MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2070783932 · doi:10.1080/08927014.2001.9522772

Waste management in leaf-cutting ants

2001· article· en· W2070783932 on OpenAlexaff
A.N.M. Bot, CR Currie, Adam G. Hart, Jacobus J. Boomsma

Bibliographic record

VenueEthology Ecology & Evolution · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInsect and Arachnid Ecology and Behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAttaBiologyFungusEcologyHymenopteraBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hygienic behaviour is an important aspect of social organisation because living in aggregations facilitates the spread of disease. Leaf-cutting ants face the additional problem of an obligatory dependency on a fungus, which itself is also susceptible to parasites. In this study we provide evidence for the importance of effective waste management in colonies of several Panamanian species of Atta and Acromyrmex leaf-cutting ants, differing in colony size and typical mode of waste accumulation (external or internal dumps). We show that: (1) waste is dangerous for the ants, which die at a higher rate in the presence of waste; (2) waste is dangerous for the mutualistic fungus because waste in field colonies is infected with the specialised fungal parasite Escovopsis; (3) the ants allocate considerable effort to active management of waste in order to reduce these dangers. This management follows a “conveyer belt” model according to which increasingly dangerous tasks are performed by older workers, who are less valuable to their colony. Our approach is kaleidoscopic, as different species of leafcutting ants are unequally suitable for direct observation and experimental manipulation, and suggests that more in depth studies of waste management in attine ants would be highly rewarding.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.260 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations149
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEthology Ecology & EvolutionSame topicInsect and Arachnid Ecology and BehaviorFrench-language works237,207