Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34461829›Full record

ArticleBMC ecology and evolution2021

Experimental increase of worker diversity benefits brood production in ants.

Marina N Psalti, Dustin Gohlke, Romain Libbrecht

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC ecology and evolution, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
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

3 authors.

Marina N Psalti *Institute of Organismic and Molecular Evolution, Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Hanns-Dieter-Hüsch-Weg 15, 55128, Mainz, Germany.
Dustin Gohlke *Institute of Organismic and Molecular Evolution, Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Hanns-Dieter-Hüsch-Weg 15, 55128, Mainz, Germany.
Romain LibbrechtInstitute of Organismic and Molecular Evolution, Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Hanns-Dieter-Hüsch-Weg 15, 55128, Mainz, Germany. romain.libbrecht@gmail.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe reproductive division of labor of eusocial insects, whereby one or several queens monopolize reproduction, evolved in a context of high genetic relatedness. However, many extant eusocial species have developed strategies that decrease genetic relatedness in their colonies, suggesting some benefits of the increased diversity. Multiple studies support this hypothesis by showing positive correlations between genetic diversity and colony fitness, as well as finding effects of experimental manipulations of diversity on colony performance. However, alternative explanations could account for most of these reports, and the benefits of diversity on performance in eusocial insects still await validation. In this study, we experimentally increased worker diversity in small colonies of the ant Lasius niger while controlling for typical confounding factors.

resultsWe found that experimental colonies composed of workers coming from three different source colonies produced more larvae and showed more variation in size compared to groups of workers coming from a single colony.

conclusionsWe propose that the benefits of increased diversity stemmed from an improved division of labor. Our study confirms that worker diversity enhances colony performance, thus providing a possible explanation for the evolution of multiply mated queens and multiple-queen colonies in many species of eusocial insects.

Indexed as

AntsAnimalsBehavior, AnimalHumansReproductionBehaviorDivision of laborGenetic diversitySocial evolutionSocial insects

Identifiers

PMID34461829
PMCPMC8404329

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.