Virgin wasps develop ovaries on par with mated females, but lay fewer eggs

In the primitively eusocial wasp Ropalidia marginata, mating is not necessary for a female wasp to develop her ovaries, lay eggs, and even to become the sole egg layer of her colony despite the presence of other mated nestmates. Here, we show that virgin wasps do not differ from their mated counterparts in the extent and rapidity of their ovarian development, in the proportion of individuals that build a nest and laid eggs, and in the time taken to do so. However, a significantly larger proportion of virgin females showed resorbing oocytes, and laid fewer eggs as compared to mated individuals. Thus, virgin females have the ability to develop ovaries and lay eggs but also to refrain from necessarily laying all mature eggs produced, before mating opportunities arise. This dual ability would be adaptive in haplodiploid, tropical species with perennial nesting cycles and frequent opportunities for workers to become replacement queens or solitary nest foundresses throughout the year.

How should biologists engage with controversial mathematical theory?

Mathematics is beautiful and precise and often necessary to understand complex biological phenomena. And yet biologists cannot always hope to fully understand the mathematical foundations of the theory they are using or testing. How then should biologists behave when mathematicians themselves are in dispute? Using the on-going controversy over Hamilton's rule as an example, I argue that biologists should be free to treat mathematical theory with a healthy dose of agnosticism. In doing so biologists should equip themselves with a disclaimer that publicly admits that they cannot entirely attest to the veracity of the mathematics underlying the theory they are using or testing. The disclaimer will only help if it is accompanied by three responsibilities - stay bipartisan in a dispute among mathematicians, stay vigilant and help expose dissent among mathematicians, and make the biology larger than the mathematics. I must emphasize that my goal here is not to take sides in the on-going dispute over the mathematical validity of Hamilton's rule, indeed my goal is to argue that we should refrain from taking sides.