Interaction and integration among behaviors of adult Drosophila in nature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Living in environments whose ecologies vary in periods as short as 24 h is a challenge for animals as Drosophila species that inhabit pear and apple orchards. These orchards have sunny and shady sections. The size and shape of these habitats change daily according to the position of the sun in the sky. Sunny areas are related to dryness and water loss, and shady places have lower temperatures and higher humidity. The presence of heterospecific flies may lead to competition for space and food. In sunny habitats we did not find adult Drosophila. In shady sections we found conspecific groups D. melanogaster, D. simulans, D. immigrans, D. subobscura, and the Chilean endemic D. pavani perched on grasses and herbs at 8-10 cm from fruits that had fallen on the ground. In the fruits, 99% of the adults were females and they were not grouped. The way in which daily changes in the size and shape of shady habitats together with the presence of heterospecific adults influence the selection of places to live is poorly understood in Drosophila. Our experiments show that adults of the five species prefer dark areas. The experimental results show that the odors of each species: i) influence conspecifics to select similar perch sites and decrease mobility, and ii) increase mobility in heterospecific adults and modify their perch site preferences. Attractions between conspecifics, the repulsions between species, and preferences for shaded areas matter in choosing a place to live in the five Drosophila species. These behaviors seem to have evolved as coordinated routines, contributing to the coexistence of the five Drosophila species in the apple and pear orchards examined.
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 | 0.000 | 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".