Sagan 4 Forum [Menu]

Obsidian flora don't have pollinators. They use wind dispersal and external fertilization.

Just a quick check:

As Disgustedorite said, blackflora trees are wind-pollinated, with no pollinators*. However, if you really want to preserve that detail, you could co-evolve this with a species based on beetles which pollinate cycads, which are similarly wind-pollinated:

"[Cycads] are wind pollinated, a strategy which requires immense amounts of airborne pollen. A few may have been pollinated by beetles attracted to the edible pollen grains. This may be the humble beginnings of the complex animal pollination developed by flowering plants."
http://www2.tulane.edu/~bfleury/diversity/...e/gymangio.html

*The Maulwart is one example of a blackflora with pollinators, but that's on Fermi and it isn't a tree.

There are no "Snowflake Obsiditree". You meant "Snowflake Obsidoaks".

It's important to know they have eyes on their rears, but those aren't visible in this image, nor referred to in the description.

QUOTE (Coolsteph @ Apr 8 2023, 09:22 AM)

Just a quick check: As Disgustedorite said, blackflora trees are wind-pollinated, with no pollinators*. However, if you really want to preserve that detail, you could co-evolve this with a species based on beetles which pollinate cycads, which are similarly wind-pollinated: "[Cycads] are wind pollinated, a strategy which requires immense amounts of airborne pollen. A few may have been pollinated by beetles attracted to the edible pollen grains. This may be the humble beginnings of the complex animal pollination developed by flowering plants." http://www2.tulane.edu/~bfleury/diversity/...e/gymangio.html *The Maulwart is one example of a blackflora with pollinators, but that's on Fermi and it isn't a tree. There are no "Snowflake Obsiditree". You meant "Snowflake Obsidoaks". It's important to know they have eyes on their rears, but those aren't visible in this image, nor referred to in the description.

Cycads have internal fertilization. Black flora do not.

Issue with nonexistant polinators should be fixed now

Could evolve something that feeds on slightly young spores before they puff away

QUOTE (Coolsteph @ Apr 8 2023, 10:22 AM)

Just a quick check: As Disgustedorite said, blackflora trees are wind-pollinated, with no pollinators*. However, if you really want to preserve that detail, you could co-evolve this with a species based on beetles which pollinate cycads, which are similarly wind-pollinated: "[Cycads] are wind pollinated, a strategy which requires immense amounts of airborne pollen. A few may have been pollinated by beetles attracted to the edible pollen grains. This may be the humble beginnings of the complex animal pollination developed by flowering plants." http://www2.tulane.edu/~bfleury/diversity/...e/gymangio.html *The Maulwart is one example of a blackflora with pollinators, but that's on Fermi and it isn't a tree. There are no "Snowflake Obsiditree". You meant "Snowflake Obsidoaks". It's important to know they have eyes on their rears, but those aren't visible in this image, nor referred to in the description.

The eyes are shown on the abdomen in the image on one of the Obsidiworm in the background.

Oh yea I see that, that's good camo


Have their abdomens lost their multiple segmentations?

This post has been edited by colddigger: Apr 8 2023, 11:25 AM

that one background example is difficult to visually connect to the other two that have their wings folded, Can a vinelike one without its wings out like that also be depicted?

QUOTE (Disgustedorite @ Apr 29 2023, 05:30 PM)

that one background example is difficult to visually connect to the other two that have their wings folded, Can a vinelike one without its wings out like that also be depicted?

I’m not really sure what you mean by “without its wings out”.
The Ivy like ones are more like the Ivy Thermoworm.

I think the wings are heavy to not have a wings “up” position.

This post has been edited by HethrJarrod: May 7 2023, 11:45 AM

Draw a supplementary image without the wings I think is roughly what's being requested

added supplemental image

I think that's a great supplement image

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?:
What changes?:

• External?: each species is specialized to mimic the leaves of its host flora
• Internal?: no longer photosynthetic
• Behavioral/Mental?: reproductive behavior syncs with host, only young are detritivores

Are Changes Realistic?: y
New Genus Needed?: y, loss of photosynthesis

Habitat:
Type?: GENUS GROUP
Flavor?: GENUS GROUP
Connected to Ancestor?: y, Always Temperate Mangal
Contiguous?: yes
Wildcard?:

Size:
Same as Ancestor?: n, a size range is an option for genus groups
Within range?: y
Exception?:

Support:
Same as Ancestor?: SUPPORT IS MISSING
Does it Fit Lifestyle?:
Does It Fit Size?:
Reasonable changes (if any)?:
Other?:

Diet:
Same as Ancestor?: n
Transition Rule?: y
Reasonable changes (if any)?: added herbivore, removed photosynthesis

Respiration:
Same as Ancestor?: y
Does It Fit Habitat?:y
Does it Fit Size?: y
Reasonable changes (if any)?:
Other?:

Thermoregulation:
Same as Ancestor?: n
Does It Fit Habitat?: y
Reasonable changes (if any)?: it's switched basking to dual colored leaves. makes sense in the description.
Other?:

Reproduction:
Same as Ancestor?: y
Does It Fit Habitat?:y
Reasonable changes (if any)?:
Other?:

Description:
Length?: okay
Capitalized correctly?: seems mostly good
Replace/Split from ancestor?: split
Other?:

"and fall down to the damp of the leaf litter below."

this statement should be fixed somehow.

Opinion: Pending no support, statement needs fixing

Added support, and fixed wording in description;

"fall down to the damp leaf litter below"

Good to go, Approved