MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4416442835 · doi:10.1101/2025.11.20.689504

Social attraction mediates collective foraging decisions in invasive hornets

2025· preprint· en· W4416442835 on OpenAlexaff
Mathilde Lcaombrade, Charlotte Doussot, Blandine Mahot‐Castaing, Jacques Gautrais, Loïc Goulefert, Edgar Ferrieu, Amelie Bourg, Denis Thiéry, Fanny Vogelweith, Mathieu Lihoreau

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInsect and Arachnid Ecology and Behavior
Canadian institutionsCanadian Nautical Research Society
FundersAgence de la transition écologique
KeywordsForagingPopulationSocial animalAttractionPriming (agriculture)Social cueExploitFish <Actinopterygii>Predation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Group-living animals commonly use social information to better locate and exploit resources. In many insects, birds, fish and mammals, this can lead to collective foraging decisions by which animals share a single food source among alternatives of equal qualities. Here, we report collective foraging decisions in a social wasp, the yellow-legged hornet Vespa velutina nigrithorax , a major predator of bees and other terrestrial invertebrates invasive across Asia, Europe and North America. When given a choice between two identical liquid food sources (feeders or traps containing sugar solutions), wild hornets distributed asymmetrically on the two options, and this phenomenon was more frequent as group size increased. Priming one of the food sources with dead hornets predictably biased the collective choices towards this particular option, irrespective of whether the dead insects were conspecifics or hornets from a closely related species. Inter-attraction in yellow-legged hornets is thus a passive and non-specific mechanism, possibly mediated by visual or chemical cues displayed by dead hornets. This collective behaviour may provide important foraging advantages to hornets invading new territories and bring new perspectives for population control.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.242 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicInsect and Arachnid Ecology and Behavior→French-language works237,207→