Early studies on Cuban weevils and their contribution to modern research in beetle evolution and island biogeography
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The foundations for present knowledge of the Cuban weevil fauna (Coleoptera, Curculionoidea) were laid between the 1820s and 1870s. We review the relevant entomological activities of that time, their aftermaths and the challenges for present-day research. The bulk of the early specimens came from two collectors, both Germans. The first, Maximilian Müller, sold his Cuban beetles to the Zoological Museum Berlin in 1828, and species with large series were dispersed subsequently to many contemporary collectors. Unawareness of their common origin and still circulating manuscript names attached during previous studies led to numerous multiple descriptions and synonymy. The second important collector, Johannes Gundlach, was a field biologist with taxidermic skills and who initially also provided specimens to coleopterists and institutions that had funded his journey to America. Together with Felipe Poey, a Cuban naturalist, he intensified his surveys in the 1850s and supplied primarily Auguste Chevrolat and Édouard Guérin-Méneville, two French coleopterists, and Friedrich Riehl, a dedicated and today nearly forgotten private beetle collector in Hesse-Kassel, Germany. Eduard Suffrian, another German coleopterist, described 103 Cuban weevils from these resources, many of them still unidentified. The objective of this paper is to provide guidance to researchers interested in these historical events and working with the Cuban fauna.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".