MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7103896064 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.17511221

Andrena (Micrandrena) libanica Wood 2025, sp. nov.

2025· article· W7103896064 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMountPopulationMeaning (existential)Head (geology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

3.1.2.13.Andrena(Micrandrena)libanicaWood sp. nov. Figures 10, 15 J, 20 A, M Etymology. From the Latin name for Mount Lebanon, “ Libanus ”, with the feminine suffix - ica, thus “ libanica ” meaning “ of Mount Lebanon ”, given the observed geographic distribution of the species. Diagnosis. Andrena libanica is a typical member of the A. minutula species group with the propodeal triangle entirely rugose (Fig. 10 C, G). Within this group, it belongs to the species with more or less the apical half of the clypeus polished and shining (Fig. 10 B, F), the facial foveae relatively narrow along their entire length (equaling the diameter of a flagellum, Fig. 10 B), the head overall relatively elongate, around 1.1 times wider than long (Fig. 10 B, F), and the terga distinctly punctate. These are the species around A. rugulosa Stöckhert, which in the Levant and Cyprus are found in mountainous regions usually above 1200 m and include A. libanica, A. alshaykh Pisanty sp. nov. and A. lindbergella Pittioni. The female of Andrena libanica can be separated from all three comparison species due to the punctation of the terga, which have the punctures of the tergal discs separated by <0.5–0.5 puncture diameters, these punctures clearly defined against the underlying sculpture (Figs 10 D, 15 J). In A. rugulosa, the tergal punctures are slightly sparser, separated by 0.5–1 puncture diameters, but obscure and difficult to see, disappearing into the underlying sculpture. In A. alshaykh and A. lindbergella, the tergal punctation is sporadic, with punctures separated by 0.5–3 puncture diameters (Fig. 15 K, L). As in the females, the males can be recognised as close to A. alshaykh and A. lindbergella due to the clearly punctate terga combined with the clypeus smooth and strongly punctured in the apical ½ (Figs 10 F, H, 20 A). Males of A. rugulosa are very similar, but in this species the terga are slightly more obscurely punctate, with punctures separated by 0.5–1 puncture diameters and not so strongly differentiated from the underlying shagreen (in A. libanica with punctures clearly distinct against the shagreened and weakly shining terga, punctures separated by <0.5–0.5 puncture diameters, Figs 10 H, 20 A), and the scutal punctation slightly disappears into the strongly microreticulate and dull scutum (in A. libanica with the scutum more finely microreticulate, weakly shining, punctures remaining distinct across the entire disc, Fig. 10 G). Male A. libanica can be separated from A. alshaykh and A. lindbergella due to the tergal punctation and genital capsule. The genital capsule has the outer margin of the gonostyli straight, without a kink in the inner or outer margins (in A. alshaykh with a noticeable kink in the inner and outer margins of the gonostyli; Fig. 20 L, M), and the terga are strongly and densely punctate, with punctures separated by <0.5–0.5 puncture diameters (in A. lindbergella with the tergal punctures slightly but noticeably sparser, separated by 0.5–1 puncture diameters; Fig. 20 A, B). Description. Female. Body length: 6–7 mm. — Integumental colour: Body black. Flagellomeres 3–10 ventrally slightly lightened by presence of greyish scales. Legs black, apical tarsomeres slightly lightened orange-brown. Wings hyaline, stigma dark brown, venation dark orange (Fig. 10 A). Terga including marginal areas uniformly dark (Fig. 10 D). — Pubescence: Body hair relatively sparse. Face and gena with short whitish hairs, becoming light brown on vertex. Facial foveae filled with light brown hairs (Fig. 10 A – C). Dorsal mesosomal surfaces with short chestnut to dark brown hairs, these densely plumose, almost subsquamous (Fig. 10 A, C). Mesepisternum with longer white plumose hairs (Fig. 10 A). Propodeal corbicula incomplete, dorsoposterior fringe composed of moderately long plumose brownish hairs. Corbicular surface with abundant long light brown hairs. Leg hair whitish to light brown. Flocculus incomplete. Femoral and tibial scopae well-developed, femoral scopa composed of simple white hairs, tibial scopa composed of simple hairs, white ventrally, brown dorsally, tibial scopa thus bicoloured (Fig. 10 A). Tergal discs with very short pale hairs, visible only in profile. Marginal areas of terga 2–4 with apical hair fringes laterally, hairs emerging from base of marginal area and apical rim, thus apical fringes are formed from two rows of hairs; apical fringes widely interrupted, not forming complete bands. Terminal fringe dark brown (Fig. 10 A, D). — Head: 1.1 times broader than long (Fig. 10 B). Mandibles bidentate, moderately crossing apically. Labral process small, narrowly trapezoidal, slightly longer than wide to as long as wide. Clypeus weakly domed, smooth to polished in apical ¼ to ½, finely shagreened in basal ½, punctation distinct, punctures separated by 0.5–3 puncture diameters, densest basally (Fig. 10 B). Facial foveae narrow, occupying ¼ space between compound eye and lateral ocellus, uniformly narrow, equaling width of flagellum, ventrally extending to just below lower margin of antennal insertions, very slightly separated from inner margin of compound eye. Flagellomere 1 slightly exceeding 2 + 3, shorter than 2 + 3 + 4. Distance of fovea from lateral ocellus 2.2 ocellus diameters (Fig. 10 B, C). Ocelloccipital distance equals 0.6 ocellus diameter. Vertex distinctly angulate but not carinate (Fig. 10 C). — Mesosoma: Dorsolateral angle of pronotum rounded. Scutum and scutellum finely shagreened and shining, scutum densely and deeply punctate, punctures separated by 0.5–1 puncture diameters (Fig. 10 C). Mesepisternum finely reticulate. Propodeum with dense network of raised reticulation, propodeal triangle lacking lateral carinae, internally with dense network of strongly raised rugae with shining interspaces (Fig. 10 C). Hind pretarsal claw with small inner tooth. Recurrent vein 1 meeting submarginal cell 2 near its middle. Nervulus interstitial (Fig. 10 A). — Metasoma: Tergal discs finely shagreened, weakly shining, densely and deeply punctate, punctures separated by <0.5–0.5 puncture diameters. Punctures on disc of tergum 1 most coarse, almost confluent, becoming slightly finer on subsequent terga, punctures not extending onto marginal areas. Tergal margins slightly depressed (Fig. 10 D). Pygidial plate rounded, surface flat, with granular shagreen. — Male. Body length: 5–6 mm. — Integumental colour: As in female (Fig. 10 E, H). — Pubescence: Body hair longer and denser than in female, but more finely and less densely plumose, all pubescence white. Face, gena, and vertex with long white hairs, longest equaling length of scape (Fig. 10 E – G). Dorsal mesosomal surfaces with long erect white hair, long hairs present also on mesepisternum and propodeum (Fig. 10 E, G). Leg hair white (Fig. 10 E). Tergal discs with very short pale hairs, visible only in profile. Marginal areas of terga 2–4 with apical hair fringes laterally, hairs emerging from base of marginal area and apical rim, thus apical fringes are formed from two rows of hairs; apical fringes widely interrupted, not forming complete bands. Terminal fringe whitish-brown (Fig. 10 H). — Head: Clypeus structurally as in female, with clypeal shagreen uniformly weak, clypeus weakly shining over entire surface. Process of labrum very small, trapezoidal, slightly broader than long. Flagellomere 1 exceeding length of 2, shorter than 2 + 3; flagellomere 2 short, subsquare (Fig. 10 F). Ocelloccipital distance subequal to diameter of lateral ocellus (Fig. 10 G). — Mesosoma: As in female, with exception of slightly stronger scutal sculpture, becoming dull (Fig. 10 G). — Metasoma: As in female (Fig. 10 H). — Genitalia and hidden sterna: Dorsal gonocoxal lobes weakly but distinctly developed, forming short points. Gonostyli in dorsal view depressed below level of gonocoxites, dorsal surface subtly concave basally, apically becoming flattened and spatulate, inner margin slightly raised. Penis valves moderately broad basally, occupying ½ space between gonostyli, narrowing subapically to narrow point (Fig. 20 M). Sternum 8 simple, columnar, apex rounded to truncate, ventral surface covered with spreading fan of pale golden hairs. Distribution. Andrena libanica is known from remnant cedar forest habitats in the central part of the Mount Lebanon mountain chain. It has been collected between 1726–1885 m above sea level, making it a high altitude species. Previously reported from Lebanon as A. rugulosa (Boustani et al. 2021) Flight period. Collected in mid-May; presumably extending also into June. Flower records. Collected from Brassicaceae (Alyssum, Thlaspi). Type material. HOLOTYPE: LEBANON ● 1 ♀; Mount Lebanon, Chouf Biosphere Reserve, Barouk trails; 33.6858°N 35.6986°E; 1772 m a. s. l.; 16 May 2019; Sample 1579; BOLD accession number WPATW 973-22; RMNH RMNH.INS.1714343. – PARATYPES: LEBANON ● 1 ♂; Mount Lebanon, Chouf Biosphere Reserve, Barouk trails; 1885 m a. s. l.; 16 May 2019; RMNH RMNH.INS.1714344 ● 1 ♂; Chouf Biosphere Reserve, Barouk trails; 1772 m a. s. l.; 16 May 2019; TJWC ● 1 ♀, 1 ♂; Mount Lebanon, Chouf Biosphere Reserve, Maaser Gate; 1726 m a. s. l.; 16 May 2019; RMNH RMNH.INS.1714345 to RMNH.INS.1714346 ● 1 ♀; ibid.; TJWC.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.007

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.

Opus teacher head0.055
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.177 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)→Same topicPlant and animal studies→French-language works237,207→