MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3110684401 · doi:10.1038/s41598-020-79075-7

Natural history of social and sexual behavior in fruit flies

2020· article· en· W3110684401 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect behavior and control techniques
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersOntario Ministry of Research and InnovationNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Arizona
KeywordsCourtshipAggressionMatingBiologyEcologyNatural historyZoologyDemographyPsychologySocial psychologySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The past 2 decades have seen fruit flies being widely adopted for research on social behavior and aggression. This fruitful research, however, has not been well tied to fruit flies' natural history. To address this knowledge gap, I conducted a field study. My goal was to inform future research conducted in artificial surroundings, and to inspire new investigations that can rely more heavily on fruit flies' actual natural behavior. My two main novel findings were first, that flies in the field showed significant sociability, as they formed social groups rather than dispersed randomly among fruits of similar quality. Second, males showed fair levels of aggression towards each other as indicated by a lunging rate of 17 per hour, and lower rates of wing threat and boxing. Courtship was the most prominent activity on fruits, with females rejecting almost all males' advances. This resulted in an estimated mating rate of 0.6 per female per day. Flies showed a striking peak of activity early in the mornings, even at cold temperatures, followed by inactivity for much of the day and night. Flies, however, handled well high temperatures approaching 40 °C by hiding away from fruit and concentrating activity in the cooler, early mornings. My field work highlights a few promising lines of future research informed by fruit flies' natural history. Most importantly, we do not understand the intriguing dynamics that generate significant sociability despite frequent aggressive interactions on fruits. Males' responses to female rejection signals varied widely, perhaps because the signals differed in information content perceived by flies but not humans. Finally, flies tolerated cold early mornings perhaps owing to fitness benefits associated with increased mating and feeding opportunities at this time. Flies were adept at handling very high temperatures under the natural daily temperature fluctuations and availability of shelters, and this can inform more realistic research on the effects of global warming on animals in their natural settings.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.925
Threshold uncertainty score0.168

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.207 · 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