Environmental and social influences of foraging behaviour and maternal investment with a note on the mating frequency of the eastern carpenter bee, Xylocopa virginica
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis studies how weather and sociality influence the foraging effort input costs of brood production, and that multiple mating contributes to low-group relatedness and non-kin sociality in the Eastern carpenter bee, Xylocopa virginica. In Chapter 2, using a natural experiment which included a drought and three normal weather years, we found that mothers foraged more in a drought but had smaller offspring than most normal weather years. Droughts conditions lead to fewer flowers, and it follows that less abundant food resources should lead to a trade-off of more work for fewer resources. Indeed, we found that during the drought, the size of pollen loads that mothers carried were smaller than in every other normal year showcasing the impact of the drought. In Chapter 3, I assess the foraging effort in both solitary and social foundresses showing that the foraging input costs are much higher for social primary foundresses than for solitary foundresses. That foraging costs are higher for social foundresses is atypical compared to most literature, which usually suggests that solitary behaviour is more costly than social behaviour. Lower social costs implies that social behaviour should become the more predominant phenotype in the population, however, in our Niagara population there was always a mix of solitary and social phenotypes. A mix of solitary and social phenotypes suggests balanced selection for both phenotypes. That the social phenotype is more costly is interesting and we suggest that social primary foundresses must feed their nestmates throughout the foraging period. Nestmate feeding has been documented in this bee before, so it seems like the most plausible explanation. In Chapter 4, we assessed the mating frequency of female carpenter bees using behavioural observations and microsatellite markers. We found using both sets of data that X. virginica mates multiply. Multiple mating has direct implications on the genetic relatedness of already low relatedness in non-kin social groups. Non-kin sociality is understudied, and we hope that these findings spur additional studies.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".