Inconsistencies in the cross functions

[janaobsteter]

1. The basic cross function is crossVirginQueen. Here, we provide drones and nFathers. If we have:

• 1 virgin queen, we do: fathers <- selectInd(pop = drones, nInd = n, use = "rand")
• multiple virgin queens, we do: fatherGroups <- pullDroneGroupsFromDCA(DCA = drones,n = nVirginQueen,nFathers = nFathers)

Note that the first one doesn't "kill" the drones, while the second one does.

2. In the crossColony, we don't select any fathers, but instead, just pass the drones to crossVirginQueen.

3. In the crossColonies, we again sample father groups, which is then again done by crossColony that we call in here
   fatherGroups <- pullDroneGroupsFromDCA(DCA = drones, n = nCol, nFathers = nFathers, removeFathers = removeFathers)
   Also, note that here we pass the argument removeFathers, where in the crossVirginQueen we don't.

Almost all of this will be fixed by collapsing the functions, but just so that we are aware of what is hapenning.

[gregorgorjanc]

Thanks for raising this @janaobsteter . It’s a bit hard to follow since you’re not showing full examples.

[janaobsteter]

Yeah, I know - but I will assign myself to collapsing this functions and solve this!

[janaobsteter]

I moved this to the discussion since I feel we need to discuss on it.
Currently, we have three cross functions - crossVirginQueens(), crossColony(), crossColonies(). We agreed on collapsing crossColony() and crossColonies(), but what about the crossVirginQueens()?

The problem is that all of them use "drones" argument, with is basically a DCA, and then internally select fathers. So, they are actually doing two things at once (which also means things are duplicated). The problem also is, that they use different functions for selecting fathers - selectInd in crossVirginQueens() and pullDroneGroupsFromDCA in other two.

So our options are:

• to keep crossVirginQueens(), but take father selection out. The question here then is, should we allow for mating multiple virgin queens at once (with user supplying father packages)?
• to collapse all three functions into one

Thoughts?

[gregorgorjanc]

As discussed in the meeting, we probably should collapse and combine and get the function do the same thing for the three cases. Then we need what else we need for specific cases.

[janaobsteter]

Ok - I will also take father selection out of the function - for now! And then we can see whether it still makes sense to have to in there.

[gregorgorjanc]

@janaobsteter I believe this discussion should be answered given your work on crossing function, right?

[janaobsteter]

SIMplyBee now includes functions for open and controlled mating - cross() functions accepts either a population of drones (the fathers) OR a could of drones and a correspodning cross plan.