Fine- and Broad-Scale Approaches to Understanding the Evolution of Aggression in Crickets
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Male field crickets frequently engage in agonistic contests to establish dominance in social interactions and gain access to mate attraction territories. Crickets (Orthoptera: Gryllidae) are often used as a model taxon to study aggression, but limited documentation of aggression in some cricket species hinders our understanding of its evolutionary costs and benefits. Our study investigated cricket aggression at two scales: the within-species scale for two cricket species, Gryllus assimilis and G. veletis, whose aggression had not been adequately documented and the among-species scale to detect evolutionary patterns in species’ levels of aggression. In both G. veletis and G. assimilis, winners spent more time being aggressive than losers, but they were not larger or heavier. Collectively, our results reveal that G. veletis males are more aggressive than G. assimilis. Male G. veletis had higher aggression scores that male G. assimilis. The majority of G. veletis contests escalated to grappling (a highly aggressive behavior), while less than one quarter of G. assimilis contests escalated to grappling. Further, G. veletis males transitioned between two of the most aggressive behaviors most often while G. assimilis transitioned between two of the least aggressive behaviors most often. We integrate this new information on aggression for G. assimilis and G. veletis with previously documented aggression data for many cricket species to investigate aggression in a broader evolutionary context than previously possible. Within a phylogenetic context, we test the hypothesis that species whose males use burrows from which to call and attract females are more aggressive than species with non-burrowing males. We found evidence consistent with this hypothesis; species with burrowing males tended to be more aggressive than species with non-burrowing males. Together, our study provides fine-scale understanding of aggression in two cricket species and broad-scale evolutionary context for aggression across cricket species.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".