Brain Gene Expression of Foraging Behavior and Social Environment in<i>Ceratina calcarata</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Rudimentary social systems have the potential to both advance our understanding of how complex sociality may have evolved and our understanding of how changes in social environment may influence gene expression and cooperation. Recently, studies of primitively social Hymenoptera have greatly expanded empirical evidence for the role of social environment in shaping behavior and gene expression. Here, we compare brain gene expression profiles of foragers across social contexts in the small carpenter bee, Ceratina calcarata. We conducted experimental manipulations of field colonies to examine gene expression profiles among social contexts including foraging mothers, regular daughters, and worker-like dwarf eldest daughters in the presence and absence of mother. Our analysis found significant differences in gene expression associated with female age, reproductive status, and social environment, including circadian clock gene dyw, hexamerin, and genes involved in the regulation of juvenile hormone and chemical communication. We also found that candidate genes differentially expressed in our study were also associated with division of labor, including foraging, in other primitively and advanced eusocial insects. Our results offer evidence for the role of the regulation of key developmental hormones and circadian rhythms in producing cooperative behavior in rudimentary insect societies.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".