MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Understanding the Relationship Between Brain Gene Expression and Social Behavior: Lessons from the Honey Bee

2012· review· en· W2132740022 on OpenAlex

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

VenueAnnual Review of Genetics · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInsect and Arachnid Ecology and Behavior
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsBiologyHoney beeGene expressionGeneHeredityPhenotypeRepertoireBehavioral syndromeGeneticsTranscriptomeRegulation of gene expressionEvolutionary biologyNeuroscienceEcologyPsychologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Behavior is a complex phenotype that is plastic and evolutionarily labile. The advent of genomics has revolutionized the field of behavioral genetics by providing tools to quantify the dynamic nature of brain gene expression in relation to behavioral output. The honey bee Apis mellifera provides an excellent platform for investigating the relationship between brain gene expression and behavior given both the remarkable behavioral repertoire expressed by members of its intricate society and the degree to which behavior is influenced by heredity and the social environment. Here, we review a linked series of studies that assayed changes in honey bee brain transcriptomes associated with natural and experimentally induced changes in behavioral state. These experiments demonstrate that brain gene expression is closely linked with behavior, that changes in brain gene expression mediate changes in behavior, and that the association between specific genes and behavior exists over multiple timescales, from physiological to evolutionary.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.951
Threshold uncertainty score0.722

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.198
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.197 · 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