Thermal ecology and behaviour of the nomadic social forager <i>Malacosoma disstria</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study examines whether the nomadic social caterpillar Malacosoma disstria Hübner (Lepidoptera: Lasiocampidae) can thermoregulate despite the lack of a tent, and evaluates the role of thermoregulation in directing the colony's behaviour. The presence of a radiant heat and light source (i.e. a lamp in the laboratory experiments and the sun in the field observations) enables caterpillar colonies to increase body temperature by basking (remaining still under a heat source) and this is only effective when caterpillars cluster in groups. Body temperatures achieved when basking in a group coincide with the temperatures at which the development rate is maximal for this species. Indeed, in the laboratory experiments, the presence of a lamp results in higher growth rates, confirming that thermoregulation is an advantage to group living. When a radiant heat/light source is provided at a distance from the food in the laboratory, caterpillars behave to maximize thermal gains: colonies move away from the food to bivouac (i.e. group together and remain still on a silk mat) under the lamp, spend more time on the bivouac and cluster in a more cohesive group. Thermal needs thus influence habitat selection and colony aggregation. Malacosoma disstria relies on developing rapidly, despite low seasonal temperatures, aiming to benefit from springtime high food quality and low predation rates; however, unlike others in its genus, it does not build a tent but instead exhibits collective nomadic foraging (i.e. the whole colony moves together between temporary resting and feeding sites). In this species, collective thermoregulatory behaviour is not only possible and advantageous, but also drives much of the colony's behaviour, in large part dictating the temporal and spatial patterns of movement. These findings suggest that thermoregulation may be an important selection pressure keeping colonies together.
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".