Social environment: Trait, context and agent for selection in a meta‐population
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Focus: Formica, V., Donald, H., Marti, H., Irgebay, Z., Brodie III, E. Social network position experiences more variable selection than weaponry in wild subpopulations of forked fungus beetles. Journal of Animal Ecology, 90, 168-182, https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2656.13322. That social network traits can exhibit consistent-individual differences among individuals and confer a fitness benefit or cost is increasingly well-established. However, how selection-natural or sexual-affects those social traits and at what scale remains an open question. In this Special Feature, Formica and colleagues employ a meta-population of forked fungus beetles to test and contrast whether sexual selection on social network traits contrasted to morphological traits occurs at the local (soft) or global (hard) scales. The authors demonstrate that morphological traits are largely under hard directional positive selection, whereas social traits are under soft and variable selection. The findings are compelling and raise interesting discussion of multi-level selection and the evolution of social traits in a meta-population.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".