CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
EN/FR
Search
Menu
Research dossier · Science & Nature

Ctenophthalmus

genus of insects

Specimen drawers, botanical folios and brass scientific instruments under study light
Science and natureInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionMar 24, 2026
Entity authorityQ10462977 ↗
Source-derived summary

Ctenophthalmus is a genus of fleas in the family Hystrichopsyllidae.

Multiple species in this genus are responsible for transmission of Yersinia pestis in Russia and north Asia.

References

External links

Media related to Ctenophthalmus at Wikimedia Commons

"Genus Ctenophthalmus (Kolenati, 1856), Taxonomy". Archived from the original on 7 February 2017.

Editorial summary

Begin with the source’s own compact description: “Ctenophthalmus” is genus of insects. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through Ctenophthalmus, genus and insects, not as a finished interpretation.

Editorial reviewA practical orientation to terminology and classification, particularly when read beside dated observations, specimens or technical literature. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—1856, 2017—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. For this dossier, Ctenophthalmus, genus and insects is the immediate research focus.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

The phrase “genus of insects” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.

Evidence profile

Datasets, specimens, observations and peer-reviewed methods provide the appropriate test for the technical claims summarized here. The source revision retrieved here is dated Mar 24, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q10462977. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1856 and 2017.

Critical limits

A general summary may omit uncertainty, sample limits or methodological disagreement that is explicit in the technical record. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Check terminology, classification and the date of the cited evidence. Scientific names and technical consensus can change while older records retain historical value.

Best used for
  • Current terminology
  • Classification context
  • Finding cited technical literature
Verify next

Primary datasets, specimen catalogues, standards bodies and the most recent peer-reviewed literature.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Ctenophthalmus”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Ctenophthalmus primary sources, Ctenophthalmus archive and Ctenophthalmus research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Ctenophthalmus”?
  2. Has classification or technical consensus changed since the cited source?
  3. Is the terminology current, historical or disputed?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “Ctenophthalmus” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.