Drifting bumble bee (Hymenoptera: Apidae) workers in commercial greenhouses may be social parasites
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Commercial greenhouses require high densities of managed bumble bee (Bombus occidentalis Greene, 1858 and Bombus impatiens Cresson, 1863) colonies to pollinate crops such as tomatoes (Lycopersicon esculentum Miller). We examined drifting, a behavioural consequence of introducing closely aggregated colonies into greenhouse habitats, to determine possible explanations for observed drifting frequencies. Bee drift is normally associated with increased individual mortality and disease transfer between colonies. In this study, individual bees frequently drifted into and remained within foreign colonies. More drifting bees were found in colonies with higher worker and brood populations and greater pollen stores. Increased intracolony aggressive interactions were not associated with a higher number of drifting bees. Drifting bees had a significantly greater number of mature eggs in their ovaries than did resident worker bees residing in colonies hosting drifters, suggesting that drifting could potentially increase the fitness of individual worker bees and may not be solely a function of disorientation and (or) nectar robbing. Taken together, our results suggest that drifting of workers into foreign colonies within greenhouses may demonstrate a predisposition to social parasitism. This selfish worker reproduction challenges our previous understanding of social insect societies as being cooperative societies.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".