revised writings in poster

3 files changed, 33 insertions, 39 deletions

diff --git a/src/abstr2.i b/src/abstr2.i
index e71807e..50c91ae 100644
--- a/src/abstr2.i
+++ b/src/abstr2.i
@@ -1,35 +1,22 @@
-The question of how antlion spatial patterns, such as pit depth, width,

-and nearest neighbor, as well as group behavior vary with respect to

-spatial constraints and interruptions in possible communication pathways

-was examined through the procedure.

-The objective of the research was to expand upon the established

-conclusion from the previous years experiment, which determined that

-antlions space themselves in a hexagonal pattern and maintain a constant

-ratio between all pits to reduce intraspecies competition.

-In order to test the natural hexagonal dispersion pattern of the

-antlions the follow up study aimed to identify the method of

-organization of the organisms, as the previous years study clearly

-illustrated that the organisms had a standard distribution pattern, and

-thereby some means of communicating or understanding spatial information

-in order to achieve that pattern.

-In order to develop a conclusion regarding the method of communication

-three initial hypothesis were made and it was determined that the

-antlions communicated through the use of making trail in the sand, which

-allowed them to mathematically determine a settling position, or that

-the antlions used obstacles and pits as regulatory mechanisms, or

-finally that antlions had no means of communication, but rather their

-cannibalistic nature determined the settlement pattern observed.

-With this in mind a procedure was drafted that contained three distinct

-trials, one where antlion trails were removed, one where fake pits were

-introduced, and one where obstacles were introduced into the

-environment.

-With this procedure  several similar ``cooperative'' behaviors to prior

-studies were observed, with the antlions remaining under the soil when

-the surface was overpopulated (demonstrable by a significantly lower

-number of pits forming in smaller trials).

-Along with this the antlions seemed to be most disrupted by the

-introduction of fake pits, as during these trials the averager pit

-depth, pit width, and nearest neighbor calculation changed

-significantly, thereby indicating that antlions use the presence of pits

-around them to mathematically determine where they need to settle on an

-instinctual level.

+The question of how antlion spatial patterns, such as pit depth, width,
+and nearest neighbor, as well as group behavior vary with respect to
+spatial constraints and interruptions in possible communication pathways
+was examined through the procedure.
+This research expands on a previous study that investigated antlions
+in habitats of, sometimes, extremely small size.
+It found that antlions, as groups, tend to have fewer and smaller pits
+on the surface in smaller areas, to maintain fair food-collection
+densities.
+This follow-up study aimed to identify the regularity of antlions'
+surface distributions, and whether this regularity is maintained if
+trails are removed or the environment is constricted with barriers.
+It was determined that antlions regularize their settlement patterns
+through a couple of innate tendencies: they prefer being on borders when
+possible, to, in a group, use all of the area, and distancing themselves
+from the raised sand around other pits.
+These wouldn't have happened in a system reliant on trail density or
+pheromones (because with trail erasure, regularity was maintained) or in
+a system reliant on cannibalism.
+This experiment tested these specific anti-competitive behaviors,
+building on our previous results, which showed antlions hiding under
+sand when the population got too dense.
diff --git a/src/hypo2.i b/src/hypo2.i
index b98be24..987e723 100644
--- a/src/hypo2.i
+++ b/src/hypo2.i
@@ -1,8 +1,15 @@
-\noindent{\bf Essential Question:}
+\noindent{\bf Research Question:}
 
-How do antlion spatial patterns, such as pit depth, width, and nearest neighbor, as well as group behavior, vary with spatial constraints and interruptions in possible communication pathways?
+Through what communication pathways (pheromonal communication,
+mechanical means, or innate preferences) do antlion larvae maintain
+group organization, measured by pit depth, width, and nearest neighbor,
+and what might this tell us about the antlion's evolutionary history?
 
 \medbreak
 \noindent{\bf Hypothesis:} 
 
-Antlions likely lack an intelligent mode of communication, so interruptions in the environment (removal of trails, introduction of physical obstacles, fictional pits) will not impact their ability to form nesting patterns, except insofar as they cannot nest immediately adjacent to the obstacles because the primary regulating method is cannibalism.
+Antlions likely have an intelligent mode of communication, therefore
+interruptions in the environment (removal of trails, introduction of
+physical obstacles, fictional pits) will impact their nesting patterns,
+whereas they wouldn't if the primary regulator were cannibalism and
+reclusion behavior (hiding under sand in over-dense areas).
diff --git a/src/intro2.i b/src/intro2.i
index 966688c..412521d 100644
--- a/src/intro2.i
+++ b/src/intro2.i
@@ -6,7 +6,7 @@ Antlions, being members of the same species, likely cooperate to create
 the best results for continued reproduction.
 However, the methods by which they might communicate are unclear.
 The individuals certainly are not intelligent enough to deliberately 
-construct a social framework by careful analysis, and pheremones require
+construct a social framework by careful analysis, and pheromones require
 much more machinery than can be expected of an invertebrate's larvae.
 
 In a previous study, it was observed that spatial constraints do affect