MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4280496304 · doi:10.1038/s41598-022-12281-7

Reduced neural investment in post-reproductive females of the bee Ceratina calcarta

2022· article· en· W4280496304 on OpenAlexafffund
Sarah Jaumann, Sandra M. Rehan, Kayla Schwartz, Adam R. Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsForagingBiologyZoologyMushroom bodiesInsectOffspringReproductive successBrain sizeForageEcologyDemographyMedicinePregnancyPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many insects show plasticity in the area of the brain called the mushroom bodies (MB) with foraging and social experience. MBs are paired neuropils associated with learning and memory. MB volume is typically greater in mature foragers relative to young and/or inexperienced individuals. Long-term studies show that extended experience may further increase MB volume, but long-term studies have only been performed on non-reproductive social insect workers. Here we use the subsocial bee Ceratina calcarata to test the effect of extended foraging experience on MB volume among reproductive females. Ceratina calcarata females forage to provision their immature offspring in the spring, and then again to provision their adult daughters in the late summer. We measured the volume of the MB calyces and peduncle, antennal lobes (AL), optic lobes (OL), central complex (CX), and whole brains of three groups of bees: newly emerged females, reproductive females in spring (foundresses), and post-reproductive mothers feeding their adult daughters in late summer. Post-reproductive late summer mothers had smaller MB calyces and ALs than foundresses. Moreover, among late mothers (but not other bees), wing wear, which is a measure of foraging experience, negatively correlated with both MB and OL volume. This is contrary to previously studied non-reproductive social insect workers in which foraging experience correlates postiviely with MB volume, and suggests that post-reproductive bees may reduce neural investment near the end of their lives.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.176 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific Reports→Same topicPlant and animal studies→French-language works237,207→