Sexual pair-formation in a cicada mediated by acoustic behaviour of females and positive phonotaxis of males
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The functions of female song found in a few cicadas have rarely been studied. In the cicada Subpsaltria yangi we investigated the acoustic behaviour and signal structure of songs produced by females, the phonotaxis of males, and mate choice, as well as the selective pressure imposed on this species by predators. Pair-formation in S. yangi occurs when males signal, females respond, then males move to signaling females, which is opposite to that in most other cicadas where females move to calling males. Females only mate once and are sexually unreceptive after copulation. Most males mate once, but ~25% mate multiply. Females display little direct evidence of mate preference or choice of males, and all mate encounters led to a successful mating. Only males are attacked by a robber fly, Philonicus albiceps, while flying to females. This imposes strong selection on males - only males who can evade predators mate. Males are also attracted to human simulations of female calls. This behaviour exposes the mating system to impacts from anthropogenic noise systems which could disrupt mating activity of this species. Our results improve the understanding of mate choice/competition in cicadas, and are valuable for future studies of the evolution of sound communication in the Cicadoidea.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".