I've collected a list of organisms that could easily yield easy-to-draw descendants, for the benefit for newcomers who may have limited art skills. This list is not comprehensive. I'm posting it here for feedback or expansion.

If your art skills, science skills, and writing skills are all very limited, the easiest possible option is selecting a genus group of aquatic flora that is easy to draw, summarize some details from the genus group description with a few bits of novel information (possibly paraphrased from pages on round algae species, like Neptune's necklace, or kelp), and place its habitat in a temperate or tropical coast habitat.

General Principles

When in doubt, draw from the side, without background details.

Deep sea fauna are more likely to have thick, simple body shapes than those in shallower water, so you can look for organisms in Twilight Floor and habitats and lower, or even make a descendant for a deep-sea organism that’s even simpler.

If a slender-bodied organism takes on a burrowing life, its limbs may become smaller, or it may lose them entirely. You can use this to make simpler, easier-to-draw descendants of an organism with a compelling in-universe explanation.

Usually, official art of organisms shouldn’t be drawn from above, but if the organism in question is flat, like a flatfish, and doesn’t really have anything remarkable on its underside, it can be drawn from above. This is true for Flat Swarmer descendants, and they’re easiest to draw from this angle.

Organisms tend to get simpler body shapes (e.g., lose limbs) if they become endoparasites, although with the limited number and diversity of parasites on Sagan 4, it might be difficult to find good candidates for fauna that can develop into endoparasites.

----
Total Beginner
If you can't draw anything more complicated than a flat smiling sun or a stick figure, these are good choices.

Just Circles
If you can draw a circle/sphere, color it solid purple, and give it shading or waves or circle patterns (so it doesn't look very lazy, even given your limited art skills), you can draw a Marbleflora. This is also extremely easy to do in digital modeling. There are many guides for shading spheres online.

Marbleflora
Sanguine O’Spheres (can be depicted excised from host skin, or against a solid background the color of the host's skin)
Chambered Bobiiro (patterns)
More Complicated:
Dry Gelatin (mostly a sphere, but with wrinkly, leathery skin and pores)

Circles Plus Other Circles
Ouhciiro (circle connected to a smaller circle)
Sheet Snotflora (circle within a circle, with little stringy pseudopods within the inner circle)
Cloudbubble (sphere covered in hair)
Parasitic Floats (Circles connected with strings, with strings at each end of the chain)

A Circle With A Little Extra
Mostly a circle, with small non-circle parts or patterns that can be portrayed as flat.

Twinkiiros (one shape is a sphere on top of a cylindrical shape, like a can)
Pioneeroots
Omegiiro
Lediiro

Other Basic Shapes

Bonecorus (a heart, ridges, and strings at the end)
Otter Salentoid (football with little roots)

Smears and Blobs

Microbes
Salmound (irregular blob. Segmented like an orange cut in half.)

Flora

Flashkelps
Swarmerweeds
Basilliphyta (flat blobby shape on a rock)
Bonyfee (colorful gumdrops or other rounded shapes; just draw on a bone fragment to make it easier)
Slarti Glasstower (Gumdrop with a blob)

Fauna
Foi are, in general, very easy to draw. But when writing a description, remember that they're very, very simple, more like placozoans or slime molds than "normal" animals.
Examples: River Foi, Dixon Foi, Camouflage Foi, Minifee, Water Table Foi, note that some have a rim around the edge)
Flange-Nosed Foi (a smear with two rounded triangles on one end)

Mortusyte (tapered, oscillating smear, with a pointy shark-fin triangle for a fin)
Kuyasha (Make a fuzzy blob with a coarse-edged paintbrush, paint in some slight variations of grey with the same brush, then add a star with a circle inside it for a close-up view)

More complicated smears and blobs:
Lactic Foi (smear shape, core, transparent, leech-like rim)
Mortuprey

Organized Blobs/Round Shapes Plus Other Shapes

Microbes

Morphous Swampbean (various simple shapes)
Beach Bean (a lot of circles and blobs)

Flora

Larands (Larands genus group, Larachoy, Larandbora)
Fuzzpile (Blobby smears stacked on top of each other, with long hair and many circular berries)
More complex:
Kack Tower (a somewhat pinched-in, upright smear, covered in spikes and cactus pleats, with spiky fluff on top)

Coralkiiro (a sphere with triangles)
Sappro (from a distance: a blob covering flora; from close up: basically a row of teeth in their sockets.)

Fauna

Keryhs Clade
These are tiny, wobbly endoparasites that come in a variety of forms. If you can draw a tooth in its socket, you can draw these.

-Keryhs (genus group)
-Fang Keryh (wobby stalagmite shape with two tentacles)
-Pricklecone Keryh (wobbly stalagmite shape, four tentacles, tiny triangles at the tip of the big triangle; larva is shaped like the head of a wrench with four tentacles on top)

Qural Clade
-Qural (half a big circle, a squarish shape, and tentacles on top)
-Artir Cural: (a very thick pill shape, with a smear below, and lots of tentacles on top)
-Jaydoh Cural: A wobbly, elongated pill shape, with a square at the bottom, some black ovals for vents, blotchy colors, and tentacles at the top).

Swarmers
Not all swarmers are easy to draw, but a fairly large number are.

-Miniswarmer (especially the smallest, roundest sample)
-Deep Glowswarmer
-Flabnose
-Flatswarmer
-Ray Flat Swarmer

Vaguely Animal-Like Blobby Shapes
If your animal drawings look like fused-together chicken nuggets, these are good for you.

Topyiiro (variable blobby shapes)
Lureflab
Rojoko
More complicated:
Stegosnaper: Big head, gills, thick tube body, short, thick tube-limbs, blobs of scutes, blobs of a mouth, no eyes)
Scooters (tend to have rounded shapes; can use spheres for the torso, eye, thighs, and triangles for the back spikes.)

Basic Non-Tube Fauna
Aphluks (If you can draw a snowman made of two balls of snow with bunny ears and three twigs with three branches each, you can probably draw this)
Gilltails (elongated football shape, with tail fins like hearts with triangles on top)

Snakes & Worms

Limblesses (somewhat similar to snakes; the mouths are complicated, but you can simplify them for a descendant)
Cleaner Borevermid (segmentation, spikes, somewhat complicated mouth; combine smear, rectangle, circles, triangles, and oval)
False Cleaner Borevermid (similar to Cleaner Borevermid, but more segmentation, and a triangle mouth with more segmentation)

Slightly More Skilled
If you can draw a roast chicken, you can probably draw these.

Geometric Shapes
Shapes which are simple to draw, but not round or blobby.

Kory Claw (bending pyramid, attached to a semicircle; three colors)
Terrace Crystal: Soil, long rectangular box, triangular prism, rectangular box, triangular prism.

Pagoda Crystal:
Soil, Rectangle, Four trapezoids, one triangle. Split evenly to indicate shading. Ideally, put a little shading underneath the edge of each, to indicate depth. Look at Egyptian pyramids for shading cues.

Crystalfir/Emeraldfir :
A box, three progressively narrower boxes stacked on top of each other, and a triangular prism on top. Small spheres just underneath the edge of each row. If you can draw a simplified Christmas tree, you can draw this.

Phantasmagoria Crystal (long rectangular prisms (boxes) with pyramids on top.

Signpost Crystamboo: long tube (like a paper towel roll) with segmentation (like cans stacked on top of each other), and skinny pyramids between segments.

Vaguely Plant-Like Simple Shapes
If you can draw a recognizable piece of broccoli, you can probably draw these.

Pert
Pioneer Quillprong
Fuzzyfan
Piomike
Cushprongs
Kellace (circle/blob, curving stalks, tiny dots. Optional: wandering roots in a cutaway of a crystal flora)
Colonial Calmstrum (if you can draw a generic, simplified daisy-style flower, you can draw this)

Simple:
Sapshrooms (half an oval, tilted on its side; stalks, and tiny circles at the end)

Hello, Demon7sword.
For your entry submission, I recommend making it as close to finished as possible. Otherwise, we can't properly evaluate it. There's no hurry. You don't need to take up a work-in-progress slot here.
I figure you'll fill out the other details later, but it is especially important to make sure the picture is available on the forum itself. You can enter the picture link through the IMG button above the text box for a full reply. Your picture seems to have been made on Microsoft Paint, either by using a very thick pencil tool or by very low resolution. Art submissions obviously made on Microsoft Paint are acceptable, but it does look very jagged and blocky. I recommend either enlarging the picture and cleaning up its lineart, or trying again with proportionately thinner lineart. For simple art styles on Microsoft Paint, I recommend looking at this art for the Fisticoat (first one) or Mostly Purple Snoa (second one).

...however could someone get the idea that Generation numbers are ID numbers and Sagan 4 organisms are nameless? If these people are spectators, they must not have gone on the wiki.

The batbee having some "fingers" not enclosed by wings in an interesting innovation.

Some parts of the diet are listed in an overly long way that would be better elaborated in the description or suggested by being ranked farther down the list. Namely: Carnosprawl, Necks, Mistswarmers, Flashkelps, Minikruggs, Mudferra, Cloudswarmers, Sapworms, Sruglettes, and especially Gushitos. In fact, if they dislike Gushitos so much and can eat other small flying insectoids, it brings up the question of why it’s even in the diet.
Heterotherm (muscle vibration) should be capitalized, as well as the words In the Reproduction line.

“Songsauce Piper” should be capitalized.

The picture is strongly grainy; it might have been saved as a JPEG and saved over. The black speck near the tail is also so large and conspicuous as to be distracting. The background and the speck could be fixed in less than a minute.

Mid-air should be “midair”.
“Until now, that is”. “Until now” would be better.

I haven’t looked over the whole thing yet, but I can look over more tomorrow.

It’s been 2 hours, 20 minutes. I’ll say the first draft of the Ketters page is done. It’s a mess, but at least most of the sections are filled out. The Ketters lineage was much bigger than I expected, so I figured filling out the page would be shorter. I made a reasonable assumption that most Ketters did not have teeth from the rarity of portrayal in pictures, as well as the paucity of results from “Kitrii, teeth”, “Kitrii, tooth”, “Kitrii, chew”, “Kitrii, fangs”, and even “Kitrii, bite”.

I don't think Goutis really warrant an overview page, but they are distinctive enough to warrant a mention of an overview page for a bigger clade.

I have other inquiries, and Sagan 4 tasks in general, but I'll take a break for now.

During my first pass through it, I saw thumbnail issues in the following sections.
Ketter, Bearhog, Gossalizard, Wingworms, Filtersquids, Dweller, Fee, Shockers, Swarmers, and Skuniks.

However, upon re-loading, different clades get thumbnail loading issues. I'll see if I can fix those, along with some typos or formatting issues I've spotted. I'll also work on adding inline links to some lineages mentioned.

I noticed some lineages were mentioned, but didn't have overview pages. I'd work on adding overview pages for them, at least for the smaller lineages, but it would help to know how big a clade has to get to justify a clade overview. Five species? Six? For comparison, there are only four emulsechoes, which are mentioned on your introduction page.

Why is “wooden bones” put in quotation marks? I would fix it, but I'd like to know the underlying logic.

Should the sections (e.g., senses) change for flora overview pages?
It would help with recordkeeping to note when pages were last updated, by Week and Generation.
“Ordinarily arthropods” Does this mean "typically ordinary arthropods" or "typically resemble arthropods"?

I've added more information, and sorted each by subject. I wasn't sure if biats had tongues, so I didn't add tongue-specific information.

Fixed the habitat typo.
I pointed out it was a flora because flora are generally ectotherms.
What would a mushroom 80 cm tall rely on? Cell walls?

“actually hit each other’s” Actually hit each other.
“Are born”: “they are born"
The title in the template is “Beach Cheekhorn”, when that’s actually its ancestor.

Why not make them specialized to achieve just one broad and useful function? Since plant parasites are somewhat underdeveloped compared to real life, making these help prevent water loss might be enough of a function.

I explained the similarities as a particularly odd case of convergent evolution, and suggested a real-life comparison to make it seem more plausible.

I think I was originally going to introduce sexual evolution, but that might take a while. To get this approved faster, perhaps I'll add that in a descendant.

I'm not very familiar with the topic of cephalization, but from what I know, this seems like a sensible compromise.

Quillboll
Original description idea, which I can change:



I’m thinking of making this a Quaxaca, Quassagule or Prongoli descendant, and spreading it from Raptor Volcanic to Wallace Savana and West Wallace Veldt, and perhaps Raptor Plains, too. (Raptor Plains has no local organisms.) Annual cotton plants could provide inspiration for its physiology. I was going to use cottongrass as inspiration, but they live in colder, northerly climates.

It would be useful as a foodstuff for my antelope-like Rainforest Buttpiper descendent, which I’ve mentioned before in the Works in Progress topic, but have since elaborated on in my ideas document.

I'm thinking it could be a herbaceous/semi-woody annual or biennial. It seems to have well-developed, shallow roots and a small rhizome. That might suggest it lives in thick soil, or somewhat thin or rocky soil. As typical for its lineage, it would probably be capable of nitrogen-fixing because of its microbes, and it might have tiny, hard-to-digest thorns hidden among its leaves which gradually wear down herbivores' teeth. If it's a Quassagule descendant, it might be notable for turning a washed-out reddish-purple when it dries, when most purpleflora turn pink or champagne when dry. Raptor Plains has no other local flora, so if it gets that far, it would probably have to be adapted as a pioneer species.

An interesting opportunity is making it so dominant in Raptor Plains with its unusual dry-season coloration that it creates selection pressure for any species or locally-adapted subspecies that come in to also have its unusual dry-season coloration, at least until more typical purpleflora come in.

I probably could make a passable description by stringing together generic traits from its ancestors with brief life-history and soil conditions descriptions, as well as spelling out the implications of its being common in certain habitats, but I would like my flora to be a little more original and interesting.

This is a topic for asking the community for moderate description and concept help for half-finished submissions. It's good to use if one feels one's submission is too bland or basic for one's tastes, because just one or two things are missing or underdeveloped. It is also useful if one doesn't feel a submission is quite developed enough to fill up a work-in-progress slot on the submissions board, or for using between Generations for upcoming submissions.

If low on ideas, please see other topics, such as the Submission Ideas topic, or browse the wiki.

It won't have much variety in its diet in Lamarck Temperate Rainforest, but I guess it's your choice to make it somewhat ecologically vulnerable there.

I approve this submission.

@colddigger:

Some minor feedback:

“Trichomes are commonly found in varying degrees similarly, and for similar reason, to its ancestor.” You’ll need to briefly summarize that: it seems to be an infraction under the Standalone Read rule. (https://sagan4.jcink.net/index.php?showtopic=1) Since trichomes seem distinctive and physiologically important, it’s worth specifying. However, the description is sufficiently detailed that the “most other characteristics are fairly similar” part at the end may not need to be elaborated upon.

“It’s ancestor”->”its ancestor”.
I’m not sure if “heliothermy” is worth specifying as separate from “ectothermy”.

Otherwise, it looks fit for approval.

@kopout:

Some minor feedback:
“As these islands”: I recommend splitting the sentence with a comma: it’s long.
“were out,” Wear out.
“Common.Species” A minor spacing error.
“Wind blown” -> wind-blown.
Thermoregulation: Flora are surely ectotherms by default.
Support: I don’t know for certain for this lineage, but cell walls and cellulose are likely.


Otherwise, this looks suited for approval. Strictly speaking, these things are so minor they could easily be corrected after approval on the wiki, due to the typo correction rule.

“It’s ancestor”
“Hoofs”: while “hoofs” was the older, traditional form of the word, “hooves” seems more common in modern use.
“Their chin”: this is a plural possessive error.
“Tail,.” This is a typo.
“Jusice”: “juice”.
“Their tail”: plural possessive error.
“Each others”: Each other’s.
“Actual hit”: Actually hit.
“Modified quill”: “modified quills”.
“To big”: “too big”.
“The semiaquatic”: The semiaquatic plants?

While a view of a female Quillyn's face would be useful to indicate the thickness of the throat when not covered by tufts, this otherwise seems suited for approval.

Subjective Review

The texturing in the background is similar to your standard Hydromancerx swirly-watercolor background, but grainier, suggesting sand. The coloring is pleasant.

—

Preliminary Review

It may be a symbiote with its host flora, but that doesn't explain what nutrients it uses. Does it use simple sugars, other compounds, or both?

Support: It appears to have cell walls.
Respiration: Passive Diffusion seems the most likely at this scale, given its complexity.
Thermoregulation: At this scale, it would surely be “ectothermic”.

In retrospect, Hexpouruses have a terribly underdeveloped description for.a genus group. Various important traits in the merged genus groups aren’t even mentioned in its description. It may be best to ask TheBigL to update it, although, as it is a microbe genus group and those rarely get attention, it’s not high-urgency.

I noticed the capitalization of species names is inconsistent.
“Ancestor however”: “Ancestor; however”
“To bring in” “which bring in” is better. “
“In its oral groove”: “Into its oral groove”
A quick check suggests the plural is “flagella” or “flagellums”, although “flagella” seems more standard.
“To help”-> “which help”

“Extreme temperature”: “extreme temperatures”.
“Safe inside the flora”: this needs a comma at the end.
“This doesn’t cost the flora much so it can keep growing healthy”. What does “it” refer to? Can you clarify this?
“They are not harmful to their host”: if it has multiple host species, the grammar should be adjusted.
“Endophytes”: this should not be capitalized.
“Endophytes they”: Endophytes, they.
“Species they”: Species, they.

“Its hot”: It’s hot.
“Loose”: lose.
“These pours”: Do you mean “pores”, or “‘pours”, as a shortened form for Symbiopouruses or its relatives?
“While other species” The “while” doesn’t make sense. The easiest solution is to omit the “while”.
“Fruits, flowers”: the simplest solution is adding an “and” after the comma.
“Spores. Thus” -> “spores, thus”.
Does “them” refer to the frequency of spreading events in the flora, or there microbes?


I recommend reading the descriptions out loud to check for choppy sentences. The Oatmeal provides a humorous guide to punctuation, though it mostly teaches about the use of semicolons. (https://www.theoatmeal.com/comics/semicolon)

Suggestions
Since this is a genus group, I would recommend adding a little more detail, such as elaborating on the chemicals it uses.

Moderators have a lot of tasks to attend to: this might not be considered especially urgent.

QUOTE (Disgustedorite @ Dec 27 2022, 08:56 PM)

Pterosaurs actually could launch from water, so I see no reason biats can't. In fact, pole vaulting species will always be lighter in overall weight than things that can't. The leg strength problem is not only nonexistent, but with the existing lightweight traits of biats they can actually get larger than the biggest pterosaurs, in theory. Biats have some respiratory advantages. It's much easier for them to evolve complex and unidirectional respiratory systems because they have multiple pairs of lungs, while for skysnappers evolving this trait would be uncommon and difficult. Earth tetrapods have done it before, but only a few times. Skysnappers are inherently much heavier than a biat can be, as their only lightening adaptation is their hollow bones. Having separate legs and wings means they have to have two pairs of strong heavy limbs instead of one, much like birds, and on top of that their wings are membrane-based so they're heavy from all the water inside. Biats have dead dry lightweight feather wings, which not only need to be smaller than a skysnapper wing to carry the same weight but also weigh less overall. Same with all their other flight surfaces such as the ears and tail. All this said, there's no reason for these groups to be unable to niche partition. Flying isn't a niche, it's a method.

QUOTE

Pterosaurs actually could launch from water, so I see no reason biats can't.

I checked that. Apparently, that is new knowledge. I will update the list accordingly.

I'm aware of the possibility of niche partitioning. Opportunities for niche partitioning are implied in the list.

I noticed that your response exclusively points out negatory things: that is, it's both negative in tone and provides no favorable concessions or admissions for skysnappers. In fact, almost all of your response seems to suggest, in detail, how biats are inherently superior flying organisms. To point out the utility of the list and provide additive feedback as well would be more constructive.

I noticed that biat (interbiat descendants) are a fairly popular kind of organism to evolve and widespread, even yielding six species in a small genus group. To reduce the chances biats will not eventually ecologically overtake skysnappers entirely through their popularity, I have created a list of physiological advantages, disadvantages, and constraints between skysnappers and biats. This may be useful to put on the wiki as a meta page. I have posted it here for double-checking, feedback, and expansion as needed.

Skysnappers and Biats: A Comparison


Jaws and Mouthparts


Limbs


Senses


Other

QUOTE

That's a fair bit different from what I'd had in mind for it, but I like it! Note I intentionally gave it more toes; this was because originally it was eating larger prey and needed more stability when holding it down, but I suppose being polydactyl could also help it hold onto a branch.

I did consider the possibility it would be like a bird of prey with those long, sharp claws, but its face shape and small teeth didn't look well-suited for ripping apart rodent-esque organisms. (Though, after the fact, wooden bones are probably weaker than calcium bones at that size.) In designing how it worked, I focused on what sort of lifestyle it could have with its particular mouth shape. It's not a full-on swift or swallow, or even treeswift (which have longer legs and nest in trees, making them more similar). In fact, as swifts or swallows go, it's incompetent. Still, I didn't think its niche would be covered at all within its particular habitat. Its closest competition, Songsauce Piper and Quail Raptor, are ground foragers. I did incorporate the claws to help it scramble up and launch itself off large fauna. While this idea is a little boring, I figure it's interesting for being one of the few submissions to even mention tongue papillae, much less in the back of the throat, and for making more uses for sticky saliva.

What was your initial idea for it?

I decided to salvage one of Disgustedorite's scrapped ideas. Unfortunately, it was somewhat difficult to make it interesting, and it did seem Earthclone-like, as a blend of a swift or swallow and a cowbird.



Hejahaida ((Pengsongalong sepisfaucium) (??? hedge-throat)
Creator: Coolsteph (Art by: Disgustedorite)
Size: 25 cm tall
Habitat: Koseman Temperate Woodland, Koseman Temperate rainforest, Vivus Lowboreal, Central Koseman Lowboreal, Vivus Prairie (uncommon; hunting only)
Diet: Carnivore (Gushitos, Sapworms, Leaping Soriparasite, Bludbug, Minikruggs, Mikuks, Feluks, Cloudswarmers, Soricinus)
Support: Endoskeleton (Bone)
Respiration: Active (Lungs)
Thermoregulation: Endotherm (Downy Feathers)
Reproduction: Sexual (Male and Female, Hard-Shelled Eggs in Woven Nests)


==Nesting and Aggregations==

Hejahaidas nest in woodlands, clearings, or other semi-open habitats. They nest in blackflora trees of smaller species or not fully-grown individuals, and camouflage the nest using leaves and its black down feathers. Lacking a gripping hind toe, it actually can’t grip tree branches as well as a songbird, and so prefers fairly thick branches. While Hejahaidas spend most of their time in woodlands, they may make forays into the surrounding plains to hunt.

Hejahaidas live in the densest flocks during the breeding season of Sapworms and Dartirs in summer, as well as the breeding seasons of Gushitos. Populations in the Lowboreal move north in autumn, seeking more food, although they do not migrate significant distances.

==Diet & Digestive Physiology==

While not as generalistic as its ancestor, it is nonetheless adaptable to a wide range of prey and nesting habitats, so long as the prey can be caught on the wing or gleaned from conspicuous elevated locations like branches. Due to its long-legged, heavy body, it is not so maneuverable as, say, a swift, limiting sharp turns. Consequently, it favors less-maneuverable or less-aware prey species. In accordance with its niche of catching prey on the wing, its jaws can open wide: even the tip of its upper jaw is surprisingly flexible.

Typically, it swallows prey whole, where it is immobilized in sticky saliva, pushed down into an esophagus outpocket, and further trapped behind “hedges” of backward-facing conical papillae at the base of the Hejahaida’s tongue. However, it may chomp down once on fairly fragile large prey. At times, it flies just above its prey to snatch it up in one downward gulp.

Much as for Earth’s swifts, its thick saliva glues together its many small prey into a ball of corpses in its “crop”, an out pocket of its esophagus just above its stomach. It regurgitates this ball to feed its young. As it tends to swallow prey whole, a few species, such as Gushitos, have sufficient adaptations against suffocation or crushing to still be alive when it returns to the nest, twitching futilely in a mass of prey.

It rarely eats fully-grown Dartirs, as even the smaller species are absurdly long relative to its body size and a hassle to bite apart. Juvenile Hejahaidas may try to hunt fully-grown Dartirs anyway, only to rip Dartirs’ back halves off with a midair chomp and seem confused or disappointed when their prey just keeps flying away. (The prey is doomed, of course, but it’s not entirely in their stomachs.)

==Other Feeding Behavior==

Hejahaidas forage in small flocks, seeking out large aggregations of their preferred prey. This often means following large herbivorous fauna as they inadvertently flush prey out of hiding, attract detritivores with their dung, pellets, or simply lure in bloodsucking pests.

It occasionally scrabbles onto large herbivorous fauna and launches itself when it spots prey. For some large fauna, its claws hurt.

==Ecology==

It has the same predators as its ancestor where their habitats overlap with that of its ancestor’s predators, such as the Woodsalcon.

Near bodies of water (especially permanent ones), they compete somewhat with Sruglettes, which have a similar diet. They associate more strongly with large herbivores near bodies of water, as a form of niche partitioning.

QUOTE

And how big is said bat? If it's really small, that probably the reason why regarding their wing structure. This snapper, meanwhile, has a body length of 3.6 meters, nevermind it's wingspan.

QUOTE (Disgustedorite @ Dec 24 2022, 12:19 PM)

I don't think it's a big deal if someone doesn't draw good muscle definition. We don't require uber-perfect photorealistic art.

The bat I mentioned is very small, admittedly. The golden-capped fruit bat is a better example, with a forearm length of 21 cm, although that is also way, way smaller than this organism.

Making a little bicep-bulge on the left side of the arm facing the viewer is a reasonable compromise, as is making a propatagium.

With that kind of wing structure, it looks like it would fly either by straightening its arms out, with its wing membranes behind it with a croissant-like shape, or it would put its claws right in front of it and fly like the Pokemon Garchomp.