Female false black widow spiders,<i>Steatoda grossa,</i>recognize webs based on physical and chemical cues
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Females of the false black widow, Steatoda grossa CL Koch (Araneae: Theridiidae), invest significant energy and time weaving cobwebs. We tested the hypothesis that S. grossa females select sites for their webs based, in part, on the presence of con‐ or heterospecific webs, sensing both physical and chemical web cues. In bioassays, we offered female S. grossa a choice between an empty control frame and a frame bearing the web of a conspecific female or that of a female common house spider, Parasteatoda tepidarium CL Koch (Araneae: Theridiidae), recording (1) the time she spent, and (2) the time she spent inactive (a proxy for settling behaviour) on each frame. We also tested the effect of (1) silk micro‐ and macrostructure (wrapped‐up silk or intact web, each semiochemical‐deprived), (2) plastic webs, and (3) silk semiochemical extract on the responses of S. grossa females. Females settled on both con‐ and heterospecific webs and chose test stimuli based on their chemical and physical characteristics. Even plastic webs in cobweb‐like arrangement readily prompted settling behaviour by females. Our results suggest that web architecture, rather than web silk, mediates settling responses by female S. grossa on pre‐existing webs which may provide structural support for a new web and indicate habitat suitability.
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".