| Speculative biology is simultaneously a science and form of art in which one speculates on the possibilities of life and evolution. What could the world look like if dinosaurs had never gone extinct? What could alien lifeforms look like? What kinds of plants and animals might exist in the far future? These questions and more are tackled by speculative biologists, and the Speculative Evolution welcomes all relevant ideas, inquiries, and world-building projects alike. With a member base comprising users from across the world, our community is the largest and longest-running place of gathering for speculative biologists on the web. While unregistered users are able to browse the forum on a basic level, registering an account provides additional forum access not visible to guests as well as the ability to join in discussions and contribute yourself! Registration is free and instantaneous. Join our community today! |
| Evolutionary patterns; Evolutionary pattern extrapolation | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Nov 15 2009, 08:20 AM (3,507 Views) | |
| T.Neo | Nov 15 2009, 08:20 AM Post #1 |
![]()
Translunar injection: TLI
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I'd like to take the oppurtunity to post some things that have evolved multiple times/niches that have evolved multiple times. Body structures and life stratagies: Eyes- evolved multiple times. Advanced eyes have evolved multiple times as well. Vision is a very useful ability, I don't see why this wouldn't evolve elsewhere. Jaws/mouthparts- evolved multiple times. From the derived gill arches of vertebrates, to the leg-derived mandibles of arthropods, and the rasping radulae of molluscs. Jaws also seem to be a very useful feature, and have evolved to fit several different roles. Supporting structures- evolved multiple times, in more advanced creatures such as arthropods and vertebrates. Simply put, supporting structures are essential to becoming a dominant species, although an exoskeleton can hinder size. Armor- evolved multiple times. The exoskeletons of arthropods are both supporting structures and armor, although some species are more protected then others. Also very common in benthos such as molluscs, brachiopods and sea urchins. Vertebrates, especially tetrapods, display many vastly different armor schemes. Insulatory structures- evolved multiple times, vital to temperature regulation in active creatures. From the hair of mammals to the hair-like structures of pterosaurs and protofeathers of dinosaurs, and fluffy setae of bumblebees, insulatory structures are quite likely to evolve elsewhere. Flight- evolved multiple times, once in arthropods and three times in vertebrates. Mechanisms for flight differ. Euosociality- evolved multiple times in arthropods, and even in mammals. Display organs- horns, crests, etc. Multiple times in vertebrates, especially dinosaurs/mammals. Camoflage- very common. Is dependant on the environment, but is almost certain to evolve elsewhere. Hydrodynamic bodyplans- evolved multiple times, in fish, squid, icthyosaurs, dolphins/whales and to a lesser extent in some other secondarily aquatic lineages. Reliant polinisation, i.e. flowers- relying on another organism to propagate the gametes. This occurs in some of Earth's plants. Symbiosis- evolved multiple times. Corals and algae, and the fungi and algae that make up lichens, etc. Life stratagies: Small shelly organisms- brachiopods and some molluscs. Specialised carnivores- tyrannosaurs, big cats. Generalist carnivores- allosaurs, maniraptors, dogs/wolves. Gigantic aquatic filter-feeders- baleen whales, certain fish. Small herbivores- hypsilophodonts, deer etc and kangaroos/wallabies. All very different yet have some key similarities. Medium herbivores- term is relative. buffalo, bison, mammoths, elephants, hadrosaurs, ceratopsians. All very common in their environments. Large herbivores- sauropods, indricotheres. Perhaps mammoths and elephants in their particular environments. Ant/termite eaters- anteaters, pangolins. Clearly ants would not exist outside of Earth (unless introduced) but equivalent creatures should occupy the niche. Armored animals- tortoises, ankylosaurs/stegosaurs, glyptodonts and perhaps rhinoceroses. Heavily armored animals. Parasites- evolved multiple times. Animals that exploit other animals to survive. I am sure there are more repeated traits or niches, feel free to correct any errors or make additions. Edited by T.Neo, Nov 16 2009, 08:52 AM.
|
| A hard mathematical figure provides a sort of enlightenment to one's understanding of an idea that is never matched by mere guesswork. | |
![]() |
|
| Replies: | |
|---|---|
| Empyreon | Nov 18 2009, 04:45 PM Post #46 |
|
Are you plausible?
![]()
|
Good points about the chemoautotrophs. I'll have to go to my teacher and ask her why the textbook is saying that alien chemoautotrophs are most likely to be discovered... (I still think it would be cool to come up with macroscopic examples.) The auto- and hetero- prefixes have to do with where an organism gets its carbon source. 'autos' take it in through CO2, while 'heteros' get it from organic compounds. Photoheterotrophs use sunlight for energy as well, but they don't use CO2 as their carbon source, relying on organic sources. |
|
Take a look at my exobiology subforum of the planet Nereus! COM Contributions food for thought
| |
![]() |
|
| Paul_de_Vries | Nov 18 2009, 11:32 PM Post #47 |
|
Newborn
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Well, as life starts evolving on a planet, (atleast this is what they think has happened on earth) there will be a kind of organic soup, providing a "free lunch" for the early organisms. Early organisms simply fermented these organic compounds for energy. But as the free lunch starts to run out, it becomes more and more advantageous to discover new ways of feeding, such as generating your own organic compounds, or getting it elsewhere by other means, such as by eating other organisms. There doesn't really seem to be a reason for photoheterotrophs though. Depending on light for the fermentation of organic compounds doesn't really seem like an evolutionarily stable strategy, as organisms who learn to do it without light will be more sucessful. In the case of autotrophs photosynthesis is quite likely to occur...the reason being that the only (known) alternative is being a chemoautotroph, which has some serious limits in its aplicability to different environments. |
![]() |
|
| Holben | Nov 19 2009, 04:23 AM Post #48 |
![]()
Rumbo a la Victoria
![]()
|
What about Phgotosynthesis analogues? Surely there could be different ways of plant sugar-making? |
|
Time flows like a river. Which is to say, downhill. We can tell this because everything is going downhill rapidly. It would seem prudent to be somewhere else when we reach the sea. "It is the old wound my king. It has never healed." | |
![]() |
|
| Paul_de_Vries | Nov 19 2009, 07:21 PM Post #49 |
|
Newborn
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Yeah there might be loads of different ways to photosynthesize (use light to synthesize organic compounds which can then be used as food), even on earth there are different (but similar) pathways. Im actually not sure whether on earth there is an entirely different way to photosynthesize though. Nevertheless, on another planet, we should assume that they photosynthesize by a different pathway, and discovering otherwise would be surprising (and entirely awesome). |
![]() |
|
| Ànraich | Nov 19 2009, 07:24 PM Post #50 |
![]()
L'évolution Spéculative est moi
![]()
|
I bet photoheterotrophs would do pretty well on a tidally locked planet where there is just a Life Ring around the "Twilight Zone" of the planet. There's always light there, and the farther you go towards the horizon the brighter the sun will be. |
|
We should all aspire to die surrounded by our dearest friends. Just like Julius Caesar. "The Lord Universe said: 'The same fate I have given to all things from stones to stars, that one day they shall become naught but memories aloft upon the winds of time. From dust all was born, and to dust all shall return.' He then looked upon His greatest creation, life, and pitied them, for unlike stars and stones they would soon learn of this fate and despair in the futility of their own existence. And so the Lord Universe decided to give life two gifts to save them from this despair. The first of these gifts was the soul, that life might more readily accept their fate, and the second was fear, that they might in time learn to avoid it altogether." - Excerpt from a Chanagwan creation myth, Legends and Folklore of the Planet Ghar, collected and published by Yieju Bai'an, explorer from the Celestial Commonwealth of Qonming Tree That Owns Itself
| |
![]() |
|
| Paul_de_Vries | Nov 19 2009, 08:59 PM Post #51 |
|
Newborn
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
But the way I see it... its perfectly possible without light. Adding light to the equation only seems to make things more complicated so I dont see why it would happen. But your right it would be a lot less disadvantageous than in other situations. |
![]() |
|
| ATEK Azul | Nov 19 2009, 09:58 PM Post #52 |
|
Transhuman
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I think photosynthetic life will be common across the universe but maybe not dominant. Instead a more planet bound diversity of groups across the cosmos Might be dominant especially if some planets have a weird orbit or had an era of volcanism which wiped out photosynthesisers. Basicly I think a more planet bound system might be more common then a solar based system of food gathering. |
| I am dyslexic, please ignore the typo's! | |
![]() |
|
| Ànraich | Nov 19 2009, 10:26 PM Post #53 |
![]()
L'évolution Spéculative est moi
![]()
|
In that case we're more likely to find chemosynthesis reigning in autotrophs more than photosynthesis. I imagine there's a healthy mix of both on most worlds, Earth probably has lots of photosynthetic autotrophs because of our planet's rotation. |
|
We should all aspire to die surrounded by our dearest friends. Just like Julius Caesar. "The Lord Universe said: 'The same fate I have given to all things from stones to stars, that one day they shall become naught but memories aloft upon the winds of time. From dust all was born, and to dust all shall return.' He then looked upon His greatest creation, life, and pitied them, for unlike stars and stones they would soon learn of this fate and despair in the futility of their own existence. And so the Lord Universe decided to give life two gifts to save them from this despair. The first of these gifts was the soul, that life might more readily accept their fate, and the second was fear, that they might in time learn to avoid it altogether." - Excerpt from a Chanagwan creation myth, Legends and Folklore of the Planet Ghar, collected and published by Yieju Bai'an, explorer from the Celestial Commonwealth of Qonming Tree That Owns Itself
| |
![]() |
|
| ATEK Azul | Nov 19 2009, 11:01 PM Post #54 |
|
Transhuman
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
That's possible and it would create alot of interesting habitats that are slightly more crowded than Earth habitats. Also something more akin to electromagnetic generators that restarts the spin of its ring(s) with mucles might also happen. And yes I am thinking of generators from Hoover dam(and yes I only have limated knowledge of it). |
| I am dyslexic, please ignore the typo's! | |
![]() |
|
| T.Neo | Nov 20 2009, 10:06 AM Post #55 |
![]()
Translunar injection: TLI
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Any volcanic activity severe enough to wipe out photosynthesisers will probably wipe out all or most of the life on the planet anyway. The main downside of a chemosynthetic autotroph is that is needs to be situated in a region with concentrated chemical energy. Photosynthesisers are far more versitile. And any sort of "magnetic autotroph" would probably have such an ineffective method of energy generation as to be implausible. |
| A hard mathematical figure provides a sort of enlightenment to one's understanding of an idea that is never matched by mere guesswork. | |
![]() |
|
| ATEK Azul | Nov 20 2009, 12:38 PM Post #56 |
|
Transhuman
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Well then maybe we need another alternative or an alternate form of Chemosynthesis. Also the volcanism does not have to be super powerful it just has to block out the sun for long periods with dust and ash something I am sure life can survive. |
| I am dyslexic, please ignore the typo's! | |
![]() |
|
| T.Neo | Nov 20 2009, 12:47 PM Post #57 |
![]()
Translunar injection: TLI
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Planet-covering eruptions are usually very powerful. And when you wipe out photosynthetic life, you're wiping out the primary autotrophs. Because photosynthetic organisms will be the primary autotrophs. It's just that photosynthesis is by far the best solution. Photosynthesis will always be predominant where possible. Under oceans or ice crusts it will be a different story. But you simply can't produce energy effectively everywhere via just chemical means. |
| A hard mathematical figure provides a sort of enlightenment to one's understanding of an idea that is never matched by mere guesswork. | |
![]() |
|
| ATEK Azul | Nov 20 2009, 12:51 PM Post #58 |
|
Transhuman
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Are you sure because that seems a little limated and disasterous. Also can it not be possible that life would create an alternate system that is more effective perhaps with an element or compound we are not familiar with? |
| I am dyslexic, please ignore the typo's! | |
![]() |
|
| T.Neo | Nov 20 2009, 01:27 PM Post #59 |
![]()
Translunar injection: TLI
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
All stable elements are mapped out in the periodic table, and are known. As for compounds, well, we know most of the naturally occuring simple ones. WHOLLY unusual complex organic ones could exist (and would be found in extraterrestrial life etc) but they probably aren't the sort of thing that would be widely and naturally occuring. Unless there is a way that a multicellular autotroph can produce energy without sunlight using just plain old soil and water, I'm not convinced. I'm not sure what you mean by limited and disasterous. |
| A hard mathematical figure provides a sort of enlightenment to one's understanding of an idea that is never matched by mere guesswork. | |
![]() |
|
| Holben | Nov 20 2009, 02:10 PM Post #60 |
![]()
Rumbo a la Victoria
![]()
|
You can use any energy like heat and light to power processes, so why not elastic energy? |
|
Time flows like a river. Which is to say, downhill. We can tell this because everything is going downhill rapidly. It would seem prudent to be somewhere else when we reach the sea. "It is the old wound my king. It has never healed." | |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · The Habitable Zone · Next Topic » |














9:32 AM Jul 11