130,529 research outputs found
Gonatocerus (Lymaenon) mediterraneus Donev & Triapitsyn, sp. n.
No full textGonatocerus (Lymaenon) mediterraneus Donev & Triapitsyn, sp. n. (Figs 8–10) Type material. Holotype: female (Fig. 8) on slide [PUPB] labeled: 1. “ 20.07 – 10.08.00, Creet [sic] Island, Iraklio, Greece, Leg. D. Petrov”; 2. “Fam. Mymaridae Gonatocerus mediterraneus sp. n.? holotype ♀ Det. At. Donev”; 3. [red] “ Gonatocerus (Lymaenon) mediterraneus Donev & Triapitsyn HOLOTYPE ♀”. The collecting locality is Heraklion (Iraklion), Crete Island, Crete, Greece; the specimen was captured 20.vii– 10.viii. 2000 in a Malaise trap. The holotype is in fair condition although insufficiently cleared, mounted laterally. Paratype: GREECE. CRETE, Crete Island, Heraklion, 10–20.vii. 2000, D. Petrov [1 ♀ on slide, PUPB]. The paratype lacks one fore wing. Description. FEMALE (holotype and paratype). Body length 1107–1218 µm. Head, mesosoma and apical 0.75 or so of gaster brown; remainder of gaster, antenna, and legs light brown or golden brown to brown. Antenna (Figs 8, 9) with radicle 0.26–0.29 × total length of scape, rest of scape 3.1–3.2 × as long as wide, faintly scuptured; pedicel longer than F 1 and F 2 together; F 1 and F 2 shorter than following funicle segments, F 3 a little longer than F 2, F 4 longer than F 3 and shorter than F 8 when lacking mps but as long as F 8 when bearing a mps, F 5 as long as F 6 and a little longer than F 7, and notably longer than F 8, F 5, F 6, and F 7 about 2 × as long as wide; mps on F 4 (usually 0 but 1 on one antenna in the holotype), F 5 (2), F 6 (2), F 7 (2), F 8 (2); clava with 9 mps, 3.5–3.6 × as long as wide, a little shorter than combined length of F 6 –F 8. Mesosoma (Fig. 8). Propodeum laterally slightly convex. Fore wing (Fig. 8) 2.6–2.9 × as long as wide; longest marginal seta 0.16–0.2 × maximum wing width; disc completely bare behind submarginal vein, with just a few setae behind the middle and apex of marginal vein (cubital row of setae composed of just a few setae, not extending to base of marginal vein, thus leaving a bare area behind base of marginal vein, Fig. 10), and densely setose elsewhere except for a very small, narrow bare area just beyond stigmal vein. Hind wing (Fig. 8) 18–19 × as long as wide; disc with a few scattered setae; longest marginal seta about 2.0– 2.3 × maximum wing width. Metasoma. Gaster (Fig. 8) longer than mesosoma. Ovipositor occupying about 0.9 × length of gaster, not or just barely exserted beyond its apex; ovipositor 2.2 × length of mesotibia. Measurements (µm) of the holotype. Body 1107; head 191; mesosoma 412; gaster 554; ovipositor 541. Antenna: radicle 51; rest of scape 124; pedicel 58; F 1 25; F 2 24; F 3 28; F 4 30 (42); F 5 57; F 6 57; F 7 52; F 8 42; clava 145 (148). Fore wing 935: 320; longest marginal seta 67. Hind wing 680: 36; longest marginal seta 83. MALE. Unknown. Hosts. Unknown. Diagnosis. In Triapitsyn (2013), G. mediterraneus keys to the same couplet as G. (Lymaenon) karakum Triapitsyn (known from Italy and Turkmenistan), the only other described Palaearctic species of G. (Lymaenon Walker) that has the fore wing with the cubital row of setae not extending to the base of the marginal vein (Fig. 10). Females of G. mediterraneus differ from those of G. karakum by having 2 mps on F 5 and F 6 (without mps on F 5 and F 6 in G. karakum), and also by a notably longer ovipositor, which is 2.2 × as long as mesotibia (1.3–1.4 × as long as mesotibia in G. karakum) (Triapitsyn 2013). The following couplet is thus modified accordingly in Triapitsyn’s (2013: 39–40) key to females of G. (Lymaenon) to accommodate G. mediterraneus: 6 (3) Fore wing with cubital row of setae not extending to base of marginal vein (Fig. 10) [and Fig. 101 in Triapitsyn (2013)]... 6 ’ - Fore wing with cubital row of setae extending to base of marginal vein........................................... 7 6 ’(6) F 5 and F 6 without mps...................................................... G. (Lymaenon) karakum Triapitsyn - F 5 and F 6 each with 2 mps................................. G. (Lymaenon) mediterraneus Donev & Triapitsyn sp. n.Published as part of Triapitsyn, Serguei V., Donev, Atanas D. & Huber, John T., 2013, Descriptions of two new species of Gonatocerus (Hymenoptera: Mymaridae) from southeastern Europe, pp. 277-286 in Zootaxa 3718 (3) on pages 281-284, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3718.3.4, http://zenodo.org/record/22413
Mymar ramym Donev & Triapitsyn, sp. n.
No full textMymar ramym Donev & Triapitsyn, sp. n. (Figs 1–5) Mymar sp.: Triapitsyn & Berezovskiy 2001: 5 (as an undescribed species from Kyrgyzstan). Type material. Holotype female [PUPB] on slide: BULGARIA, Blagoevgrad Region, 41 ° 53 ’ 16 ’’N 23 ° 31 ’ 16 ’’E, 790 m, 19.v. 1988, A. Donev. Paratypes: BULGARIA, same data as the holotype [1 male on slide, PUPB]. KYRGYZSTAN: Chuy Province, Suusamyr Valley, W. side of Kichi-Korumdy River, 42 ° 13 ’ 28 ’’N 73 ° 41 ’ 31 ’’E, 2291 m, 16.viii. 1998, C.H. Dietrich (vacuum, collector’s code 98.009.02) [1 male on point, UCRC]. Naryn Province, Alabuga River, 25 km W. of Baetov, 41 ° 17 ’ 47 ’’N 74 ° 39 ’ 20 ’’E, 1700 m, 16.vii. 2000, C.H. Dietrich (vacuum, collector’s code 00.025.01) [1 male on point, UCRC]. Talas Province, Dzheruj River bridge (near Boo-Terek), 42 ° 26 ’ 47 ’’N 72 ° 45 ’00’’E, 1000 m, 16.vi. 1999, C.H. Dietrich (vacuum, collector’s code 99.49.02) [1 female on slide and 1 female on point, UCRC]. Description. FEMALE (holotype and paratypes). Body length 862–914 µm. Body and appendages mostly yellowish brown, with following parts a little darker (brown): trabeculae, F 1 –F 3 and clava, tip of ovipositor sheath, and distal tarsomere of all legs; F 4 –F 6 notably lighter than F 1 –F 3. Head. Face with setae distributed as in Fig. 2. Antenna (Fig. 1). Radicle short, fused with scape; scape long, with constriction in the middle; pedicel about as long as F 1; F 2 the longest funicle segment, much longer than combined length of F 3 –F 6 plus clava, and also much longer than scape (in the holotype, ratio of length of F 2:clava = 2.2: 1, and ratio of F 2:F 3 –F 6 = 2.4: 1; and in the slide-mounted paratype, ratio of length of F 2:clava = 2.6: 1, and ratio of F 2:F 3 –F 6 = 2.7: 1); remaining funicle segments short (F 3 the shortest, F 6 the longest); all funicle segments without longitudinal sensilla; clava with 7 subapical longitudinal sensilla. Mesosoma (Fig. 4). Pronotum entire, with at least 6 setae; mesoscutum with narrow notauli and lateral lobes each with one seta; scutellum subrectangular, wider than long, longer than mesoscutum, scutellar placoid sensilla closer to posterior margin of scutellum, not far apart from each other; each axilla with one seta; dorsellum about 0.2 x as long as scutellum; propodeum smooth, a little shorter than scutellum, with a pair of widely separated setae about midway between anterior and posterior margins of propodeum. Wings (Fig. 3). Forewing disc about 0.4 x total length of wing, length:width ratio of disc about 3.8: 1 in the holotype (about 3.5: 1 in the slide-mounted paratype), disc with 48 long marginal setae in the holotype and 54 long marginal setae in the slide-mounted paratype; venation reaching level of 5 th long marginal seta on anterior margin; basal (hyaline) part of disc bare except for 1 row of setae closer to anterior margin; apical dark spot almost 0.5 x length of disc, with its apical half setose anterior to the complete submedian row of setae. Hind wing 0.27–0.28 x length of forewing, with a narrow, distinct extension (stub) beyond hamuli but without a membrane or long setae on stub apex (only with a few very short setae along stub length); ratio of post hamuli stub length to entire hind wing length 0.37–0.38: 1 in the holotype and 0.3–0.4: 1 in the paratypes. Metasoma (Fig. 4). Petiole smooth, about 6.4 x as long as wide, its posterior half or so a little wider than its anterior half, about 2 x as long as metacoxa; gaster longer than mesosoma; ovipositor about 0.8 x length of gaster, not or just barely exserted beyond gastral apex. Measurements of the holotype (µm). Body: 914; mesosoma: 305; petiole: 152; gaster: 335; ovipositor: 274. Antenna: scape: 251; pedicel: 61; F 1: 67; F 2: 325; F 3: 28; F 4: 30; F 5: 37; F 6: 49; clava: 146. Forewing: total length: 1189; disc length:width: 488: 128; longest marginal seta: 415. Hind wing length: 329. Legs (given as coxa, femur, tibia, tarsus): fore: 67, 305, 299, 390; middle: 67, 305, 390, 360; hind: 104, 396, 476, 396. MALE (paratypes). Body length 595–825 µm. Most non-sexually dimorphic morphological features similar to female except as follows. Antenna with flagellum brown; all flagellar segments more or less subequal in length, much longer than wide. Foretarsus 1.24 x as long as metatarsus. Forewing disc 4.13 x as long as wide, with 38 long marginal setae in the slide-mounted paratype. Hind wing (Fig. 5) with post hamuli stub length quite variable, its ratio to entire hind wing length 0.29–0.41: 1. Gaster notably shorter than mesosoma. Diagnosis. Mymar ramym sp. n. keys to couplet four in Triapitsyn & Berezovskiy (2001), together with the Palaearctic species M. pulchellum Curtis and M. maritimum Triapitsyn & Berezovskiy. Females of the new species differ from females of all other Mymar species of the pulchellum group (i.e., those with the hind wing abbreviated in females to a short stub just beyond the hamuli and without a membrane or long apical seta(e)) by the relative length of the post hamuli stub to the entire length of the hind wing: at least 0.3: 1 in M. ramym but at most 0.2: 1 in M. pulchellum or M. maritimum (the stub is particularly short in the extralimital species, M. schwanni Girault). Pintureau & Iglesias Calvin (1996) show quite a long stub (their fig. 2 C) in M. pulchellum but only the tip of the male hind wing is illustrated, and the relative length of the post hamuli stub to the entire length of the hind wing was not given. The common, widespread M. taprobanicum Ward differs from M. ramym in having a very long, filamentous (yet membraneless) post hamuli bearing usually 1 (sometimes 2) long, apical setae (Triapitsyn & Berezovskiy 2001). We attribute minor morphological differences between the female holotype (from Bulgaria) and the female paratypes (from Kyrgyzstan), particularly in the proportions of the female antennal segments and the wings, to intraspecific variation. Etymology. The specific name (a noun in apposition) is a reverse spelling of the generic name. Comments. The opportunity is taken by the junior author to correct some errors in Triapitsyn & Berezovskiy (2001). Fig. 15 should replace Fig. 11 in couplet two of their key (p. 5, bottom line). Also, after that publication the junior author examined many additional specimens of Mymar from the Holarctic region. Mymar venustum Girault rev. stat. is reinstated here as a valid species from previous synonymy under M. pulchellum by Annecke (1961). Triapitsyn & Berezovskiy (2001), who doubted the validity of that synonymy, indicated the difference in the proportions of the female antennal segments between M. pulchellum and M. venustum. In both M. maritimum and M. pulchellum the antennal scape of the female antenna is shorter than F 2, whereas in M. venustum it is about as long as F 2. Further, it was discovered that in females of M. maritimum and M. venustum the hind wing is abbreviated as in M. pulchellum, but males have a narrow membrane with a few setae as in M. ermak Triapitsyn & Berezovskiy or M. regale Enock. Thus, records of males of M. regale from Primorskiy Kray, Russia, by Triapitsyn & Berezovskiy (2001) were incorrect because these are in fact the previously unknown males of M. maritimum. The earlier record of M. regale from Primorskiy Kray by Pintureau & Iglesias Calvin (1996), who unfortunately did not indicate sex of the specimen(s), needs to be verified as a similar misidentification is likely. Mymar cincinnati Girault syn. n. is also synonymized here under M. venustum because they are just opposite sexes of the same Nearctic species with the pronounced sexual dimorphism of the hind wing described above. See Triapitsyn & Berezovskiy (2001) for information on their type specimens – both were described from single holotypes, a male and a female, respectively.Published as part of Donev, Atanas D. & Triapitsyn, Serguei V., 2010, A new species of Mymar (Hymenoptera: Mymaridae) from the Palaearctic region, with nomenclatural changes in the genus, pp. 64-68 in Zootaxa 2644 on pages 64-67, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.19864
The D-optimal design of blocked and split-plot experiments with mixture components.
No full textSo far, the optimal design of blocked and split-plot experiments involving mixture components has received scant attention. In this paper, an easy method to construct efficient blocked mixture experiments in the presence of fixed and/or random blocks is presented. The method can be used when qualitative variables are involved in a mixture experiment as well. It is also shown that orthogonally blocked mixture experiments are highly inefficient compared to D-optimal designs. Finally, the design of a split-plot mixture experiment with process variables is discussed.Design; Fixed and random blocks; Minimum support design; Mixture experiment; Optimal; Optimal design; Orthogonal blocking; Process variables; Processes; Qualitative variables; Split-plot experiment; Variables;
A new species of Mymar (Hymenoptera: Mymaridae) from the Palaearctic region, with nomenclatural changes in the genus
No full textDonev, Atanas D., Triapitsyn, Serguei V. (2010): A new species of Mymar (Hymenoptera: Mymaridae) from the Palaearctic region, with nomenclatural changes in the genus. Zootaxa 2644: 64-68, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.19864
Descriptions of two new species of Gonatocerus (Hymenoptera: Mymaridae) from southeastern Europe
No full textTriapitsyn, Serguei V., Donev, Atanas D., Huber, John T. (2013): Descriptions of two new species of Gonatocerus (Hymenoptera: Mymaridae) from southeastern Europe. Zootaxa 3718 (3): 277-286, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3718.3.
FIGURES 1, 2 in A new species of Mymar (Hymenoptera: Mymaridae) from the Palaearctic region, with nomenclatural changes in the genus
No full textFIGURES 1, 2. Mymar ramym female (paratype from near Boo-Terek, Talas, Kyrgyzstan). 1. Antenna. 2. Head (frontal view).Published as part of Donev, Atanas D. & Triapitsyn, Serguei V., 2010, A new species of Mymar (Hymenoptera: Mymaridae) from the Palaearctic region, with nomenclatural changes in the genus, pp. 64-68 in Zootaxa 2644 on page 65, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.19864
Social-economic Inequalities and Risk Groups Vulnerability in SEE Countries
No full textDonev D, Laaser U. Social-economic Inequalities and Risk Groups Vulnerability in SEE Countries. In: Donev D, Pavlekovic G, Zaletel Kragelj L, eds. Health promotion and disease prevention: A Handbook for Teachers, Researchers, Health Professionals and Decision Makers. Programmes for Training on Research in Public Health for South Eastern Europe. Vol 4. Lage: Jacobs; 2007: 806.The aim of this module is to explore the connection between certain social and economic factors and conditions as determinants of vulnerability and social exclusion of some risk groups and possible main changes in the health status of the population in South Eastern European countries within the last almost twenty years of post-communist transition. The available data regarding the demographics, economic and health statistics of the morbidity and causes of death, as well as the expected influence of various social-economic factors to certain risk and vulnerable groups and their possible health consequences, were analyzed. Based on the observations and conclusions, directions and suggestions are given for appropriate strategies and programmes directed toward mitigating and overcoming the adverse conditions and problems related to the health status and health protection of the vulnerable groups and the total population in the SEE countries
MeSH term explosion and author rank improve expert recommendations
No full textInformation overload is an often-cited phenomenon that reduces the productivity, efficiency and efficacy of scientists. One challenge for scientists is to find appropriate collaborators in their research. The literature describes various solutions to the problem of expertise location, but most current approaches do not appear to be very suitable for expert recommendations in biomedical research. In this study, we present the development and initial evaluation of a vector space model-based algorithm to calculate researcher similarity using four inputs: 1) MeSH terms of publications; 2) MeSH terms and author rank; 3) exploded MeSH terms; and 4) exploded MeSH terms and author rank. We developed and evaluated the algorithm using a data set of 17,525 authors and their 22,542 papers. On average, our algorithms correctly predicted 2.5 of the top 5/10 coauthors of individual scientists. Exploded MeSH and author rank outperformed all other algorithms in accuracy, followed closely by MeSH and author rank. Our results show that the accuracy of MeSH term-based matching can be enhanced with other metadata such as author rank
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
No full textThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
"Closing the R&D Gap, Evaluating the Sources of R&D Spending"
No full textBoth spending and tax policies have been implemented in the United States with the goal of stimulating private sector research and development (R&D). Karier questions whether current R&D policy, especially the research and experimentation tax credit, can contribute to closing the gap between nondefense expenditures on R&D in the United States and such expenditures in other countries, such as Japan and Germany. He also explores possible changes to our current R&D policy to make it more effective.
- …
