Spiteful Soldiers and Sex Ratio Conflict in Polyembryonic Parasitoid Wasps
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The existence of spiteful behaviors remains controversial. Spiteful behaviors are those that are harmful to both the actor and the recipient, and they represent one of the four fundamental types of social behavior (alongside selfishness, altruism, and mutual benefit). It has generally been assumed that the conditions required for spite to evolve are too restrictive, and so spite is unlikely to be important. This idea has been challenged in recent years, with the realization that localized competition can relax the conditions required for spite to evolve. Here we develop a theoretical model for a prime candidate for a spiteful behavior, the production of the sterile soldier caste in polyembryonic wasps. Our results show that (a) the biology of these soldiers is consistent with their main role being to mediate conflict over the sex ratio and not to defend against competitors and (b) greater conflict will occur in more outbred populations. We also show that the production of the sterile soldier caste can be classed as a spiteful behavior but that, to an extent, this is merely a semantic choice, and other interpretations such as altruism or indirect altruism are valid. However, the spite interpretation is useful in that it can lead to a more natural interpretation of relatedness and facilitate the classification of behaviors in a way that emphasizes biologically interesting differences that can be empirically tested.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".