Do monarch butterflies use polarized skylight for migratory orientation?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To test if migratory monarch butterflies use polarized light patterns as part of their time-compensated sun compass, we recorded their virtual flight paths in a flight simulator while the butterflies were exposed to patches of naturally polarized blue sky, artificial polarizers or a sunny sky. In addition, we tested butterflies with and without the polarized light detectors of their compound eye being occluded. The monarchs' orientation responses suggested that the butterflies did not use the polarized light patterns as a compass cue, nor did they exhibit a specific alignment response towards the axis of polarized light. When given direct view of the sun, migratory monarchs with their polarized light detectors painted out were still able to use their time-compensated compass: non-clockshifted butterflies, with their dorsal rim area occluded, oriented in their typical south-southwesterly migratory direction. Furthermore, they shifted their flight course clockwise by the predicted approximately 90 degrees after being advance clockshifted 6 h. We conclude that in migratory monarch butterflies, polarized light cues are not necessary for a time-compensated celestial compass to work and that the azimuthal position of the sun disc and/or the associated light-intensity and spectral gradients seem to be the migrants' major compass cue.
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 | 0.000 | 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".