ROVER/SITTER POLYMORPHISM & SEXUAL SELECTION IN FRUIT FLIES
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The fruit fly, Drosophila melanogaster is an exceptional model species for understanding both proximate and ultimate causes of variation in behaviour. Here, we have examined two behaviors: foraging and mating. We discuss these research projects in turn. Almost 40 years ago, the classic foraging behaviour polymorphism rover/sitter was first discovered. Recently, evidence has suggested that the polymorphism is maintained by negative frequency-dependent selection at the larval stage. In two separate experiments we failed to replicate negative frequency-dependence in the survival of rover and sitter larvae. However, we empirically demonstrated differences in burrowing behaviour between the rover and sitter morphs which may be a possible mechanism causing the negative frequency-dependent relationship between the morphs. Future replication of negative frequency-dependence is necessary if we are to understand the maintenance of this polymorphism in nature. We examined mating behaviour from the perspective of two mechanisms of sexual selection: female choice and male-male competition. The study of sexual selection requires careful isolation of these mechanisms. Owing to difficulties in experimental design, studies have yet to properly separate and quantify the individual effects of female choice and male-male competition in fruit flies. Here, we designed a novel arena to assess true female choice. We then used this arena to test the effect of male courtship interference on mating outcomes. However, due to an unforeseen amount of male harassment of females in the arena, we withhold any strong conclusions about the effect of male-male interference behaviour. We also attempt to demonstrate the potential for sexual selection on traits associated with interference behaviour in males.
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".