MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2096817282 · doi:10.1098/rsbl.2010.0757

The evolution of eusociality in allodapine bees: workers began by waiting

2010· article· en· W2096817282 on OpenAlexaff
Michael P. Schwarz, Simon M. Tierney, Sandra M. Rehan, Luke B. Chenoweth, Steven J. Cooper

Bibliographic record

VenueBiology Letters · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEusocialityBiologyForagingSocial evolutionBroodEcologySocialityDominance hierarchyDominance (genetics)CasteBiological dispersalCooperative breedingSocial animalNest (protein structural motif)ZoologyEvolutionary biologyHymenopteraDemographyAggressionSociologyPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Understanding how sterile worker castes in social insects first evolved is one of the supreme puzzles in social evolution. Here, we show that in the bee tribe Allodapini, the earliest societies did not entail a foraging worker caste, but instead comprised females sharing a nest with supersedure of dominance. Subordinates delayed foraging until they became reproductively active, whereupon they provided food for their own brood as well as for those of previously dominant females. The earliest allodapine societies are, therefore, not consistent with an 'evo-devo' paradigm, where decoupling of foraging and reproductive tasks is proposed as a key early step in social evolution. Important features of these ancestral societies were insurance benefits for dominants, headstart benefits for subordinates and direct reproduction for both. The two lineages where morphologically distinct foraging worker castes evolved both occur in ecosystems with severe constraints on independent nesting and where brood rearing periods are very seasonally restricted. These conditions would have strongly curtailed dispersal options and increased the likelihood that dominance supersedure occurred after brood rearing opportunities were largely degraded. The origins of foraging castes, therefore, represented a shift towards assured fitness gains by subordinates, mediated by the dual constraints of social hierarchies and environmental harshness.

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 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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.705
Threshold uncertainty score0.636

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations63
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiology LettersSame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207