The preparation of centipedes for microscopical examination with particular reference to the Geophilomorpha
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Traditional methods of clearing and mounting geophilomorph centipedes have proved to be unsatisfactory. Both 60 per cent lactic acid and lactophenol, which are often used for temporary mounts, do not clear specimens adequately and cause slight swelling of the appendages, altering their shape. In addition, lactophenol contains glycerol which is hygroscopic and therefore takes up some water from the air, which is an additional disadvantage. Many workers, for example Attems and Verhoeff, made permanent mounts, macerating specimens by heating them in 10 per cent potassium hydroxide, washing, then dehydrating in a series of alcohols. They were cleared in xylene and mounted in Canada balsam. Potassium hydroxide, however, damages poorly sclerotized structures as well as the internal organs which are important for classification (for example the structure of the coxal organs) and also for assessing the maturity of the specimen (presence of spermatozoa in the seminiferous tubules of males and spermathecae of females). In addition specimens treated with potassium hydroxide become deformed under the pressure of the cover glass when mounted.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.003 |
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".