Blacklegged ticks, <i>Ixodes scapularis</i> , reduce predation risk by eavesdropping on communication signals of <i>Formica oreas</i> thatching ants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ticks spend most of their life inhabiting leaf litter and detritus where they are protected from sun but preyed upon by ants. Ants secrete chemical communication signals to coordinate group tasks such as nest defence. Ticks that avoid ant semiochemicals—as indicators of ant presence—would reduce predation risk by ants. We tested the hypotheses that: (i) chemical deposits from the thatching ant Formica oreas deter blacklegged ticks, Ixodes scapularis , (ii) deterrent semiochemicals originate from the ants' poison and/or Dufour's gland(s), and (iii) tick-deterrent semiochemicals serve as alarm-recruitment pheromone components in F. oreas . In two-choice olfactometer bioassays, filter paper soiled with ant chemical deposits significantly deterred female and male ticks. Poison and Dufour's gland extracts deterred ticks in combination but not alone. Gas chromatographic-mass spectrometric analyses of gland extracts revealed formic acid as the major constituent in the poison gland and eight hydrocarbons as constituents in the Dufour's gland. Synthetic formic acid and hydrocarbons deterred ticks only when combined. F. oreas workers sprayed both formic acid and hydrocarbons when distressed. A synthetic blend of these compounds elicited alarm-recruitment responses by F. oreas in behavioural bioassays. All results combined indicate that ticks eavesdrop on the ants' communication system.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".