MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7115078297 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.17922369

Illidops planiscapus

2025· article· W7115078297 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicLepidoptera: Biology and Taxonomy
Canadian institutionsCNIB Foundation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHolotypeHost (biology)Identification (biology)Type (biology)Set (abstract data type)Genus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Illidops planiscapus (Tobias, 1976) Apanteles planiscapus Tobias, 1976: 248–249. Species concept Our species concept is based on the information available in Tobias (1976), Tobias & Kotenko (1986) and Papp (1988). → *. Ecology / host information Tentative information provided in the original description, check remarks for more details. Distribution PAL: Russia (DA). Molecular data No molecular data available. Remarks Holotype female, ZIN. Country of type locality: Russia. Type depository inferred from Tobias & Kotenko (1986) by Fernandez-Triana et al. (2020). Tobias provided a tentative host identification for the holotype of I. planiscapus (Tobias, 1976), although he placed a question mark in front of it, so it is rather uncertain. Tobias’ (1976) putative host of this species is Talis quercella ([Denis & Schiffermüller], 1775), a Crambidae, collected from a Poaceae grass in the Caucasus region. This species was transferred to Illidops by Papp (1988), but he already stated that his placement of this species is rather provisional, as he only knew it from its original description. Tobias & Kotenko (1986) did not consider it part of the butalidis group, but rather proposed a new planiscapus group. We consider that the morphology potentially does not match the set of characters diagnostic of the butalidis and suevus groups in the past, and our more current concept of Illidops. The species has a much less angled radial vein (r) and it is not “slanting outwards” (Mason 1981) as it does in most species of Illidops (illustrated in Fig. 242; Tobias & Kotenko 1986: 751, drawing 2). We cannot verify this and we do not have specimens available resembling this species, or access to the holotype. We are not satisfied with the placement of this species in Illidops. However, similar to Papp (1988), we cannot transfer this species to any genus as we have not seen any material and the original description is not sufficient to place it with certainty in any other genus. The species is partially illustrated in Tobias & Kotenko (1986: 751). Original description sensu Tobias (1976) (translated from Russian and with updated morphological terminology) Female. 3.5 mm. Malar distance equal to basal width of mandible; face in upper part with shining tubercle, face height 1.5× its width; distance between tentorial pits 3× distance between tentorial pit to eye margin. Scape strongly compressed from sides so that its length is about same as its width frontally but looking 3× as long when seen laterally; length of F14 and F15 1.3 × their width. Fore wing veins C+SC+R thickened; fore wing vein 1cu-a arising from around basal third of 1st discal cell. Length of metafemur 4.5× its width. T1 more or less barrel-shaped, with its anterior (strongly) and posterior (slightly) narrowed, T1 length equal to T1 greatest width (centrally); T1 and T2 with central impression on its posterior half; ovipositor sheaths slightly longer than half of metatibia. Sculpture. Head mildly punctured, slightly shining, antennal sockets smooth; mesoscutum roughly punctured, without granular microsculpture, shining between punctures, especially on sides; scutellum slightly punctured, shining; mesopleura anteriorly punctured, posteriorly smooth; mesonotum punctured; propodeum roughly wrinkly-punctured, T1 and T2 densely wrinkly-punctured, T3 with soft granular punctures, shining, other tergites slightly rough, shining. Anteromesoscutum with sparse setae, thickened before scutellum and on anterolateral corners of scutellum. Coloration. Femora, except for base and apex of profemur, apex of mesofemur, metafemur medially, tibiae and tarsi of all legs, except brown apex of metatibia, yellowish-brown; veins C+SC+R and pterostigma, except for its brown margins, yellow. The male is unknown. Holotype: female, Dagestan, Makhachkala, steppe grass moth (? Talis quercella Schiff.) on wild grasses, 4 VIII 1972 (Krasova).

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)0.000
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 topicLepidoptera: Biology and TaxonomyFrench-language works237,207