MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2946915604 · doi:10.1101/652677

Division of labor increases with colony size, regardless of group composition, in the social spider <i>Stegodyphus dumicola</i>

2019· preprint· en· W2946915604 on OpenAlexaff
Colin M. Wright, James L. L. Lichtenstein, C. Tate Holbrook, Justin Pretorius, Noa Pinter‐Wollman, Jonathan N. Pruitt

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2019
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInsect and Arachnid Ecology and Behavior
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersDivision of Integrative Organismal SystemsUniversity of California, Santa BarbaraNational Institutes of HealthNational Science Foundation
KeywordsEusocialityDivision of labourBiologySpiderGroup (periodic table)PredationComposition (language)Social groupEcologyFunction (biology)Diversity (politics)Social psychologyEvolutionary biologyPsychologyHymenopteraSociologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A bstract Division of labor (DOL) is a pattern of work organization where individual group members specialize on different tasks. DOL is argued to have been instrumental for the success of eusocial insects, where it scales positively with group size both within and across species. Here we evaluate whether DOL scales positively with group size in a society of cooperative breeders (social spiders) and whether this pattern is impacted by the behavioral composition of the group. To do this we engineered experimental colonies of contrasting group sizes and behavioral compositions and tracked individuals participation in two colony maintenance tasks: prey capture and web construction. As with some eusocial insects, we found that larger groups exhibited DOL metrics up to 10-times greater than smaller groups, conveying that individuals specialize on particular tasks more in larger colonies. This scalar relationship did not differ by a groups behavioral composition, though groups composed of only bold spiders exhibited reduced DOL relative to all-shy or mixed groups. We also found that per capita participation in prey capture, but not web construction, decreased as a function of group size. This suggests that individuals in larger groups may save energy by reducing their involvement in some tasks. Together, our results convey that similar scalar relationships between DOL and group size can emerge both inside and outside the eusocial insects. Thus, theory developed for understanding DOL in eusocial societies may inform our understanding of group function in a larger swath of animal social diversity than is broadly appreciated. S ignificance S tatement Division of labor (DOL) has been a major area of research in the eusocial insects for decades, and is argues to underlie their ecological success. Only recently have other social arthropods, such as social spiders, been considered for studies concerning DOL. Given their smaller colony sizes, and absence of morphological castes, DOL was not thought to be an important facet of spider societies. However, we found that spider societies do indeed exhibit high degrees of DOL that is positively correlated to colony size, as seen in many eusocial insects. These findings suggest that the scalar relationship between group size and social organization seen in social insects is likely generalizable to a larger diversity of social taxa, and that cooperative breeders can show levels of division of labor equaling or exceeding those of eusocial systems evaluated to date.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.214 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicInsect and Arachnid Ecology and BehaviorFrench-language works237,207