MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6950732196 · doi:10.5683/sp3/n7xboj

Data for: On the use of kinship and familiarity associated social information in mediating Drosophila melanogaster oviposition decisions

2024· dataset· en· W6950732196 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueBorealis · 2024
Typedataset
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKinshipKin recognitionDrosophila melanogasterForagingDrosophila (subgenus)Public informationOffspringKin selectionInclusive fitness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Decisions about where to lay one’s eggs are of great importance, as the specific conditions in one’s offspring developmental environment may be critical to their subsequent survival and lifetime reproductive success. Information produced by conspecifics can potentially be useful to an individual’s oviposition decision-making process as this “social information” may provide an energetically cheaper means of assessing site suitability rather than acquiring it personally. However, not all conspecific public information may be equally beneficial, and cues produced by kin may be especially valuable as they might signal uniquely suitable microenvironments, as well as suggesting other fitness advantages resulting from improved foraging success and/or a decreased risk of competition/cannibalism amongst kin compared to sites where unrelated conspecifics are located. Using the fruit fly, Drosophila melanogaster, we explored whether public information use is associated with kin-based egg-laying decisions. Kinship is potentially recognized in several ways, including cues produced by environmentally-associated gut microbiota of the egg-laying flies, and so we also explored whether there were biases in how focal females interacted with cues from individuals that differed in both their genetic relatedness, as well as their environmental “familiarity.” In a series of inter-connected assays, we examined the egg-laying behaviour of females that interacted with a choice of potential egg-laying substrates that differed in the manner of their prior conspecific exposure. Not only do female flies lay more eggs on sites that had cues left behind by conspecifics compared to unexposed substrates, but they also exhibited strong biases in their oviposition patterns that was consistent with being sensitive to the kinship status of the prior substrate occupants. Furthermore, while females did not apparently discriminate between sites differing in prior egg abundance, they did exhibit bias in their egg-laying based on the population of origin of the demonstrator female. The basis of the kinship categorization by ovipositing females appears to be based on phenotypes that reflect true genetic relatedness that are neither mimicked nor disrupted by the conspecific’s developmental environment. These results highlight the potential usefulness of D. melanogaster as a model to understand the evolution of social behaviour in the expression of decision-making. The data here represent behavioural and reproductive data collected in four inter-related experiments (counts of visits, number of offspring). The files are saved in .csv tables.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.242
Threshold uncertainty score0.810

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2420.076

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 head0.168
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.168 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBorealis→French-language works237,207→