| QUOTE (colddigger @ Oct 26 2022, 09:02 PM) |
| does this really only eat ferries? are there no other similar purple floras that it would eat? |
Koalas eat only eucalyptus leaves, and from only a few species, at that. Greater glidersGreater gliders are even more specific. While most broadly comparable real animals have broader diets than that, given the diversity of Ferries species and the fact it eats multiple parts of Ferries, it's still a plausible diet. Deficiencies in nutrients in one kind of food could be compensated for in another. The description also specifies it's constantly on the move to take advantage of fresh growth, which is more nutritious.
"their body's" (Their bodies')
"They have developed the ability to store this sugar as antifreeze" (Since there are multiple kinds of antifreeze compounds, it would help to specify it's an antifreeze sugar compound, and, ideally, to specify what kind of antifreeze sugar.
"Strategists" (Strategies)
Xenobees are not attracted to the smell of blood, although it's possible it might catch a few anyway if it's next to a branch bearing flowers and a Xenobee blunders into it. This can be acknowledged by putting Xenobees last in the diet list and acknowledging the rarity of Xenobee capture in the description.
If you intend for the colonial stage to catch prey, you'll need to take note of how it does so. As Disgustedorite pointed out on Page 1, flypaper is baited, and spidewebs are hard to see an the wind passes through it. The flypaper technique would be easiest at this point, since it wouldn't require altering the art.
If you intend for the colonial stage to catch prey, you'll need to take note of how it does so. As Disgustedorite pointed out, flypaper is baited, and spidewebs are hard to see an the wind passes through it. The flypaper technique would be easiest at this point, since it wouldn't require altering the art.
The bait-scent that should work most effectively on most of its prey would be blood. Dartirs are all-purpose scavengers (though honestly they should be classified as scavenger/detritivore now), and Xenowasps drink nectar and blood. Strictly speaking, if it got translucent as well, that would help it capture prey, but Dartirs and Xenowasps are probably not intelligent enough to often get suspicious about the scent of blood coming from something with a shape very dissimilar to blood-containing fauna.
If you intend for the colonial stage to catch prey, you'll need to take note of how it does so. As Disgustedorite pointed out, flypaper is baited, and spidewebs are hard to see an the wind passes through it. The flypaper technique would be easiest at this point, since it wouldn't require altering the art.
The bait-scent that should work most effectively on most of its prey would be blood. Dartirs are all-purpose scavengers (though honestly they should be classified as scavenger/detritivore now), and Xenowasps drink nectar and blood. Strictly speaking, if it got translucent as well, that would help it capture prey, but Dartirs and Xenowasps are probably not intelligent enough to often get suspicious about the scent of blood coming from something with a shape very dissimilar to blood-containing fauna.
| QUOTE (Disgustedorite @ Oct 25 2022, 03:47 PM) |
| That actually is multicellularity. Organizing and functioning as one organism the way oozes do is multicellularity. |
@Disgustedorite You used "multicellularity" twice. In any case, should we conclude this submission's cellular status won't be an issue?
The habitat type listed include "atmosphere", but none of its habitats are in the atmosphere. It would surely need specialized adaptations to stay in the atmosphere on a regular basis. Short of forming spores, that might be hard to do for something with such a simple body.
I'm not sure if that's a good idea. On Beta, there were so many multicellular lineages that rules had to be implemented to cap the number of multicellular lineages. The Alpha timeline already has a massive number of multicellular lineages. The number of multicellular lineages, and kingdoms in general, seems greater than for Earth. While multicellularity has evolved many times, it surely doesn't occur with equal frequency across each kingdom of life.
A quick check of Oozes says:
"While the individual microbes can survive on their own, they prefer to cluster in colonies on millions of microbes, which allows them to bring down larger prey or share collected nutrients. The colony maintains its organization via chemical signals used as communication between cells, and actions are "remembered" through a form of modified genetic memory. "
A quick check of Oozes says:
"While the individual microbes can survive on their own, they prefer to cluster in colonies on millions of microbes, which allows them to bring down larger prey or share collected nutrients. The colony maintains its organization via chemical signals used as communication between cells, and actions are "remembered" through a form of modified genetic memory. "
| QUOTE (HethrJarrod @ Oct 25 2022, 07:47 AM) | ||||
There are plenty of coastal trees for it to use. Quhft, Cocobarrage, Obsidibend, Mainland Fuzzpalm, Mangot, Qupe Tree, Bangsticks Branching Qupe Tree, Topship Fuzzpalm I just don't think getting rid of coast would be the best option here. Got rid of Rainforest and Archipelago |
You seem to have mistaken "Elerd Temperate Coast" with "Elerd Temperate Beach". On second inspection, Carnosprawls and floating Mangrovecrystal forests are also an option, but that does bring up the question of what happens to them if they float away from the trees and land into the water. The simplest solution is to keep them on land, rather than on Mangrovecrystal, Carnosprawl, or Topship Fuzzplams.
EDIT: It seems you've already corrected the beach/coast problem.
| QUOTE (colddigger @ Oct 24 2022, 09:16 PM) |
| So just removing the coast and it'll be fine? Even if it gets blown out there, there's nothing for it to perform its normal lifestyle on so probably shouldn't count as a habitat. |
Removing the coast from the habitats is the simplest solution, yes. It's not impossible for it to live in a coastal habitat if it uses Topship Fuzzpalms, but this does greatly complicate the submission. There is also the possibility it could simply yield a specialized Topship Fuzzpalm-dependent descendant later on.
Please put the thing you're responding to at the top of your response. This is done automatically if you respond by pressing the quote button on a post.
Keep in mind that the mangal is like a mangrove forest, but the coast is out in the sea. This organism relies on trees. The coast (as a specific habitat) does not have trees, barring Topship Fuzzpalms. I checked the rules, and Coastal/Mangal counts as one flavor (Sunlight Zone) only if it includes the coast as well, which is, again, impossible for this organism, barring Topship Fuzzpalms. This rule most likely exists for fishlike organisms that live in both mangrove-like estuaries and bays or coasts, not for terrestrial organisms.
Keep in mind that the mangal is like a mangrove forest, but the coast is out in the sea. This organism relies on trees. The coast (as a specific habitat) does not have trees, barring Topship Fuzzpalms. I checked the rules, and Coastal/Mangal counts as one flavor (Sunlight Zone) only if it includes the coast as well, which is, again, impossible for this organism, barring Topship Fuzzpalms. This rule most likely exists for fishlike organisms that live in both mangrove-like estuaries and bays or coasts, not for terrestrial organisms.
The habitats involved have four flavors. Unless you're using a wildcard, this is impossible, but that's a moot point because the coast is largely an underwater enviroment with no trees inherent to the habitat....unless, of course, you make these use Topship Fuzzpalms on Topship Shrog nests.
That does bring up the question of how it doesn't use Topship vessels to spread to more habitats, though, and unless it just ran out of food, couldn't handle environmental conditions on the journey, or got destroyed by Topship Shrogs or other topship symbiotes, it would likely have to be a wildcard anyway, since it would surely spread to other forested areas once the Topship Shrogs made landfall. Notably, Topship Shrog nests are much cleaner than most shrog nests, which would likely make it harder for Flying Oozes to get enough food when it separates from the parent organism.
Style of feeding is not normally listed in the diet, so "omnivore" is more suitable.
I recommend:
"Diet: Omnivore (Dartirs, Xenobees, Xenowasps), Detritivore". "Detritivore" would suggest species matters little, if at all, when it concerns the rotting material it eats. You can, however, specify it eats (or mainly eats) rotting fruit and leaf litter in the description, as that is a useful detail.
When you've updated it, make a post in this thread to alert others to the fact. If you edit the first post without telling anyone, it's hard to know there was an update.
That does bring up the question of how it doesn't use Topship vessels to spread to more habitats, though, and unless it just ran out of food, couldn't handle environmental conditions on the journey, or got destroyed by Topship Shrogs or other topship symbiotes, it would likely have to be a wildcard anyway, since it would surely spread to other forested areas once the Topship Shrogs made landfall. Notably, Topship Shrog nests are much cleaner than most shrog nests, which would likely make it harder for Flying Oozes to get enough food when it separates from the parent organism.
Style of feeding is not normally listed in the diet, so "omnivore" is more suitable.
I recommend:
"Diet: Omnivore (Dartirs, Xenobees, Xenowasps), Detritivore". "Detritivore" would suggest species matters little, if at all, when it concerns the rotting material it eats. You can, however, specify it eats (or mainly eats) rotting fruit and leaf litter in the description, as that is a useful detail.
When you've updated it, make a post in this thread to alert others to the fact. If you edit the first post without telling anyone, it's hard to know there was an update.
If this has a global habitat, it will need to be a genus group. That requires depicting at least three species in the image, and I recommend providing more detail about its broad adaptations to various environments and environmental tolerances. You can also just limit it to one continent, but the same genus group rules apply.
An easier tactic is making it just one species, but giving it a remarkably wide distribution as your wildcard submission. (See Wildcard Rule in the rules: https://sagan4.jcink.net/index.php?showtopic=1&st=0)
"an organism" surely means "the organism".
The second part of the scientific name should not be capitalized. Remember: "T.rex", not "T.Rex".
Since the Flying Ooze eats "whatever it can find" when it's small, it would help to specify the sorts of things it eats, or at least prefers: say, small prey, rotting fruit and leaves, and so on.
If you intend to make this a wildcard submission, then all you'll need to do (after the relatively minor things above) is specify habitats, make sure they're connected, or make habitats that can't be survived in for long merely merely migrating habitats in between main habitats.
An easier tactic is making it just one species, but giving it a remarkably wide distribution as your wildcard submission. (See Wildcard Rule in the rules: https://sagan4.jcink.net/index.php?showtopic=1&st=0)
"an organism" surely means "the organism".
The second part of the scientific name should not be capitalized. Remember: "T.rex", not "T.Rex".
Since the Flying Ooze eats "whatever it can find" when it's small, it would help to specify the sorts of things it eats, or at least prefers: say, small prey, rotting fruit and leaves, and so on.
If you intend to make this a wildcard submission, then all you'll need to do (after the relatively minor things above) is specify habitats, make sure they're connected, or make habitats that can't be survived in for long merely merely migrating habitats in between main habitats.
Weird. Cotton Candy Phlyers' ancestors have always been heteotherms. Bats are also heterotherms, although it's unclear how similar these are to bats.
I used the summer temperatures of the Canadian tundra as a proxy. The average summer temperatures are 37-54° F, and the freezing point of water (and point where frostbite/frostnip is a risk) is 32°F, making it likely they'll get a few days (and especially nights) in summer at the freezing point, at least for a few hours. Given these are fairly small, have no insulation, and have big wings, once outside temperatures hit 32°F, it would likely be at particular risk offrostbite/frostnip.
Wood frogs survive beingpartially frozen because their bodies are flooded with sugar (glucose), but their blood sugar concentration is 450 times greater than that of a human's. Apparently, they survive this partly because ttheir metabolism has essentially shut down. Unless these similarly go into suspended animation, which might not be practical or plausible, having wings extremely high in sugar probably wouldn't work.
Antifreeze proteins would surely be better. However, if you're going for antifreeze sugars in its wings, using the antifrezeze-sugar of the Upis beetle, xylomannan, could work. It doesn't prevent freezing, but slows ice growth, allowing fluids surrounding cells to freeze in a controlled way without harming the insides of the cells. Xylomannan plus cryoprotectant compounds in the wings, especially the wing tips, should allow it to get frostnip occasionally for a few hours in polar summer nights and just shrug it off.
If they fold their wings, or wrap their wings around themselves, huddle together in groups at night (at least when it's particularly cold), and use xylomannan and cryoprotectant compounds in the wings, it should be sufficient to endure a few freezing-temperature days in summer. It would help them to have some ability to regenerate frostbitten wingtips, but, of course, organisms don't have to be perfectly adapted to the difficulties of their environment to survive.
I used the summer temperatures of the Canadian tundra as a proxy. The average summer temperatures are 37-54° F, and the freezing point of water (and point where frostbite/frostnip is a risk) is 32°F, making it likely they'll get a few days (and especially nights) in summer at the freezing point, at least for a few hours. Given these are fairly small, have no insulation, and have big wings, once outside temperatures hit 32°F, it would likely be at particular risk offrostbite/frostnip.
Wood frogs survive beingpartially frozen because their bodies are flooded with sugar (glucose), but their blood sugar concentration is 450 times greater than that of a human's. Apparently, they survive this partly because ttheir metabolism has essentially shut down. Unless these similarly go into suspended animation, which might not be practical or plausible, having wings extremely high in sugar probably wouldn't work.
Antifreeze proteins would surely be better. However, if you're going for antifreeze sugars in its wings, using the antifrezeze-sugar of the Upis beetle, xylomannan, could work. It doesn't prevent freezing, but slows ice growth, allowing fluids surrounding cells to freeze in a controlled way without harming the insides of the cells. Xylomannan plus cryoprotectant compounds in the wings, especially the wing tips, should allow it to get frostnip occasionally for a few hours in polar summer nights and just shrug it off.
If they fold their wings, or wrap their wings around themselves, huddle together in groups at night (at least when it's particularly cold), and use xylomannan and cryoprotectant compounds in the wings, it should be sufficient to endure a few freezing-temperature days in summer. It would help them to have some ability to regenerate frostbitten wingtips, but, of course, organisms don't have to be perfectly adapted to the difficulties of their environment to survive.
| QUOTE (colddigger @ Oct 23 2022, 04:44 PM) |
| For the wings and heat, during flight the large torso muscles should be able to create enough heat to keep them warm during flight. And during rest if the membrane is retracted against a supporting bone it would decrease surface area to volume ratio, so that would help. |
Retracted? Like a telescope? Don't you mean folded over?
It is possible this would eat Ferries' berries as well. Would you like to add Ferries' berries to its diet and wait until Ferries are approved? Although I have been going somewhat out of order in checking over organisms, I expect to go over Ferries in a few hours.
The review has been clarified into items that could be easily changed after the fact on the wiki and items the creator must attend to prior to approval.
"steals from shrog nests" Is more of a style than a diet. A frigatebird may consume fish by means of stealing it from other birds, but it's still a carnivore. I therefore recommend omitting that from the diet section.
I am not sure how "generalist ovivore" should be processed. Egyptian vultures eat bird eggs, but not turtle or snake eggs. Egg-eating snakessnakes (of the genus Dasypeltis) also seem to eat exclusively bird eggs, although the egg-eating snake E. westermanni seems to eat other kinds of eggs in addition to bird eggs.
I am not sure how "generalist ovivore" should be processed. Egyptian vultures eat bird eggs, but not turtle or snake eggs. Egg-eating snakessnakes (of the genus Dasypeltis) also seem to eat exclusively bird eggs, although the egg-eating snake E. westermanni seems to eat other kinds of eggs in addition to bird eggs.
| QUOTE (colddigger @ Oct 22 2022, 07:08 PM) |
| Good point, bats actually use their wings to cool off since flight heats their bodies up so much. |
They do: I did check that out. Still, bats do wrap their wings around themselves when cold, and bats are generally hairy, particularly in cold environments.
Approval Checklist:
Art:
Art Present?: Y
Art clear?: Y
Gen number?: Y
All limbs shown?: Y
Reasonably Comparable to Ancestor?: Y
Realistic additions?: Y
Name:
Binomial Taxonomic Name?: Y
Creator?: Y
Ancestor:
Listed?: Y
What changes?:
• External?: Larger size, greater speed, bigger ears, bigger scent pores, minor pelage changes, extra teeth on gums,
• Internal?: Microlung growth, facial muscle changes, taking in and expelling air , extra teeth per gum
• Behavioral/Mental?: Flesh Fairy gorge-frenzies; relentless personality.
Are Changes Realistic?: Y
New Genus Needed?: (If yes, list why) [Unknown; I am not in the taxonomy cluster.]
Habitat:
Type?: 1 (Temperate)
Flavor?: 2 (Woodlands and Rainforests)
Connected?: Y
Wildcard?: N
Size:
Same as Ancestor?: N
Within range?: Y
Exception?: N
Support:
Same as Ancestor?: Y
Does It Fit Habitat?: Y
Reasonable changes (if any)?: N/A
Other?: N/A
Diet:
Same as Ancestor?: Y
Transition Rule?: N/A
Reasonable changes (if any)?: N/A (no change)
Respiration:
Same as Ancestor?: Y
Does It Fit Habitat?: Y
Reasonable changes (if any)?: N/A
Other?: N/A
Thermoregulation:
Same as Ancestor?: Y
Does It Fit Habitat?: Y
Reasonable changes (if any)?: N/A
Other?: N/A
Reproduction:
Same as Ancestor?: Y
Does It Fit Habitat?: Y
Reasonable changes (if any)?: Y
Other?: They can mate during gorge-frenzies.
Description:
Length?: Appropriate.
Capitalized correctly?: Inconsistent capitalization.
Replace/Split from ancestor?: Split.
Other?: N/A
Opinion: Pending.
Feedback on extra teeth on gums and Sauceback respiration; taxonomy check by taxonomy experts. Fix inconsistent capitalization of species names. Should specify it burrows into dead flora in the description. Optional: fix minor “saucback” typo.
Suggested Sauceback expert:@Disgustedorite
Suggested taxonomy experts: @OviraptorFan, @MNIDJM
Art:
Art Present?: Y
Art clear?: Y
Gen number?: Y
All limbs shown?: Y
Reasonably Comparable to Ancestor?: Y
Realistic additions?: Y
Name:
Binomial Taxonomic Name?: Y
Creator?: Y
Ancestor:
Listed?: Y
What changes?:
• External?: Larger size, greater speed, bigger ears, bigger scent pores, minor pelage changes, extra teeth on gums,
• Internal?: Microlung growth, facial muscle changes, taking in and expelling air , extra teeth per gum
• Behavioral/Mental?: Flesh Fairy gorge-frenzies; relentless personality.
Are Changes Realistic?: Y
New Genus Needed?: (If yes, list why) [Unknown; I am not in the taxonomy cluster.]
Habitat:
Type?: 1 (Temperate)
Flavor?: 2 (Woodlands and Rainforests)
Connected?: Y
Wildcard?: N
Size:
Same as Ancestor?: N
Within range?: Y
Exception?: N
Support:
Same as Ancestor?: Y
Does It Fit Habitat?: Y
Reasonable changes (if any)?: N/A
Other?: N/A
Diet:
Same as Ancestor?: Y
Transition Rule?: N/A
Reasonable changes (if any)?: N/A (no change)
Respiration:
Same as Ancestor?: Y
Does It Fit Habitat?: Y
Reasonable changes (if any)?: N/A
Other?: N/A
Thermoregulation:
Same as Ancestor?: Y
Does It Fit Habitat?: Y
Reasonable changes (if any)?: N/A
Other?: N/A
Reproduction:
Same as Ancestor?: Y
Does It Fit Habitat?: Y
Reasonable changes (if any)?: Y
Other?: They can mate during gorge-frenzies.
Description:
Length?: Appropriate.
Capitalized correctly?: Inconsistent capitalization.
Replace/Split from ancestor?: Split.
Other?: N/A
Opinion: Pending.
Feedback on extra teeth on gums and Sauceback respiration; taxonomy check by taxonomy experts. Fix inconsistent capitalization of species names. Should specify it burrows into dead flora in the description. Optional: fix minor “saucback” typo.
Suggested Sauceback expert:@Disgustedorite
Suggested taxonomy experts: @OviraptorFan, @MNIDJM
Thermodynamically, the wings are more like bat wings than penguin feet. Countercurrent heat exchanges therefore cannot be the sole solution.
Keep in mind that plents don't have to be smooth and bare-skinned. The Gryphler, for example, is a phlyer (descendant of the Quone Phlyer) but is covered in fuzz. Hairlike structures are surely not that hard to evolve, judging by the fiber coatings on pterosaurs* and feathery fuzz on various dinosaurs, kiwis (birds), and various bird nestlings.There's even a species of frog with temporary hairlike structures, though it's not like mammal fur or bird feathers. The fact it exists elsewhere in a phlyer suggests the lineage has the potential to grow hairy structures, too.
If you wanted to maximize (a particular conception of) plausibility, you could make a note the fuzziness is homologous to that of gryphlers, but has some structural differences on close inspection that attest to its convergent manifestation.
---
According to this source:
"The average winter temperature is -34° C (-30° F), but the average summer temperature is 3-12° C (37-54° F) which enables this biome to sustain life."
For something small with large wings, it might be cold, even in summer. Being able to fold its wings over itself in some way would help, although if it typically does this "in the wild", the vertical portrayal of its wings risks being unrealistic.
Here are some links that could help you figure out winter adaptations for something with batlike wings:
General sourceGeneral source.
Non-migratory bat
Bats that are migratory, but but capable of brief hibernation.
Migratory species from similar habitats (although these migrate over long ranges).
---
*A quick check shows there's been recent (and debated) research suggesting pterosaurs' pycnofibers are, in fact, feathers, even though pterosaurs are only distantly related to birds, but that's probably more precision than is needed here. Not every evolutionary innovation here will need three research paper citations.
Keep in mind that plents don't have to be smooth and bare-skinned. The Gryphler, for example, is a phlyer (descendant of the Quone Phlyer) but is covered in fuzz. Hairlike structures are surely not that hard to evolve, judging by the fiber coatings on pterosaurs* and feathery fuzz on various dinosaurs, kiwis (birds), and various bird nestlings.There's even a species of frog with temporary hairlike structures, though it's not like mammal fur or bird feathers. The fact it exists elsewhere in a phlyer suggests the lineage has the potential to grow hairy structures, too.
If you wanted to maximize (a particular conception of) plausibility, you could make a note the fuzziness is homologous to that of gryphlers, but has some structural differences on close inspection that attest to its convergent manifestation.
---
According to this source:
"The average winter temperature is -34° C (-30° F), but the average summer temperature is 3-12° C (37-54° F) which enables this biome to sustain life."
For something small with large wings, it might be cold, even in summer. Being able to fold its wings over itself in some way would help, although if it typically does this "in the wild", the vertical portrayal of its wings risks being unrealistic.
Here are some links that could help you figure out winter adaptations for something with batlike wings:
General sourceGeneral source.
Non-migratory bat
Bats that are migratory, but but capable of brief hibernation.
Migratory species from similar habitats (although these migrate over long ranges).
---
*A quick check shows there's been recent (and debated) research suggesting pterosaurs' pycnofibers are, in fact, feathers, even though pterosaurs are only distantly related to birds, but that's probably more precision than is needed here. Not every evolutionary innovation here will need three research paper citations.
| QUOTE (Evolutionincarnate @ Oct 20 2022, 08:36 PM) | ||||
yes the gastrocnemius attaches to the lower outer part of the epicondyle and the biceps femoris attaches to the proximal end of the of the tibiotarsus |
!!!
Is this...
The first post of Disgustedorite's illustrious "bone friend"?
"These adaptations still suit the purotora well with processing every part of a carcass,"
Every part?
At some point, we need to make a direct bone-to-wood hardness scale to quantify the properties of calcified wood vs. "petrolignin".
Every part?
At some point, we need to make a direct bone-to-wood hardness scale to quantify the properties of calcified wood vs. "petrolignin".
There is a small possibility this is in violation of the locomotion rule. Its ancestor's description said, "It isn’t as great at flying as its ancestor, but can still take off to avoid predators."
The locomotion rule says:
"Air to Land
Flight -> Poor Flight (Like Chickens) -> Terrestrial"
It would have helped to know whether the "chickens" described refer to more-or-less modern heavy chickens or less top-heavy historic breeds, but neither is particularly good at flight, so that's not urgent.
So, for thoroughness's sake: is the Snowy Florasnapper equivalent to a chicken here? If it is, then just a quick habitat check remains before approval. While the new habitat rules surely allow it in principle, it does seem to have a broad habitat range for such a large herbivore with a relatively narrow diet.
EDIT: White-tailed deer have a similarly broad habitat range, and can actually get even bigger than these, but they have broader diets. Vingrasions being a genus group helps, but it would surely need to eat other genus groups, too, to have a reliable food supply for something so large in the majority of circumstances across such a wide range of habitats. Lamarck Temperate Rainforest doesn't even have two of its food items.
The locomotion rule says:
"Air to Land
Flight -> Poor Flight (Like Chickens) -> Terrestrial"
It would have helped to know whether the "chickens" described refer to more-or-less modern heavy chickens or less top-heavy historic breeds, but neither is particularly good at flight, so that's not urgent.
So, for thoroughness's sake: is the Snowy Florasnapper equivalent to a chicken here? If it is, then just a quick habitat check remains before approval. While the new habitat rules surely allow it in principle, it does seem to have a broad habitat range for such a large herbivore with a relatively narrow diet.
EDIT: White-tailed deer have a similarly broad habitat range, and can actually get even bigger than these, but they have broader diets. Vingrasions being a genus group helps, but it would surely need to eat other genus groups, too, to have a reliable food supply for something so large in the majority of circumstances across such a wide range of habitats. Lamarck Temperate Rainforest doesn't even have two of its food items.
Inconveniently, the rules don't specify a size limit for organisms with passive respiration.
A quick check suggests sea spiders use passive body surface-based respiration, so for now, we can use the maximum sea spider size of 70 cm as maximum provisional size limit in the best possible conditions of high surface area and cold, high-oxygen conditions, and a maximum of 50 cm in less-ideal conditions. In this case, no editing is needed, since it's 40 cm wide and uses the inside of its mouth for extra respiration area.
With that checked over, this looks good for approval.
A quick check suggests sea spiders use passive body surface-based respiration, so for now, we can use the maximum sea spider size of 70 cm as maximum provisional size limit in the best possible conditions of high surface area and cold, high-oxygen conditions, and a maximum of 50 cm in less-ideal conditions. In this case, no editing is needed, since it's 40 cm wide and uses the inside of its mouth for extra respiration area.
With that checked over, this looks good for approval.
| QUOTE (OviraptorFan @ Oct 18 2022, 12:02 PM) | ||
Okay, then what could I use instead? Because the reference does relate to something that has poop in their names. Also, Im pretty sure the thread titles do not end up on the wiki, so I do not think a lot of people will end up seeing this. |
While thread titles do not end up on the wiki, it's still a good principle to avoid profanity.
You could say "poopy" or "fecal", I suppose. "Poopy" is not actually a word, but it's still an improvement.
View Desktop Version | Disable Images in Posts
Powered by Invision Power Board (Jcink) © 2023 IPS, Inc.
Powered by Invision Power Board (Jcink) © 2023 IPS, Inc.