ArticleRoyal Society open science2015
Regulatory mechanisms of group distributions in a gregarious arthropod.
Article in Royal Society open science, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Gregarious behaviour in Carboniferous cyclidan crustaceans.Biology letters · 2025Article
- Avoidance behaviour toxicity tests should account for animal gregariousness: a case study on the terrestrial isopodZooKeys · 2022Article
- Sensitivity of density-dependent threshold to species composition in arthropod aggregates.Scientific reports · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In a patchy environment, how social animals manage conspecific and environmental cues in their choice of habitat is a leading issue for understanding their spatial distribution and their exploitation of resources. Here, we experimentally tested the effects of environmental heterogeneities (artificial shelters) and some of their characteristics (size and fragmentation) on the aggregation process of a common species of terrestrial isopod (Crustacea). One hundred individuals were introduced into three different heterogeneous set-ups and in a homogeneous set-up. In the four set-ups, the populations split into two aggregates: one large (approx. 70 individuals) and one smaller (approx. 20 individuals). These aggregates were not randomly distributed in the arena but were formed diametrically opposite from one another. The similarity of the results among the four set-ups shows that under experimental conditions, the environmental heterogeneities have a low impact on the aggregation dynamics and spatial patterns of the isopod, merely serving to increase the probability of nucleation of the larger aggregation at these points. By contrast, the regulation of aggregate sizes and the regular distribution of groups are signatures of local amplification processes, in agreement with the short-range activator and long-range inhibitor model (scale-dependent feedbacks). In other words, we show how small-scale interactions may govern large-scale spatial patterns. This experimental illustration of spatial self-organization is an important step towards comprehension of the complex game of competition among groups in social species.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.