Sexual conflict and social networks in bed bugs: effects of social experience
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Living in groups can provide essential experience that improves sexual performance and reproductive success. While the effects of social experience have drawn considerable scientific interest, commonly used behavioral assays often do not capture the dynamic nature of interactions within a social group. Here, we conducted 3 experiments using a social network framework to test whether social experience during early adulthood improves the sexual competence of bed bugs (Cimex lectularius) when placed in a complex and competitive group environment. In each experiment, we observed replicate groups of bed bugs comprising previously socialized and previously isolated individuals of the same sex, along with an equal number of standardized individuals of the opposite sex. Regardless of whether we controlled for their insemination history, previously isolated males mounted and inseminated females at significantly higher rates than previously socialized males. However, we found no evidence of social experience influencing our other measures of sexual competence: proportion of mounts directed at females, ability to overcome female resistance, and strength of opposite-sex social associations. We similarly did not detect effects of social experience on our female sexual competence metrics: propensity to avoid mounts, rate of successfully avoiding mounts, opposite-sex social association strength, and rate of receiving inseminations. Our findings indicate that early social experience does not improve sexual competence in male and female bed bugs.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 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 it