Giant hornet (<i>Vespa soror</i>) attacks trigger frenetic antipredator signalling in honeybee (<i>Apis cerana</i>) colonies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Asian honeybees use an impressive array of strategies to protect nests from hornet attacks, although little is understood about how antipredator signals coordinate defences. We compared vibroacoustic signalling and defensive responses of Apis cerana colonies that were attacked by either the group-hunting giant hornet Vespa soror or the smaller, solitary-hunting hornet Vespa velutina . Apis cerana colonies produced hisses, brief stop signals and longer pipes under hornet-free conditions. However, hornet-attack stimuli—and V. soror workers in particular—triggered dramatic increases in signalling rates within colonies. Soundscapes were cacophonous when V. soror predators were directly outside of nests, in part because of frenetic production of antipredator pipes, a previously undescribed signal. Antipredator pipes share acoustic traits with alarm shrieks, fear screams and panic calls of primates, birds and meerkats. Workers making antipredator pipes exposed their Nasonov gland, suggesting the potential for multimodal alarm signalling that warns nestmates about the presence of dangerous hornets and assembles workers for defence. Concurrent observations of nest entrances showed an increase in worker activities that support effective defences against giant hornets. Apis cerana workers flexibly employ a diverse alarm repertoire in response to attack attributes, mirroring features of sophisticated alarm calling in socially complex vertebrates.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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".