It's interesting to see the Marine Tamow get more descendants. I like this one.
I recommend cleaning up both images using contrast enhancement on GIMP. You could at least use the paint bucket over the background in the first image to paint it all blue, suggesting it's swimming underneath a Marine Tamow dwelling.
"are even known" That's an odd phrasing to use, given you have absolute knowledge of the species.
Are the babies good at holding their breath or going dormant when the mother is swimming? Short of some way to oxygenate the pouch, or a swimming style that exposes them to air, I figure the babies would need to be good at holding their breath.
It seems to have a very big claw on its forelimbs. Is that correct?

The idea of animals other than chordates having recognizable, somewhat vertebrate-like bones/bony elements is still a rather odd one to grasp. Scientifically, it makes sense. Intuitively, it's strange. Scientifically, birds are an offshoot of non-avian dinosaurs, and so are dinosaurs, which is fairly easy to grasp when one looks at accurate skin depictions of dinosaurs and looks at their skeletons. In the same way, though...humans are technically a really weird, derived kind of fish.

"known to" That's superfluous, given it's being described from a position of total knowledge.

"as it instinctively believes that the grass is “purpler” on the other side." That doesn't make any sense. How can one instinctively believe something? Certainly, the human brain (and likely other animals' brains) have innate biases in processing certain kinds of information, which can include the optimism bias, but the way this is phrased doesn't seem scientific, and the particular way "the grass is greener on the other side" is used could be taken to mean it mis-perceives color with distance. One alternative is suggesting they are very prone to optimism bias, or are neophilic (in more colloquial terms: "curious") animals inclined to explore.

How does it "use fermentation"? Does it ferment in its stomach? Its gut? A brief mention of what microbes are used would be interesting, though Guttoplaques are surely included. (Speaking of that...they sure have a wide distribution of "all species with a stomach".)

Its body shape reminds me of the Sayront, especially in its scales. It sure would mess people up if I made a grey descendant for this that looked like a Sayront. It'd be like seeing a marsupial that looked like a Triceratops.

That's an interesting background...though of course purple makes sense.

It's interesting how you mentioned color changes in this flora. Of course many real-life plants go through color changes, but I don't recall this being explicitly mentioned in Sagan 4 flora before.

The name suggested relation to the Sango, but it suppose it was just a coincidence. Pandas and pangolins and chimpanzees are not related, either.

That's a very broad, species-nonspecific predatory diet...is that even allowed?

I like the color scheme, pattern, and shape.

You're right. These, despite being chitinous photosynthesizers that seemingly use green photosynthetic pigment, like many crystalflora (e.g., Grovecrystal descendants), have no relation to the Binucleus Crystal Shrub. That's surprising. The Solumcrusta, ancestor of the Chitjorn itself, descends directly from Protosagania.

It appears a general category name for Chitjorn descendants ("Jornflora") was only made in July 2020, judging by the editing history of a somewhat hard-to-find wiki page.

I like its bristly look.

"crows" and "ravens" are needlessly capitalized.
"it's ancestor" should be "its ancestor".
There should be a space between "biomes" and "Like their ancestor".
"made for" suggests these were manufactured; I suggest "suited for".
"peg like" should be "peg-like".
"Earths insectivore" should be "Earth's insectivore".
"Normally solitary they" there should be a comma after "normally solitary".
"predators kills carrion". Did you mean, "other predators' kills" or "carrion resulting from other predators' kills".
"rather quickly" should be a comma after it.
"way of predators" should have a comma after it.
"with with" is a repetition error.

What a fascinating, bizarre crystalflora. I like how it conveys the idea of an "alien cactus" without just being a cactus with a few weird parts.

I ought to work on my end of the swap soon.

Yes, I think it is good. I see no other things which ought to be corrected or clarified.

I had to go all the way to Generation 12's Neo Furtim Carpotesta Luceremundare (quite a mouthful) to learn shrew bones are made from alien lichen-diatoms. At least I guessed correctly that they had descended from the Carpotesta Luceremundare.

It would be...interesting if these ended up developing bony elements very similar to shews' bones, like how crinoids segments could be mistaken for weird vertebrae.

The artwork looks nice.

I suppose this was just inevitable...
Ah well. I wanted to make the Press-toothed Bubbleskin a raptor.

These are very interesting alien chickens. I like the lineart, pose, feathers, and color and patterning.

Since these are "chickens"....I wonder if a Naucean would pluck one of these, say, "Behold! A man!" and everyone would be baffled at it. (Though if they define themselves as "uncovered things with two jaws, two legs and a long tail", the joke would probably still work.)

" '''in'''sects, p'''ter'''osaurs, '''bi'''rds, and b'''at'''s" That sounds oddly like you're trying to avoid tag-based filtering on Tumblr. It's a rather conspicuous and hard-to-read way of pointing out the connection. I recommend using single quotes or italics.

" flyer" Generally, "flier" is used for things that fly, and "flyer" is used for advertising copy, or what were historically called "handbills".

"It has gotten smaller so that it can be lighter for this purpose," That suggests intention, which is incorrect.

"cotton" I know some plents have cottony coverings, but I still recommend you specify "plent cotton" or particular species.

What explains the different coloration? Locally-adapted subspecies, or diet?

I'm not done reading this yet. Since it's so long, I'll give feedback in parts.

"it has the intuition" Instinct, you mean?
"parental instincts" Do the Seashrogs look like infant Wolvershrogs?

"Fully aware are a different species" I wonder if animals can even recognize "natural kinds", much less species...do cats know that they are cats and humans are humans, or do they consider humans weird cats or "those big two-legged things"? I recommend rephrasing it to "they are aware of the big physical differences between them" or "aware that they are reproductively incompatible", if the latter can be assumed a proxy for species recognition...and I'm not sure whether that counts.

"beams also serve to support additional floors, shelves, and various ramps" That seems rather sophisticated architecture. Great apes are highly intelligent and regularly create fairly sophisticated nests; judging by Wikipedia, the closest parallel to the Wolvershrog's architecture may be how orangutans may add "pillows", "blankets", "roofs", and "bunk-beds" to their nests.

Since the "furniture" may lead one to conclude they're sapient, I recommend relating them to orangutans in the description.

" Wolvershrog has borrowed ideas from the Maineiac Rivershrog" I don't think they can communicate. Did it simply observe them making nests and eventually imitated them? Certainly, animals can imitate other animals, but borrowing nest-building "ideas" seems rather complex.

"due to their close relation" Using it as a noun suggests they have a cousin between them or something of that sort. I suggest, "due to being closely related".

Wow, that's a long description...it's about 500 words longr than for the Pollooks genus group, though substantially shorter than for the Seashrog.

I recommend splitting this into subheadings, like I did for the Pollooks and you did for the Seashrog.

I was going to comment on it, but I was delayed due to technical issues and other "Real-Life Stuff".

I'd recommend using "fringed" rather than "hairy" for the gecko-like feet, unless it uses actual specialized hairs. While things can certainly be described as "hairy" despite no relation to mammalian hair, since Soriparasites are somewhat mammal-like anyway, it would be useful to specify the structure.

It seems it would have a lot of trouble getting around on the ground, but its description suggests its yellow coloration helps blend into the soil between hosts. For comparison, three-toed sloths have trouble getting around on the ground because of their front claws, and this one has proportionately even longer claws. I figure it would awkwardly inch along on its "wrists" (if it has wrists), hop along, or swim.

The skin texture is pleasant to look upon, as usual. These certainly are distinctive as a "shrew" which doesn't (seemingly) have six eyes, but a more normal, mammal-style two.

This is an image of a Saurohound pup, which I made years ago and must not have submitted. Since I'm the creator of the Saurohound, I'm not sure whether I even need approval to add it. I suppose this post can serve as a precedent for similar future things.

I like it.
"wait for the danger to not notice it" Do you mean "pass it by"?
"maintain alertness" is ambiguous; I recommend "watch for predators".
Oh ho ho, this retroactive organism expanded the range of the Mostly Purple Snoa.

QUOTE (TheBigDeepCheatsy @ Mar 22 2021, 12:02 PM)

I’m admittedly a little iffy on how squished the torso looks, I’m guessing that’s due to it lifting its rear up?

"It's butt has raiser [sic] higher so its "butt-nostil" can sit above the waterline when wading in the shallows."

I think this means it doesn't raise its butt, but it grows in a way that makes it seem pre-raised. I think it's like how a wildebeest face makes it look as if they are often tilting their heads slightly down, but if you look at their skeletons, their skulls actually have a strong diagonal slant relative to the more familiar-looking goat skeletons.

"it's ancestor" should be "its ancestor". (this occurs twice.
"front hood" is surely "front hooves".
"it's butt" should be "its butt".
"it's eyes" should be "its eyes".
"up stream" should be "upstream", and "down stream" should be "downstream".
"each others plow" should be "each other's plow".
"lead by" should be "led by".
"sicne" is an error; you mean "since".

This sure has a unique body shape. It would probably be a pain to ride.

QUOTE

I asked the discord about anything I should have changed about the description before I had submitted it, as I prefer to work on there. I'm not entirely sure on how the reproduction and intelligence works, as I was trying to submit what I know and what people like dorite suggested. How would you suggest I do the birthing process and intelligence? Plus how could I reflect the bottleneck? Meanwhile I made the edits both you and Cheatsy suggested I should make.

As TheBigDeepCheatsy says, the reproduction seems to be ovoviviparity. I would recommend the eggs be kept in the oviduct, and the newly-hatched young would be expelled by contractions, as it is for ovoviviparous snakes. I am uncertain about whether the eggs should be extra-big or whether the baby Signaltails would be smaller compared to equivalent developmental stages in its ancestor. I suppose that depends on the size of its ancestors' eggs. Its ancestor's description already mentioned: "Because of the high numbers of larva surviving, Rainbowtails will lay fewer eggs". Laying them as juveniles might make them even more likely to survive, suggesting they might have fewer young than their ancestor for lack of need.

The cognitive buffer hypothesis suggests higher general intelligence evolves to deal with novel or changing environments. According to this source (https://source.wustl.edu/2017/09/came-first-big-brains-demanding-environments/), birds with big brains are able to move into more seasonal, unpredictable places. The source also says: "“We showed that species with big brains maintain stable populations in environments where the temperature, precipitation or productivity change a lot, and species with smaller brains cope less well,” Botero said."

If its lifestyle is somehow easier, or more predictable, it may have less reason to keep its ancestor's high level of intelligence. Its ancestor's intelligence was handy for making spawning pools, and spawning pool construction behaviors were most of its nigh-sapient behaviors, but this one doesn't use spawning pools anymore, from lack of need. ​Still, it's odd how they wouldn't use that behavior as an exaptation for something else, such as making the pits carcass storage areas. (Dogs, squirrels, and scrub jays bury food)
​
For the high grasslands, one could argue the soil is too thin or rocky to dig, at least for those organisms with minimal natural digging adaptations, like this one. For the plains, though....plains are likely easy to dig. People did make dugout homes in the American Plains, after all. If there's more strong, woody roots than one might expect in the plains, or dangerous digging predators easily alerted by digging activities, or scavengers very effective at detecting and stealing their food, that might lead to a loss of caching behavior as an exaptation from birthing pool digging. Ergo, there would be less reason to preserve the intelligence that would grant them the capability to dig pools.

Something like a cave or a rainforest would be very predictable in resource availability compared to, say, a savanna, monsoon forest or temperate forests, with big seasonal variations. But I figure the plains and high grasslands environments don't fit those parameters.

As for the bottleneck? Well, you could simply state it has fairly low genetic diversity as a consequence of a historic bottleneck in the Drake Plains Rainbowtail population. If you want to be harsh, you could say they, like cheetahs, commonly have infertility problems or low litter sizes. You could, however, say it's largely compensated for by their social lifestyles and low offspring mortality rates. Perhaps they have a promiscuous mating system, so that if one mate is infertile, it doesn't matter like it would for a monogamous species because they mate with multiple individuals.

"and thus replace them" (that should be "and thus replacing them" or "to replace them".

"living only in the Plains" is odd; I recommend "plains".

If their numbers dwindled rapidly over the decades and their future looked "grim" at some point, they would surely have gone through a population bottleneck. If they went through a population bottleneck at some point, wouldn't it be reflected in their genetics? Pandas, cheetahs, golden snub-nosed monkeys, and humans are all examples of species that have gone through population bottlenecks.

The eggs are retained within the oviduct like ovoviviparous snakes, right? Some Fermisaurs have "pool organs" which, I assume, are farther inside and somewhat more womb-like. Can you clarify "small juveniles"? Do they make bigger eggs, or is their bodily growth within the egg comparatively compressed, while the land adaptations still happen?

"The armor present[...]" I recommend adding commas, or splitting up that sentence.

"and thus needs" Her limited hunting prowess doesn't limit her need to rely on her mate and other members of the pack, as the grammar suggests. "And thus she" would be clearer.

"under developed" Under-developed.

Out of curiosity, are the live young pushed out, a la mammals, or do they climb out?

"Due to a high amount of energy required for their elaborate reproductive activities, their brains have simplified to require less energy to run said brain and as such they have a much more simple language."

Wolves, bonobos, and wild turkeys all have, to some degree, elaborate "reproductive activities" (Courtship? Gestation?) and are still intelligent. The human brain itself, for all its sophistication, doesn't require that much energy to run. It's not uniquely energy-hungry, either. (https://www.futurity.org/humans-brain-energy-cost-1596812/)

If it lived in a very food-limited environment, like deep in a cave or in a desert, perhaps trimming its brain's caloric consumption would be sensible, but here, the reasoning doesn't make sense.

" they are old enough to fend for themselves" repeating "fend for themselves" twice is awkward.

It would help to clarify mesothermy and its variants for those cases.

It seems some ectotherms can become endothermic as needed. (e.g., sphinx moths and tegus)

According to the BBC:

QUOTE

Smaller mammals – including many rodents, insectivores, bats, marsupials and even some primates – have evolved a way to push this temperature reduction much further. They enter an energy-saving state known as daily torpor.

In a way, those mammals are regularly ectotherms, despite having integument.

The same article mentions:

"For instance, newborn mammals' body temperature is entirely dependent on the temperature of the environment. The ability to produce internal heat only kicks later in development."

It could be that some endothermic lineages lost endothermy, a la naked mole rats, due to living in very temperature-stable environments, like burrows.

Even endotherms (vulturesvultures) can regularly bask; they apparently maintain the nighttime body temperatures lower than their daytime temperatures.

It is possible that some plents from endothermic lineages living in warm, stable environments, such as perpetual caves or perhaps rainforests, could lose the ability to be endothermic, because it wouldn't be as necessary.

I'd suggest:

The Scaleskunik is, at least, a facultative endotherm, a la a tegu.

If it's a smaller flier with no integument, and lives full-time in areas that get cold either daily (some deserts) or seasonally (subtropics and colder, boreal and higher) , it either heats itself up for flight by the movement of its flight muscles, or, if improbable, is a hummingbird/bat-style heterotherm. Depending on exactly how cold the environment is, hibernation or similar states can be assumed.

For seemingly-endothermic fliers which don't have integument, in environments where it doesn't really need it (e.g., rainforests, perhaps savannas) the best comparison would be copying the metabolism of the hairless bat, or, if information is unavailable, close relatives of the hairless bat.
Sub-rule: If it's really big (exact size undecided), and it has some way of reducing heat loss via its wings (assuming uncovered skin), it can be assumed to be a giganototherm of some sort.

If it has integument and appears warm-blooded, but depends on the sun to warm up, it lets its body temperature drop at night (a la vultures) and basks in the morning, or it outright enters torpor, kind of like hibernation, during nighttime. (If in doubt, the big ones that can keep in body heat better or the especially fuzzy ones are vulture-like.)

Notably, an ancient goat species was ectothermic, apparently due to a lack of food on its tiny island.

It's possible the Blind Hoofplent could have lost some measure of thermoregulation, due to living in a stable and possibly food-limited cave environment (Ferret Limestone Caverns). If its descendants lived in warm environments, or environments that are normally cold but are pretty warm due to climactic fluctuations, they might keep that state of being somewhat ecothtermic. Nighttime temperatures are generally colder, though, so it seems more likely they would become more endothermic (barring integument) if they're nocturnal.

This is a sketch page from years ago, before the hiatus.

Some of these (the Luroxal, Tamybara, Corkscrew Krugg, and Guhnuh) have already been released. The "Fermisaur" near the top, with two pictures, is nearly done. The one at the upper right is impossible to make now, since its ancestor, the Pearback, went extinct.

Herbivore? Microbivore? Both?

How would self-domestication apply here? I checked the Wikipedia article on the subject, and it doesn't seem the parallel how this one farms.

There's still the "burring" typo, as well as other typos.

This is an interesting development---an entire species consisting of a massive number of cloned trees. That might illustrate what might happen when there aren't enough diseases or parasites to maintain sexual reproduction in a population that has the option to reproduce asexually.

I wonder how many parasites and pests and diseases we can throw at these until they "give up" and reproduce sexually...or until some mating-obsessed whippersnapper trees crush Pandocrystal's brief but glorious reign.

Can macroscopic organisms of this size really be called "consumers"?

The comma is "decades, however" should be a period. As it is, it looks on a run-on sentence. "replaced" should not be capitalized.

I look forward to seeing further development on this.