Parydra (Chaetoapnaea) arctica Clausen & Cook 1971
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Parydra (Chaetoapnaea) arctica Clausen & Cook, 1971 (Figs. 2, 22, 30–33) Parydra (Chaetoapnaea) arctica Clausen & Cook 1971: 69–71; type-locality: „ Canada, NWT, Salmita Mines, 64°05'N., 111°15'W.“; holotype ♂ [CNC, Clausen & Cook 1971]. Material examined: CANADA: 1♂, 7.viii.1950, Northwest Territories, Cambridge Bay [69.116°N 105.059°W], paratype, leg. E. H. N. Smith; FINLAND: 1♂, without date, Esbo [60.195°N 24.767°E], leg. R. Frey, coll. MZH; 1♀, without date, Torneå [65.8°N 24.1°E], leg. R. Frey, det. Zatwarnicki, coll. MZH; 1♂, without date, Utsjoki [69.909°N 27.028°E], leg. R. Frey, coll. MZH; 1♂, 21.vii.2020, Lapland, Kortteenniska e Torvinen [67.198°N 26.663°E]; NORWAY: 1♀, 20.vii.2004, Svartness [70.372°N 31.012°E], det. Zatwarnicki. Diagnosis: A small black legged Parydra with the face and frons strongly dusted, gena broad, a light brown haltere knob and without obvious wing markings is a good candidate for P. arctica. However, it is difficult to distinguish P. arctica from P. nigritarsis and P. kahanpaai. Males of P. arctica can be clearly distinguished by their terminalia. Especially the postgonite which is blunt and laterally pointed (Fig. 30) and examination of the male terminalia is recommended for reliable identification. The only known distinguishing character for females is that the tip of the frontal triangle is almost as densely dusted as the frontal vita. Distribution in Europe: To date the only published European records are from Finland (Krivosheina 2000), Norway (Zatwarnicki & Andersen 2023) and Sweden (Hellquvist et al. 2024). Outside of Europe this Holarctic species has been recorded from northern Canada (Clausen & Cook 1971) and Siberia (Krivosheina 1989, 1995). Biology: Both records made by the author are from barely overgrown sections of the banks of small streams. Flight time based on the available records is from July to August.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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".