana Motschulsky, \nC. gemmata Faldermann, C. soluta Dejean and C. lacteola Pallas. Soil \nassociations of the two Nearctic species were investigated. \nC. longilabris is a boreal and montane forest species \noccurring on Podzolic soils in eastern North America and Luvisolic and \nBrunisolic soils of coniferous forests in western North America as well \nas in boreal forest-grassland transition areas. Three subspecies are \nrecognized: c. l. longilabris Say, found across the boreal zone from \nNewfoundland and New England to Alaska, C. l. laurentii Schaupp, in the \nRocky mountain areas of the United States, including isolated populations \nin northern New Mexico, eastern Arizona, northern Arizona and southwestern Utah, and c. l. perviridis Schaupp, found in the Sierra Nevada \nand Cascade Mountains of California, Oregon and Washington. An area of \nhybridization occurs in southwestern Alberta, southeastern British \nColumbia, eastern Washington, Idaho and northwestern Montana where the \nthree subspecies converge geographically. C. nebraskana is a monotypic \nspecies which occurs on Chernozemic soils of prairie grasslands and \ngrassland-forest transition zones of western North America. \nThe three year life cycle of C. longilabrls is described. \nTwo winters are passed in the larval stage and one winter in the adult \nstage before mating and oviposition occur. The egg stage and first, \nsecond and third stage larvae of c. longilabris are described. \nA reconstructed phylogeny is presented in which three species \npairs are evident, C. soluta-C. gemmata, C. sylvatica-C. granulata, \nand C. longilabris-C. nebraskana with C. japana being most closely \nrelated to the soluta-gemmata sibling species, and C. lacteola having \nbeen derived earlier in the evolution of the whole group.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".