Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17373656›Full record

ReviewBioEssays : news and reviews in molecular, cellular and developmental biology2007

The making of a social insect: developmental architectures of social design.

Robert E Page, Gro V Amdam

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BioEssays : news and reviews in molecular, cellular and developmental biology, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 68 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
68citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

68 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Genome Evolution in Social Insects.Genome biology and evolution · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. TheInsects · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. TheFrontiers in physiology · 2022
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Special Significance of Non-Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2020
    Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

8 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Robert E PageArizona State University, School of Life Sciences, Tempe, AZ 85287-4501, USA. repage@asu.edu
Gro V Amdam

Funding

THE MATHEMATICAL DEMOGRAPHY OF BIODEMOGRAPHYP01AG022500 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA DAVIS · PI CAREY, JAMES R. · 2003 to 2010
$8.1M
NIA NIH HHS P01 AG022500NIA NIH HHS P01 AG22500
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We marvel at the social complexity of insects, marked by anatomically and behaviorally distinguishable castes, division of labor and specialization--but how do such systems evolve? Insect societies are composed of individuals, each undergoing its own developmental process and each containing its own genetic information and experiencing its own developmental and experiential environment. Yet societies appear to function as if the colonies themselves are individuals with novel "social genes" and novel social developmental processes. We propose an alternative hypothesis. The origins of complex social behavior, from which insect societies emerge, are derived from ancestral developmental programs. These programs originated in ancient solitary insects and required little evolutionary remodeling. We present evidence from behavioral assays, selective breeding, genetic mapping, functional genomics and endocrinology, and comparative anatomy and physiology. These insights explain how complex social behavior can evolve from heterochronic changes in reproductive signaling systems that govern ubiquitous and ancient relationships between behavior and ovarian development.

Indexed as

Social BehaviorAnimalsBehavior, AnimalBiological EvolutionInsectaPollen

Identifiers

PMID17373656
PMCPMC2398704

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.