MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210496329 · doi:10.3390/biology11020245

Comparison of the External Morphology of the Sternal Glands for Hornets in the Genus Vespa

2022· article· en· W4210496329 on OpenAlexaff
Heather R. Mattila, Gard W. Otis, Johan Billen, Lien Thi Phuong Nguyen, Satoshi Shimano

Bibliographic record

VenueBiology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInsect and Arachnid Ecology and Behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersAsahi Glass FoundationVietnam Academy of Science and TechnologyNational Foundation for Science and Technology DevelopmentNational Geographic Society
KeywordsBiologyMorphology (biology)GenusZoologyHymenopteraAnatomyExocrine glandSecretionEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many social wasps in the speciose subfamilies Polistinae and Vespinae have two sternal glands—the van der Vecht gland and the Richards gland—that are not found in other insects. The presence of these glands has been confirmed in only 6 of 22 hornet species (genus Vespa) and images of their fine structure have not been produced. Here; we characterize the external morphology associated with both glands for workers of nine Vespa species using scanning electron microscopy. All hornets had similar gland configurations; although gland-associated external features differed among species. Scaled for size, glands were equivalently sized for the giant hornets (V. mandarinia and V. soror) and their closest phylogenetic relatives (V. tropica and V. ducalis). Relative size of gland-associated structures was reduced by half for V. simillima; V. velutina; and V. affinis workers. The remaining species (V. crabro and V. analis) had intermediately sized features. Differences among species in external gland structure were best explained by selective pressures related to predatory behavior, rather than defense of nests against ants. However, a lack of information about how Vespa workers use their van der Vecht and Richards glands limits a comparative interpretation of the function of their external gland morphology.

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 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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.190
Threshold uncertainty score0.151

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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.288 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiologySame topicInsect and Arachnid Ecology and BehaviorFrench-language works237,207