NESLife VI

Organism: Goliath
Ancestor: Chomper
Selective Pressure: Competition amongst other predators
Mutation: A stronger shell with spikes. When a Goliath outgrows its shell, it sheds its shell, and absorbs water and increases in size. Within a few hours of shedding, a new shell begins to harden. During this period, the Goliath will hide amongst rocks or bury itself in sand until its shell hardens. By molting, a Goliath can grow up to 1/3 of its size per molt.
 
Organism: Tider
Ancestor: Zeppu
Selective Pressure: Protlaepish predating upon Zeppu
Mutation: The Tider is a Sunfeeder that now makes its home in the tide line along the shore. It is only semi-terrestrial as the massive swinging tides cover the Tider in deep amonia at some time of the day, and leaves it exposed to air at other times of the day. Evolved from the Zeppu, which already had evolved to deal with direct sunlight, this new plant has to put up with even more sunlight throughout the day. However, while they are exposed to the air, they are not under threat of predation at any time. The intense sunlight they receive while exposed helps make up for any lack of sunlight they receive while submerged as they have also evolved a better nutrient storage capability to survive while exposed to air and while submerged.
 
Come on someone else needs to make another herbivore so I can move on to other things.

Organism: Spikes
Ancestor: Digestor
Selective Pressure: Predation from Chompers
Mutation: A series of sharp spines running along the armor. The pressure from the Chomper's ability to break through the previously sufficient armor has caused the descendents of the the Digestors to develop a series of sharp spines down their bodies. while a Chomper may still be able to kill a Spike it does so at great risk to itself. eventually the Chompers learned to seek easier prey.
 
Notes: To thomas.berubeg and other people considering developing photosynthetic animals, it might be useful to search ‘why don’t animals photosynthesize’. I found a good link here discussing animal photosynthesis. This clip from The Future is Wild presents a feasible animal photosynthesizer, along with a discussion of real-life animals who make use of symbiotic algae to photosynthesize.
Too bad your symbiosis information is limited and obsolete, Mr. Hotshot Biologist! Also it gets weirder.
 
Photosynthetic macroscopic animals work in the cases where they aren't highly mobile, such as with various flatworms, or the hypothetical garden worms posted in my link. The salamander embryos that you noted are not exactly engaged in highly strenuous and energy-intensive behaviour, besides growing powered by yolk sacs (which are, in this case, lightly augmented by cooperative algae).

If the species under discussion had been able to manage a more passive lifestyle, it would probably have succeeded- however, it had to regularly flee predators and the best basking sites were largely destroyed due to the advent of the Hitcher.

I primarily posted that link to head off a problem that I have seen happen several times in NESLife situations, where people assume that making their animals also be photosynthetic is a great idea. Photosynthesis is good and all, but it's not nearly enough energy to power an active organism, and is it's merely used as a supplement it can often be a losing energy investment to possess all of the adaptations needed in order to interface with symbiotic algae.

In short, I didn't say it was impossible. I posted a link to explaining in general why it was a bad idea for most animals, and then posted links to hypothetical and real counterexamples. You posted links that fit entirely within the realm of my counterexamples- the adult salamanders are not powered predominately by solar energy.

Thus, I dispute your claim that my information is either limited or obsolete.

Mr. Hotshot Biologist out! ;)
 
Photosynthetic macroscopic animals work in the cases where they aren't highly mobile, such as with various flatworms, or the hypothetical garden worms posted in my link. The salamander embryos that you noted are not exactly engaged in highly strenuous and energy-intensive behaviour, besides growing powered by yolk sacs (which are, in this case, lightly augmented by cooperative algae).
I find this a curious assertion. While there is (currently) no material on adult spotted salamanders using the oxygen produced by the algae, considering reptilian exothermic temperature regulation and their propensity for basking in the sun for hours at a time, there's no reason it shouldn't occur. This can also be extrapolated: the model for this kind of behavior already exists in something more familiar to people: hybrid cars. Solar/electric during low energy usage, gasoline during high energy usage. Like all adaptations, it would come with penalties (and additional advantages). One could fold in natural metamaterial structures as found in say, insect chitin, to do some very, very interesting things.

There are functionally no overwhelming roadblocks to a particular kind of animal behavior and environment producing such a symbiotic organism (and frankly, all organisms are symbiotic with something), and using it to its (evolutionary) advantage. It's just a question of taking all the right steps, which is on you as the mod to determine. The example is not a refutation: but it is indicative of the possibility of one.

Plus it's not like you to be so close-minded. :)
 
I know some of those words.
 
Organism: Grabber
Description: A motile, predatory dorsoventrally flattened organism with fins for grip and locomotion and complex digestive enzymes.
Niche: Swimming omnivorous generalist.

Organism: Sticker
Ancestor: Grabber
Selective Pressure: Marginal Areas being pressured by other species, growth of dangerous Floater Clouds and Tower Forests hiding dangerous predators, limiting areas of opportunistic omnivorism with specialized competition
Mutation: Development of additional grip and enzyme-secretion areas on both sides, "despecialization" or "selective specialization"

The Sticker takes the development of the Grabber and brings it to its extremes. Additional sucker/fin-like growths appeared on both sides of the Sticker's body, allowing it to press firmly against and into the growing Floater Islands. Stickers also seek to migrate into the interior of said Floater Islands, where decaying deadzones provide half-digested meals and layers of flesh provide safety from dangerous predators. In addition, they are able to secrete digestive enzymes and absorb food from both sides of their body (although the side adhering to their current food specializes more). This is used both when they are stuck inside a Floater Island and pressed on both sides by delicious means, as well as a deterrent for predators. This also means their skin is somewhat resistant to current digestive juices, making them resistant to open-mouthed Feasters. Finally, if attached on the outside of a Floater Island, their fins facing the interior of the island slowly dig into the flesh of the eaten floater, eventually detaching it and allowing the Sticker to bud young closer to the heart of the island. Stickers can also choose to bud off on the outside of their "feeding side" in rich areas to help cover the delicious bounty in offspring.

Although focusing on the bounty of the Floater Islands, Stickers also are effective at attacking Sunfeeders and Towers. Some have even turned their slightly resistant skin to attack the poisonous Venters, overwhelming the filter descendent with wave upon wave of digestive acid.

Stickers can also graze like the Grabber before them. Although more energetically intensive and less specialized than a normal Grabber when not "attached", it still retains its additional fins, multiple feeding and digestive-fluid emission areas, as well as the ability to adapt to changing conditions by growing new features as needed in a specific area (for example, enzyme secretions above them while feeding on a corpse below to prevent attack.)
 
Spoiler :
Organism: Orator
Description: An armoured motile, predatory organism with 10 spines for locomotion and defense and two primitive stalked eyes.
Niche: Visual armoured, crawling omnivorous generalist.


Organism: Pedagogue
Ancestor: Orator
Selective Pressure: Increased prevalence of Chompers and Chomper predation.
Mutation: With the advent of Chompers and their subsequent predation on Orators, Orators developed limited eyesight. However, this eyesight was not always enough to give advanced warning of Orators and other predators. Thus, when predators of Orators showed up, it was typically those who could move fastest who would survive. A subset of these survivors had spines which were slightly longer and more flexible than the other Orators. These creatures began to develope a rudimentary musculature system that would allow them to have jointed spines. These Pedagogues would use these to push with more force, and climb up the sides of Towers and Poppers.

(Hopefully this works, eh? Yay ecology and genetic drift.)
 
I find this a curious assertion. While there is (currently) no material on adult spotted salamanders using the oxygen produced by the algae, considering reptilian exothermic temperature regulation and their propensity for basking in the sun for hours at a time, there's no reason it shouldn't occur. This can also be extrapolated: the model for this kind of behavior already exists in something more familiar to people: hybrid cars. Solar/electric during low energy usage, gasoline during high energy usage. Like all adaptations, it would come with penalties (and additional advantages). One could fold in natural metamaterial structures as found in say, insect chitin, to do some very, very interesting things.

There are functionally no overwhelming roadblocks to a particular kind of animal behavior and environment producing such a symbiotic organism (and frankly, all organisms are symbiotic with something), and using it to its (evolutionary) advantage. It's just a question of taking all the right steps, which is on you as the mod to determine. The example is not a refutation: but it is indicative of the possibility of one.

Plus it's not like you to be so close-minded. :)
Your reptile example is problematic. I'll point out one major issue with it: if an organism is to house photosynthetic symbionts, it is necessary for the organism to be translucent. You'll note that salamander embryos, Euglena, symbiotic flatworms, etcetera are all translucent. Translucent skin is problematic in many situations: it precludes pigmentation, which is an important defense against sunlight, and it is generally thin, thus limiting its defensive capabilities. You could potentially have a pigmented layer beneath a translucent layer, but you are still left with the problem of having to present a large and highly vulnerable surface. Theoretically, you could evolve an eyelid-type dealie that protects this, but that is a bit of a large and complex structure, which brings up once more the issue of energy payoffs.

The Hornet example is pretty cool, though I'd definitely like to hear more about the degree to which it is able to actually utilize light.

You don't need to tell me that all animals are symbiotic, that is one thing I know very, very well. However, gut flora is a lot easier to host than algae.

Anyway, the core of this argument isn't really a point of contention. I don't dispute that animals can successfully have photosynthetically-augmented lifestyles. However, you need to have significant adaptations to successfully pull it off.

Bringing this all back to the creature we're discussing, it lacked complex skin, so translucence isn't a big deal. It didn't have to deal with symbiotes, because it used its own natural pigments for light capture. However, it was part of a lineage that really got screwed over last epoch- the entire Jetseer lineage was wiped out due to the closing of the rather ephemeral niche in which they thrived. If it had not been for the evolution of the Hitcher, it probably would have survived.

Thus, when I link a few forum thread discussing the difficulties of animal photosynthesis, and then in the same paragraph discuss a few feasible forms of animal photosynthesis, I don't think it's fair to call the information 'limited and obsolete' and then call me closed-minded when I dispute the argument. :p
 
Your reptile example is problematic. I'll point out one major issue with it: if an organism is to house photosynthetic symbionts, it is necessary for the organism to be translucent. You'll note that salamander embryos, Euglena, symbiotic flatworms, etcetera are all translucent. Translucent skin is problematic in many situations: it precludes pigmentation, which is an important defense against sunlight, and it is generally thin, thus limiting its defensive capabilities. You could potentially have a pigmented layer beneath a translucent layer, but you are still left with the problem of having to present a large and highly vulnerable surface. Theoretically, you could evolve an eyelid-type dealie that protects this, but that is a bit of a large and complex structure, which brings up once more the issue of energy payoffs.
You concentrate the photosymbionts in the upper layers of the epidermis where they can still receive photons relatively efficiently while backed by a layer of pigmentation that protects from radiation penetration. This also gives you maximal surface area (and thus maximum potential production). There probably exists some mechanism for filtering the oxygen down to the living tissue (in a way similar to Vitamin D production/transport? You're the biologist; e: don't insects basically already do this bit since they don't have lungs?). This oxygen can then be used to supply aerobic needs in near-surface tissue, while deeper aerobic needs are met by traditional respiration and circulation. This lowers the "robustness" requirements of both these systems, and they still serve as a backup overnight (when energy requirements are low during sleep anyway) or while in shade.

I'm calling you close-minded because the above is pretty obvious for a normal Earth-type piece of biology even if it doesn't actually exist in nature and you 1. love crazy biological stuff, and 2. are using a wacky foreign chemistry system. :p
 
Your description pretty reasonably matches how an animal photosynthesizer could work. There are indeed plenty of methods for getting oxygen into a thin, non-vascularized and translucent tissues- human corneas, for example, absorb gases straight out of the air (which as an aside is why you should not over-wear your contacts, speaking from unpleasant personal experience).

Anyway, I still object to the close-minded moniker. I love crazy weird stuff. But I have to temper that love of the bizarre and strange with a cold, heartless culling sense. I won't kill off something because it doesn't match what is found in our own world- I'll kill it off because I can't figure out a way to make it survive in its environment.
 
Organism: Drifting budder
Ancestor: Budder
Selective Pressure: Relative decline in effectiveness of protection and competition for light.
Mutation: The Drifting Budder constructs matrices out of itself which allow it to "take" the sunlight from other species. These complex structures are supported by a profusion of small bubbles which hold gases. Mature budders can also simply detach themselves form their parent colonies, if required, and drift to a new target. This has allowed them to spread to places where there exist no predators... including on floating islands. Though this was not perhaps intentional.
 
Just to add to Iggy about the eyes, they absorb so quickly and everything that if you get something infectious in your eye you'll 100% get sick whereas you don't get sick as much if it gets in your mouth because your saliva has defenses against germs, etc.
 
Spoiler :
Organism: Grabber
Description: A motile, predatory dorsoventrally flattened organism with fins for grip and locomotion and complex digestive enzymes.
Niche: Swimming omnivorous generalist.


Organism: Slimmer
Ancestor: Grabber
Selective Pressure: Predation in the open ocean.
Mutation: The flattened body of the Grabber is curled on the Slimmer to allow a more narrow profile. This maintains the larger surface area for increased digestive fluids while allowing the Slimmer to negotiate deep into the floating islands seeking out the often decomposing insides. They are able to unfurl and enclose food. This allows them to avoid sitting in one spot to digest their meal.
 
Slimmer vs Sticker war would be fun. The Slimmer would be better at getting into the Floater Clouds, but the Sticker has more defenses and general mobility. I guess they are equal (with favor to Slimmer in most occasions) in digestive ability, but that's up to Iggy.

Fun to see how this will turn out!
 
Slimmer vs Sticker war would be fun. The Slimmer would be better at getting into the Floater Clouds, but the Sticker has more defenses and general mobility. I guess they are equal (with favor to Slimmer in most occasions) in digestive ability, but that's up to Iggy.

Fun to see how this will turn out!

Heh. I skimmed through each post just enough to know there was another descendant of the Grabber and that there was another creature going for the inside of the floating islands. I failed to realize that it was the same creature.
 
What I meant was that the Grabber descendant (Sticker) was the other creature I saw going into the floating island.

I mentally disconnected the name of your evolution and the actual mutation until you said something.
 
Top Bottom