Equiping an armor tutorial
i'll prob make more bc i love talking ab armors
Show & Tell

blake kathryn
ojovivo
Sade Olutola

pixel skylines
art blog(derogatory)

JVL
DEAR READER
No title available

oozey mess
will byers stan first human second
Game of Thrones Daily
TVSTRANGERTHINGS
cherry valley forever

Kiana Khansmith
Cosimo Galluzzi
hello vonnie

Janaina Medeiros
Keni

tannertan36
seen from Brazil
seen from United States
seen from Poland

seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from Malaysia

seen from Thailand

seen from United States

seen from United Kingdom
seen from United States

seen from Greece
seen from United States
seen from India

seen from Malaysia

seen from Vietnam
seen from Malaysia

seen from Türkiye

seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from United States
@leistentritt
Equiping an armor tutorial
i'll prob make more bc i love talking ab armors
When Drugs Became Available
Have you ever been writing some historical fiction and wondered "hey, I wonder if my characters would have been able to pop an ibuprofen in 1977?" Well, you're in luck, because this post is all about when common medications became available:
Acetaminophen: 1950
Albuterol: 1969 (UK) 1982 (US)
Allopurinol: 1966
Alprazolam: 1981
Amitriptyline: 1961
Amlodipine: 1990
Amoxicilin: 1972
Amphetamine/Dextroamphetamine (together as Adderall): 1996
Apixiban: 2012
Aripiprazole: 2002
Aspirin (first NSAID): 1899
Azidothymidine (first antiviral): 1987
Barbital (first barbiturate): 1903
Bupropion: 1985
Buspirone: 1986
Calcium Carbonate (TUMS): 1930
Captopril (first ACE inhibitor): 1981
Chlordiazepoxide (first benzodiazepine): 1960
Chlorothiazide (first thiazide diuretic): 1957
Chlorpromazine (first antipsychotic): 1952
Cyclobenzeprine: 1977
Diphenhydramine: 1946
Furosemide: 1959
Fluoxetine (first SSRI): 1988
Gabapentin: 1993
Glipizide: 1984
Hydrochlorothiazide: 1959
Ibuprofen: 1969 (UK) 1974 (US)
Insulin: 1923 (though many types of insulins would become available over the next century)
Imipramine (first tricyclic antidepressant): 1959
Iproniazid (first antidepressant (MAOI)): 1952
Levothyroxine: 1927 (though desiccated pork thyroid was used for the same reasons as early as 1890)
Lisinopril: 1987
Lithium: 1949
Losartan (first ARB): 1995
Lovastatin (first statin): 1987
Naproxen: 1976 (Rx) 1990 (OTC)
Nitrogen Mustard (first chemotherapy agent): early 1940's
Methotrexate: 1947
Methylphenidate: 1954
Metformin: 1957 (France) 1995 (US)
Metoprolol: 1978
Montelukast: 1998
Morphine: early 1800's
Omeprazole: 1989
Penicillin: 1945
Phenbezamine (first antihistamine): 1942
Prednisone: 1955
Propranolol (first beta blocker): 1965 (UK) 1967 (US)
Sertraline: 1990
Spironolactone: 1959
Sulfanilamide (first modern antibiotic): 1935
Tolbutamide (first oral anti-diabetic drug): 1956
Tramadol: 1977 (Germany) 1995 (US)
Trazodone: 1981
Valacyclovir: 1995
Verapamil (first calcium channel blocker): 1964
Warfarin: 1954
Zopiclone (first "Z-drug"): 1986
Someone asked for this list in date order, so here it is!
Morphine: early 1800's
Aspirin (first NSAID): 1899
Barbital (first barbiturate): 1903
Insulin: 1923 (though many types of insulins would become available over the next century)
Levothyroxine: 1927 (though desiccated pork thyroid was used for the same reasons as early as 1890)
Calcium Carbonate (TUMS): 1930
Sulfanilamide (first modern antibiotic): 1935
Nitrogen Mustard (first chemotherapy agent): early 1940's
Phenbezamine (first antihistamine): 1942
Penicillin: 1945
Diphenhydramine: 1946
Methotrexate: 1947
Lithium: 1949
Acetaminophen: 1950
Chlorpromazine (first antipsychotic): 1952
Iproniazid (first antidepressant (MAOI)): 1952
Methylphenidate: 1954
Warfarin: 1954
Prednisone: 1955
Tolbutamide (first oral anti-diabetic drug): 1956
Chlorothiazide (first thiazide diuretic): 1957
Metformin: 1957 (France) 1995 (US)
Furosemide: 1959
Hydrochlorothiazide: 1959
Spironolactone: 1959
Imipramine (first tricyclic antidepressant): 1959
Chlordiazepoxide (first benzodiazepine): 1960
Amitriptyline: 1961
Verapamil (first calcium channel blocker): 1964
Propranolol (first beta blocker): 1965 (UK) 1967 (US)
Allopurinol: 1966
Albuterol: 1969 (UK) 1982 (US)
Ibuprofen: 1969 (UK) 1974 (US)
Amoxicilin: 1972
Naproxen: 1976 (Rx) 1990 (OTC)
Cyclobenzeprine: 1977
Tramadol: 1977 (Germany) 1995 (US)
Metoprolol: 1978
Captopril (first ACE inhibitor): 1981
Trazodone: 1981
Alprazolam: 1981
Glipizide: 1984
Bupropion: 1985
Buspirone: 1986
Zopiclone (first "Z-drug"): 1986
Lovastatin (first statin): 1987
Azidothymidine (first antiviral): 1987
Lisinopril: 1987
Fluoxetine (first SSRI): 1988
Omeprazole: 1989
Amlodipine: 1990
Sertraline: 1990
Gabapentin: 1993
Losartan (first ARB): 1995
Valacyclovir: 1995
Amphetamine/Dextroamphetamine (together as Adderall): 1996
Montelukast: 1998
Aripiprazole: 2002
Apixiban: 2012
Trying to figure out how to draw armour. These are some of my notes I uploaded on patreon. A lot more to come since I really want to figure this one out.
Anything with cavalry pre-gunpowder was really one big game of chicken.
I know that at Waterloo, the Scots Greys advanced more at a trot than full charge.
Not everyone has been around a horse to realize just how large and powerful (and fickle) animals they are. Even fewer have seen a few, let alone one, horse charge at them.
You are pressed to find a soul alive today that can testify to the experience of several hundred horses charging at your direction and you know they intend to charge past, over, and through you. The realization is alone enough to shake your will.
But then there is the sound. Imagine the space in your mind that 5 horses take up, then expand that to get close to what a charge might be sized at. 10 horses isn't enough. not 50 horses. 200 horses? That is not enough either. Imagine 1,000 horses coming your way with 4,000 steel hooves thundering, and you know nothing can change their minds heading your way - and the one thing that is expected to stop them are your and your friend's bodies.
This is a gap in recorded/presented/easy-to-imagine history in which you can imagine the shape of a role of the “Irish” Hobelar as a fighting unit.
Hobelars were mounted on small gaited native pony-horses called hobbies; carrying no gear and wearing no armour and riding practically bareback, a feat made possible by the fast smooth pace of the hobby (whose gait would presumably resemble the Icelandic pony’s tölt or the Mongolian war pony’s joroo.) the Irish Hobby is now extinct, but the name is where we get the word “hobby” from - an activity done for pleasure. This sounds made-up, doesn’t it? You can read a long post by myself and contributors here, which includes this poem from someone describing their fighting style and how annoying it was:
And one amang, an lyrysch man, Uppone his hoby swyftly ran; Hyt was a sportfulle sygthe, How hys darttes he did schak ; And when him lyst to leve or tak, They had fulle gret dispite.
There are a few reasons why you haven’t heard of hobelars (god forbid people have hobbies). It is important to the imperial construction of the myths of the British Isles (and the French) that Celtic people be negligible and subjugated in any narrative of medieval warfare. They did not correspond to a social class outside of warfare: you can spin so MANY sexy aristocracy-reinforcing tales of chivalry around knights that we’re still doing so today. Sexy tormented superhero with his ARMOUR and his SWORD and his big HORSE - let’s roleplay this 5 million times, and for political comfort, rather than trampling the peasants he now rules, we shall enshrine and repeat the safe metaphorical image of the “dragon” for him to fight as well…
Guy Who Just Caught A Wild Hobby From A Bog And Doesn’t Wear Armour (and runs around bareback, throwing stuff and being incredibly fast and annoying, and vanishing when you tried to kill them back) is just… less sexy. They literally weren’t superheroes. There is discomfort as well - if we kept their imagery, we couldn’t give them fictions to fight; hobelars were not romantic, they had no fixed honour; they were always a scrambling skirmishing fighting unit for killing people. As an academic puts it:
The hobelar is very much the poor relation in the study of the English armies of the fourteenth century, eclipsed by both the man-at-arms and the archer. Our understanding of his origins and role has been wholly based on only two major studies of this troop type: J. E. Morris’ ‘Mounted Infantry Warfare’ in 1914 and J. Lydon's ‘The Hobelar: An Irish Contribution to Medieval Warfare’ in 1954. The lack of interest might be considered surprising, given that Morris saw him as the precursor to the mounted longbowman, while Lydon called him ‘the most effective fighting man of the age’, referring to the hobelar as ‘an entirely different type of mounted soldier’. Yet other historians have been happy to accept the conclusions of Morris and Lydon, considering the hobelar only in passing. Perhaps the reason that so little work has been done on him is that he is always considered in comparison to the man-at-arms – the elite warrior, in his shining harness, doyen of chivalry and a core element of the medieval political and social elite – and the longbowman – the almost super-heroic, Hundred Years’ War-winning, nationalistic symbol of medieval English, and Welsh, martial prowess. By contrast, there is little if any mention of the hobelar in the battle narratives of the middle ages; they have no great role to play in the successes of the English over the French. They do not form a political and social class within medieval society and there is no way, therefore, to discuss their impact outside of the military sphere. It is also almost certain that their Irish origins have counted against them too. Medieval Ireland has been considered militarily backwards by most historians of warfare, who seem to have inherited something of the dismissive tone of their English sources…
Right. 
You’ve read the posts above. You have dutifully pictured the mental image of being a pikeman, Just Some Guy with a big pointy stick, while thousands of pounds of steel-armoured horseflesh ridden by braying Tories comes at you. You have understood that this is inherently alarming, even if you understand the military theories involved, and are prepared to make horse-kebabs.
Now picture being that pikeman when hobelars turn up. First off, the hobbies are WEIRD. They’re fast and tiny, and they move Wrong:
Rather than lining up to be kebabs, as you expect, they feint - dance up to you like weirdos and turn away. They show off how - unencumbered and in good control of their hobbies - they can pretend to do the scary charge thing, breaking your will, but not get kebabed. They are not wearing armour; they’re not using saddles or stirrups, but some of them appear to be archers (?!) sometimes the hobelars get off and wind you up a bit and then jump back on their stupid hobbies. Psychologically they seem more like YOU, but then there’s the horses. They throw spears, or arrow-spears called “darts.” They laugh at you. They have amazing control of their hobbies, who turn away from pikeheads on a dime. The sight of hobbies skirmishing was described (above) as “a sportful sight” - presumably if they weren’t doing it at you, when it would be SO annoying.
There is zero expectation that Celtic mounted skirmishers will break a wall of pikemen. The hobelars have been sent to annoy you. What if this is part of their function, a natural activity in their wheelhouse, and they have perfected it. What if it’s working. What if, by the time the big shiny horses with their big shiny nobles come, you’re already a bit shaken…
Not saying this scene ever happened in history, but you can see from this a bit of how these histories are constructed: here is a unit that was effective and influential in its time and gave its name to “hobbies.” Here are the places where it would seem logical to use them. We have lost much of what would have been known about how they fought at all. The primary source for the quote of the “iyrysch man upon his hoby” is preserved in one single corrupted document in a corner of the internet that took me a morning to find. We will never forget knights, but with a strategically placed EMP, we would probably lose our ability to remember and connect over hobelars (why would anyone care.)
but care when you find yourself thinking that the entire system is pikeman vs knight, one vs the other, an armchair system that plays out like an RPG, rock-paper-scissors: care because so much of history is a spectrum of forgotten people.
oh... That's why the toy is called a hobby horse. I ... Thought the name came from "hobby" like a thing you do for fun.
The other way around! The toy “hobbyhorse”, a toy horse that gives you pleasure and lets you play pretend but clearly isn’t a real horse, gave its name to “hobby,” “activity for pleasure.”
The etymology of “hobby, a thing you do for fun” comes directly from “hobby, a little horse”. Which was once a real sort of little horse. Isn’t that great! We all need more hobbies.
the war darts that the hobelars likely used have quite an interesting history as well, we have depictions of them quite present throughout most of the medieval era, like this piece here
but the thing about fletching is, it does not age well. we have almost zero surviving examples of fletched javelins or spears, not because they don't exist, but because to determine whether or not a spear recovered from a medieval site was fletched would require testing to find traces of the bonding agents used, as the fletching itself would have entirely deteriorated after hundreds of years. this is a problem with arrows as well, despite the fact that the english longbowman was basically the symbol of the english during the hundred years war, the nature of the materials used has resulted in most of what was left behind being the arrowheads themselves, as while iron and steel corrode, they do so at a much slower rate than wood rots, or feathers dry out and disintegrate.
fun fact about war darts, in medieval artwork, skeletons are often depicted holding them! we're not entirely sure why, but it's entertaining nontheless!
Leo Todeschini, known as Tod Cutler on youtube and his online presence in general, has a video going over a large variety of war dart recreations he has worked on if you are interested in seeing them actually function!
( ❄ )
could you please do a tutorial on how you do your risograph style drawings? they look so cool 😭😭
Semi-Slugs: these are actual gastropods that are in the process of evolving from snails into slugs, with their shells gradually reducing and receding into their bodies
Above: Fastosarion brazieri, commonly known as the chameleon semi-slug, and an unidentified species of semi-slug from the genus Sheldonia
The term "semi-slug" is used to describe an intermediate stage of evolution as snails evolve into slugs. Nearly 1,000 different species of semi-slugs are known to exist, and these bizarre little creatures can be found on at least four continents.
Above: Fastosarion brazieri and Varadia amboliensis
Each species of semi-slug is technically still classified as a snail, but its shell is noticeably reduced, becoming more internalized as the species evolves. A semi-slug officially becomes a regular-slug once its shell is no longer visible at all.
As this article explains:
If life were simple, there would be snails and slugs. Snails carry their homes on their backs; slugs are naked and embarrassed. But life isn’t simple, so of course there’s secret option #3 – the semi-slug, a bizarre creature that sits exactly between the snail and the slug.
Above: genus Satiella and genus Euaustenia
This article also adds:
In contrast to snails that have an external shell large enough to accommodate the body, or slugs in which the shell is completely internal or absent, semi-slugs have an external shell, but the shell is too small to accommodate the animal’s entire body.
Above: Megaustenia siamensis
This process is known as limacization, and it's especially common in moist, low-calcium environments where a snail's shell may be more of a burden than a benefit:
Terrestrial slugs are not a monophyletic group, but a case of convergent evolution in which the slug form evolved from different lineages of land snails that gradually lost their shell through a process called limacization. Limacization resulted in adaptive radiation in land snail lineages, as slugs became adapted to diverse moist and protected spaces, such as crevices in rocks and wood debris. The loss of the shell also allowed for more movement and less calcium dependence, making slugs more successful as pests.
Above: Gaeotis nigrolineata, also known as the Puerto Rican semi-slug, has a neon green shell that is almost completely internalized, but the shell is clearly visible through the semi-slug's translucent body
Some semi-slugs have shells that are still opaque and largely visible, with the mantle (a patch of flesh) covering only the outer edges of the shell, while others have shells that are more significantly reduced, transparent, and/or concealed.
Above: Ibycus rachelae, commonly known as the green-shelled semi-slug, and a species of semi-slug from the genus Durgella
This topic was mentioned in my previous post about Ibycus rachelae, but I wanted to write a more detailed post about semi-slugs, because they're just so fascinating and weird.
Above: a black-and-white semi-slug from subfamily Sheldoniinae
Sources & More Info:
Australian Geographic: Meet the Semi-Slug, a Snail without a Home
Carnegie Museum of Natural History: What's So Good about Being a Slug?
Frontiers: Terrestrial Slugs in Neotropical Agroecosystems (PDF)
iNaturalist: Photos 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, & 13
The Shell-Makers (Introducing Molluscs): On Becoming Sluggish
Land Snails and Slugs of Sabah and Labuan, Malaysia: Semi-Slugs
Contributions to Zoology: Phylogeny and Systematic Revision of the Helicarionid Semislugs of Eastern Queensland
the new york times has such a great series of elevated butter noodles, if you ever want a super fast easy dinner that still feels grown up and you can emulsify pasta water + butter together basically the sky is your limit
ya got
gochujang butter noodles
peanut butter noodles
chili crisp fettuccine alfredo
miso butter noodles
any one of these + a bag of salad or whatever vegetable side you find easiest/cheapest, and you've got yourself a full meal that tastes far above the effort you put in.
I am constantly thinking about this
This mild Wikipedia sentence is like the understatement of all time
Here are some crazy grasshopper mouse facts for those who are not familiar with the most badass mouse species on the planet
- They are primarily carnivorous, and their diet is made up of not only bugs but also snakes, lizards and other mice.
- They hunt like true predators, slowly stalking and creeping up on their prey before ambushing them. They will sometimes let out a screech as they attack.
- Like wolves, they howl to establish territory and have a specially developed throat to produce louder vocalizations. They will stand up on their hind legs and throw their head back to howl- a sound that can be heard from 100 meters away!
- Grasshopper mouse behavior is linked to lunar cycles and they are more active during a full moon.
- These mice have been hunting bark scorpions and evolving alongside them for so long that they’ve evolved a mutation where scorpion venom that is lethal to other animals is converted into a painkiller in the grasshopper mouse’s body.
Really cool graphic broadly explaining how we've selectively bred dogs over millenia for different jobs. Drives like herding and guarding prey animals may seem counterintuitive to the dogs' nature but these actions are in fact rooted in ancestral hunting instincts, we've just "muted" down the rest of the hunt sequence resulting in a kill (but even well bred dogs need training!). This is also why crossing dogs belonging to different job types should be carefully thought out, if your breeding goals are a calm nonworking companion animal the last thing you want is to breed is a royal flush of this predatory sequence.
Finished! Hooray! The Glitching Out Brush Pack is over yonder.
You can change the size & spread by adjusting the gap & brush size values in settings. Compatible with Clip Studio only!
Don't forget: 200+ freebie brushes | and my brush tag is here!
I just learned that most earwig species have wings. I already liked these cool little critters, now I love them even more! They look like little dragons!!! :’D
I love this drawing! Such a joy-filled creature. Earwigs fold their wings in a very remarkable way.
Earwigs may look dull—until they open their wings, shimmering structures that expand 10-fold and lock without the use of muscles.
The wings are folded using curved lines, which allows for them to be packed into an even smaller package on the earwig’s back. Could make a remarkable design for a parachute or flying suit in a low gravity world…
I want to try this method to recreate the folding pattern using paper… It’s like a fan that tucks into itself…
honestly we should really remake that whole "you're doing multiple rows of teeth Extremely Noticeably Wrong" post that we made once and got deleted (it was technically a reblog of someone else's post and it must've been deleted). it's still happening and it's still so prominent every time it happens.
okay this has annoyed me enough that i'm making this full post again
so, basic physics.
if you are exerting force down onto an object, then it is spread out along the contacting surface area. this is how a knife or a sword works — you are putting force down onto a long, thin line, and thus, all that force is focused down onto that long, thin line. if you have something like, say, a bat or a club, then you are putting that force down along the rounder and wider edge of that object, making it a blunt force object, yeah?
the same applies if you have multiple edges. for instance, this is how a bed of nails works. sure, if you step on a single nail, then all of your weight is pushing down onto that point. but, if you lay on many nails, maybe even fairly close together, then each one takes your weight equally, and they don't have that same ability to puncture the skin. you're putting the same force down onto multiple points, but even though there's space between the surface of each point, that force is getting divided between all of them like it's all just one surface.
this is pretty bad if we're talking about weapons. for example, if you put too many nails into a spiked bat, then you may as well have basically added none. it might inflict some scrapes and surface wounds, but you won't do any more damage than the bat itself would do.
here's a pretty good video for a demonstration, and you can see how, by spreading out that force exerted, you can even restrict your own ability to pierce.
(behold, an image that looks like someone being injured, but, by definition, is someone showing how uninjured they are)
the same applies for teeth.
if you have multiple rows of teeth, and you exert force down onto them to bite, that force is being spread out and divided over every point of every tooth.
this is not a very good setup if, say, you are a macropredator trying to eat large prey. you require teeth that can shear into and cut flesh, even break bone, and adding additional rows means that you no longer have a cutting edge through which to push through flesh or bone, but instead, many objects forming one larger surface to push through flesh or bone together, something which requires exponentially more force for much worse results, and is likely to instead end up breaking your own teeth.
think about knives for a moment. the reason a knife is good at cutting is because that force is being exerted down onto a very thin edge, making it hard to resist. knives get dull when they lose this thin edge, and have to have the thinness of that edge restored in order to regain cutting ability.
adding multiple points is, effectively, intentionally dulling this edge. to add a point of comparison, seeing multiple tooth rows in designs intended to have high bite force or ability to cut through flesh, is a lot like seeing overdesigned anime swords. animals have one, shearing edge to their teeth for the same reason that, on the surface, all real swords tend to look the same (with similar vast differences in the details).
"but!" you may say, "sharks have multiple rows of teeth! and they bite hard!"
which is where i point to how white sharks' (and other, similar macropredatory sharks') dentition actually works.
this is the lower jaw of a white shark. you can see that they do have multiple rows of teeth — but only the frontmost row is actually being used. you might see doubles, like in the front, but they occur when the shark is actively in the process of replacing that tooth with another (the same reason that humans might appear to have a double tooth, when a baby tooth is being lost and the adult replacement is coming up underneath). the other rows are pressed flat towards the back of the mouth, like a switchblade, ready to spring up and replace that outermost tooth.
although these sharks might have multiple rows of teeth, only one row is actually being used at any given time.
you can also see how this functions in another known bone-crusher, the spotted hyena. the teeth are very thick and massive, but each individual tooth still comes up to a point after the previous tooth's point, forming a singular shearing edge, the carnassial, that pushes down on bone in a singular, cutting edge.
so, what good are multiple rows of teeth? why do animals have them?
well, one, because they can operate more like barbed wire.
caecilians are one group of animals with well-developed multiple rows of teeth, and this is because they are primarily insectivores. they are very good at gripping onto soft bodied prey, much like barbed wire or burrs catching onto exposed flesh, and shredding it. these teeth would not survive contact with plentiful resistance, so mostly, they don't.
this is also why other species of sharks, like sand tiger sharks (or ragged tooth sharks), do have multiple rows of teeth — they are much more useful for holding onto slippery prey, like fish or cephalopods, and shredding flesh. these teeth are much thinner, so that they can fit more into the mouth, and each one has a longer profile than the nearly square frame of a white shark's tooth. they might not be hunting marine mammals, but this is quite handy as a generalist in the ocean.
alternatively, if multiple teeth are spreading out that force anyways and working as blunt force weapons, then you could lean into it. you could make your teeth massive and thick, to sustain such forces, but flatten them, and turn them into a crushing battery like these stingrays, better for cracking apart hard-shelled animals like crustaceans and mollusks. in our metaphor, this might be closer to a nutcracker, or a hydraulic press. not very useful at cutting flesh, but good at getting through objects that no one else can.
so, yes. please consider this at least a little, before i start thinking your cool monster design has teeth that don't work.
Omg manticores are fish-eaters :o
In a case of obligate cross-species cloning, female ants of Messor ibericus need to clone males of Messor structor to obtain sperm for produ
Living organisms are assumed to produce same-species offspring. Here, we report a shift from this norm in Messor ibericus, an ant that lays individuals from two distinct species. In this life cycle, females must clone males of another species because they require their sperm to produce the worker caste. As a result, males from the same mother exhibit distinct genomes and morphologies, as they belong to species that diverged over 5 million years ago. The evolutionary history of this system appears as sexual parasitism that evolved into a natural case of cross-species cloning, resulting in the maintenance of a male-only lineage cloned through distinct species’ ova. We term females exhibiting this reproductive mode as xenoparous, meaning they give birth to other species as part of their life cycle.
may I add into the fray:
Little fire ants (Wasmannia) doing something similar where the males and females are different species and there is so much sexual conflict that The females have evolved to make reproductive clone babies. The males have evolved to wipe the female dna from eggs and make reproductive clone babies. Basically, the male and female reproductive lines are operating in an entirely different evolutionary pool than the sterile workers, who are still made by mixing genes from both sexes.
An extreme case of sexual conflict has been unearthed in the little fire ant Wasmannia auropunctata. Queens produce sterile workers by sexua
And then we have a harvester ant with Genetics that are functioning as if they have at least 3 different sexes, divided amongst colonies.
Basically, we have two variants of ants and a queen needs needs to mate with the same variant as herself to produce queens and the opposite variant to produce workers. So a queen needs to have mated with both if she wants to have a healthy colony and be able to pass on her genes to future queens. And all types of colonies need to be present in a population to keep it stable.
Functionally, it can be argued to be more like FOUR operational sexes. IT IS VERY NEAT.
While making the recent BBC Radio 4 series, Sexual Nature: A Brief Natural History of Sex , I came across some research on North Ameri
Actually also also I feel like it's worth how ants (and bees and wasps) normally do genetics because it's also interesting
You know how humans and most sexually reproducing animals get half their genes from one parent and half from the other, resulting in two every gene? This is called diploid. (Diplo=2). The eggs and sperm have a half set of genes (one of each) and are called haploid.
But Ants-Bees-Wasps use a haplo-diploid system.
The females (queens and sterile workers) have two of every gene, 1 from each parent, and are diploid. But the males are born from underutilized eggs. They have 1 of every gene from their mom only, and are haploid.
This results in some complicated math about what percentage of genes each parent gets to pass on, but the net result is that females are more related to their own sisters (75%) than to their own offspring (50%). And thus, it is evolutionarily beneficial to remain in a large social group and raise sister-queens rather than go off and have your own daughters.
Also if you run out of sperm for some reason you can just start spamming out males
real entomologist hours hooting and hollering in the lab at 7pm because i found some like 2mm long beetles in a sample that i recognized as the world class sexual freaks Micromalthus debilis
i really cannot recommend enough reading the entire Life Cycle and Mating Behavior sections of their wikipedia article for a good ass time.
much of the information of their mating behavior was explicated in an article from 2016 titled The ghost sex-life of the paedogenetic beetle Micromalthus debilis, which has some killer section headers
Swan family ~ Chaitanya Deshpande
well shit I'm going to make this
(also, shoutout to the Auntie/Nonna method of measuring ingredients — "all the onions in your house, and maybe your neighbor's house too")