Protective Geometry and Reproductive Anatomy as Candidate Determinants of Clutch Size Variation in Pentatomid Bugs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AbstractMany animals lay their eggs in clusters. Eggs on the periphery of clusters can be at higher risk of mortality. We asked whether the most commonly occurring clutch sizes in pentatomid bugs could result from geometrical arrangements that maximize the proportion of eggs in the cluster's interior. Although the most common clutch sizes do not correspond with geometric optimality, stink bugs do tend to lay clusters of eggs in shapes that protect increasing proportions of their offspring as clutch sizes increase. We also considered whether ovariole number, an aspect of reproductive anatomy that may be a fixed trait across many pentatomids, could explain observed distributions of clutch sizes. The most common clutch sizes across many species correspond with multiples of ovariole number. However, there are species with the same number of ovarioles that lay clutches of widely varying size, among which multiples of ovariole number are not overrepresented. In pentatomid bugs, reproductive anatomy appears to be more important than egg mass geometry in determining clutch size uniformity. In addition, our analysis demonstrates that groups of animals with little variation in ovariole number may nonetheless lay a broad range of clutch shapes and sizes.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".