Natal Dispersal Patterns of a Subsocial Spider <i>Anelosimus</i> cf. <i>jucundus</i> (Theridiidae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Species that alternate periods of solitary and social living may provide clues to the conditions that favor sociality. Social spiders probably originated from subsocial‐like ancestors, species in which siblings remain together for part of their life cycle but disperse prior to mating. Exploring the factors that lead to dispersal in subsocial species, but allow the development of large multigenerational colonies in social species, may provide insight into this transition. We studied the natal dispersal patterns of a subsocial spider, Anelosimus cf. jucundus, in Southeastern Arizona. In this population, spiders disperse from their natal nests in their penultimate and antepenultimate instars over a 3‐mo period. We tracked the natal dispersal of marked spiders at sites with clustered vs. isolated nests. We found that most spiders initially dispersed less than 5 m from their natal nests. Males and females, and spiders in patches with different densities of nests, dispersed similar distances. The fact that both sexes in a group dispersed, the lack of a sex difference in dispersal distance, and the relatively short distances dispersed are consistent with the hypothesis that natal dispersal results from resource competition within the natal nest, rather than inbreeding avoidance in competition for mates. Additionally, an increase in the average distance dispersed with time and with the number of spiders leaving a nest suggests that competition for nest sites in the vicinity of the natal nest may affect dispersal distances. The similar distances dispersed in patches with isolated vs. clustered nests, in contrast, suggest that competition among dispersers from different nests may not affect dispersal distances.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".