EVIDENCE FOR SONIC COMMUNICATION IN THE GERMAN COCKROACH (DICTYOPTERA: BLATTELLIDAE)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Our objective was to test the hypothesis that late-instar nymph, male, and (or) female German cockroaches,Blattella germanica(L.), use sonic signals for intraspecific communication. A digital-recording system was assembled that consisted of a computer equipped with data-acquisition hardware and software, microphones sensitive to sonic and ultrasonic frequencies, and speakers capable of emitting sonic and ultrasonic sound. Sound was repeatedly recorded from groups of five nymphs, five virgin males, or five virgin females. Click-type sounds were commonly present in recordings from nymphs, and consisted of sound pulses of about 10-ms duration and peak frequencies of 7, 9, 11, and 14 kHz. Similar "clicks" were found in recordings from females. In replicated binary choice arena bioassays with individual laboratory-reared insects, played-back "clicks" from nymphs or females or computer-generated artificial clicks attracted nymphs but not males or females. These results provide the first evidence that sonic signals are part of the complexB.germanicacommunication system.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".