MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2076792288 · doi:10.1093/beheco/ari057

Learning affects mate choice in female fruit flies

2005· article· en· W2076792288 on OpenAlex
Reuven Dukas

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBehavioral Ecology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyCourtshipMate choiceSexual selectionContext (archaeology)Genetic algorithmZoologyMatingInsectSelection (genetic algorithm)Evolutionary biologyEcologyArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Learning in the context of mate choice can influence sexual selection and speciation. Relatively little work, however, has been conducted on the role of learning in the context of mate choice, and this topic has been mostly ignored in insects even though insects have served as a prime model system in research on sexual selection and incipient speciation. Extending recent work indicating apparently adaptive learning in the context of sexual behavior by male fruit flies (Drosophila melanogaster), I tested for the effect of learning on mate choice by female fruit flies. Compared to young virgin females that experienced courtship by large males, young virgin females that experienced courtship by small males were more likely to mate with small and large males in a test conducted a day after the experience phase. These results, which are the first clear empirical demonstration of learning in the context of mate choice by female insects, lay the foundation for research on the role of learning in insect sexual selection and speciation. Key words: courtship, Drosophila, fruit flies, learning, mate choice, speciation. [Behav Ecol 16:800–804 (2005)] Research in the past few decades has established that learning influences mate choice by vertebrates (e.g., Collins, 1995; Domjan, 1992; Magurran and Ramnarine, 2004). It is still unclear, however, to what extent learning affects mate choice in invertebrates. Conceptually, there is no reason to assume that learning is not involved in insect mate choice. However, no single unambiguous experiment has demonstrated that learning influences mate choice in female insects, and only one study has documented learning affecting mate choice in female spiders (Schizocosa uetzi) (Hebets, 2003). Quantifying the role of learning in mate choice by female insects is important because learning may be pivotal in processes determining sexual selection and incipient speciation

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.096
Threshold uncertainty score0.920

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.211 · 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