1997
DOI: 10.1006/anbe.1996.0290
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Division of labour and ‘foraging for work’: simulating reality versus the reality of simulations

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
16
0

Year Published

1998
1998
2014
2014

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 20 publications
(16 citation statements)
references
References 18 publications
0
16
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Schmikl and Crailsheim [25] used Mathematica to formulate a very complicated model that extends the model of DeGrandi-Hoffman et al [23], in part, by including the effect of division of labour in the hive, modeled using ideas from the Foraging-for-Work theory [26]. This theory of task allocation is less relevant in bees than in ants because bees have a strong age-based component in task allocation [27], [28] and social inhibition is a very important driver of task specialization [27], [29], [30], [31]. In any case, these simulation models are complicated to understand and to construct and most are tailored to particular situations, as reflected in either their intrinsic structure or their parameterization or both.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Schmikl and Crailsheim [25] used Mathematica to formulate a very complicated model that extends the model of DeGrandi-Hoffman et al [23], in part, by including the effect of division of labour in the hive, modeled using ideas from the Foraging-for-Work theory [26]. This theory of task allocation is less relevant in bees than in ants because bees have a strong age-based component in task allocation [27], [28] and social inhibition is a very important driver of task specialization [27], [29], [30], [31]. In any case, these simulation models are complicated to understand and to construct and most are tailored to particular situations, as reflected in either their intrinsic structure or their parameterization or both.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Given a recent set of commentaries (Traniello and Rosengaus, 1997;Robson and Beshers, 1997) 'against' modeling in general, modeling division of labor in particular, and even more specifically the FFW model [see also the reply by Franks et al (1997)], we feel that it is useful to justify our own modeling approach, all the more as it is related to FFW. First, as clearly explained by Franks et al (1997), a modeling approach implies that only a (usually small) fraction of reality be studied and formalized; furthermore, any scientific enterprise-stamp collecting not being considered scientific hereis aimed at finding at least some degree of regularity in the world, and scientific explanation is explanation (by virtue of necessarily simplifying models) of such regularity.…”
Section: Modelling Division Of Labor In Social Insectsmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Ant species may differ substantially in the extent of the influence of age on behavior and its underlying physiological processes (Sendova-Franks and Franks 1993, 1995; Seid and Traniello 2006; Muscedere et al 2009, 2011; Robinson et al 2012, e.g.). The role of age in task performance has sparked controversy (Tofts and Franks 1992; Robson and Beshers 1997; Traniello and Rosengaus 1997); in some ants the effects of age on behavior may be weak (Sendova-Franks and Franks 1993, 1995). Workers that undergo considerable behavioral and physiological maturation following eclosion ( Pheidole dentata : Seid and Traniello 2006; Muscedere et al 2009, 2011) could continue to show plasticity throughout their lifespan, ultimately affecting social organization.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%