Multiple foundresses and multiple hosts: The influences of kinship and host quality on group reproduction in a quasi‐social parasitoid
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract For most foraging parasitoids, it is disadvantageous to share a host. In the genus Sclerodermus females can benefit from being among groups of foundresses, which cooperate in brood production over several weeks, but intra‐group conflicts also arise. We provided groups of females, with varying degrees of relatedness, with two hosts, in varying host size combinations, and observed behaviours and performance. Foundress death, likely caused by host defensive behaviour, was common during the initial phase, especially when foundresses were closer kin. At least one host was always oviposited on and in 60% of cases both were. When host size differed and only one was oviposited on, there was no preference for larger hosts. Oviposition was most rapid when both hosts were large and females were non‐siblings. Offspring production was greatest when broods developed on two large hosts and was not influenced by foundress kinship. Aggregation of foundresses across hosts may be promoted by variation in host size and by kinship. Foundresses were most commonly observed alone on a host but also shared hosts; all females on a single host was uncommon. Foundresses commonly moved between the hosts, most frequently when both hosts were large. Movement was not, overall, influenced by kinship. Overall, the behavioural repertoire of Sclerodermus indicates that they are able to assess and exploit locally available alternative reproductive opportunities and may attune some of their decisions according to inter‐group relatedness.
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 | 0.000 | 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".