Carry-over effects of resource competition and social environment on aggression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Aggressive behavior is common in many species and is often adaptive because it enables individuals to gain access to limited resources. However, aggression is also highly plastic and the degree of plasticity could be influenced by factors such as resource limitation and the social environment. In this study, we examined how the effects of social experience and resource limitation could persist to affect future aggressive interactions. Using naturally inbred strains of Drosophila melanogaster that differ in aggressiveness, we manipulated the level of available resources by varying fly density (two treatments: high and low per capita resources) and group composition by varying strain frequency (five treatments: homogeneous strains, or mixed at 1:3, 1:1 or 3:1 ratios of the more aggressive to less-aggressive strain). For each treatment group, we measured aggression before and after flies were placed through a 4-day period of fixed resources. There was no consistent effect of resource competition on aggression. Instead, changes in aggression depended on resource availability in combination with group composition. In homogeneous groups made up of only one strain, all males became more aggressive following the fixed-resource period, regardless of fly density. In mixed-strain treatments at high density, we observed plastic shifts in aggression of males from both strains, but the direction of plastic responses depended on social composition. Our results show that aggression may not only be influenced by the intensity of previous competitive experiences caused by resource limitation, but also through social effects caused by the composition of the group.
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".