Can a organism of immense size be a biome?

Im thinking of a creature that can support a entire ecosystem on itself, let me explain further.

For example scavengers can just bite away at it in glee since there is so much to eat upon it without barely scratching the surface or majorly injuring the animal with it just healing over like a small cut. Whereas moss or certain plant matter like fungi can grow upon it.

excessive feeding may bring about its demise however though a single carcass could feed a entire other ecosystem for a long time with predators coming around for miles and miles in search of a free meal creating competition and a massive rise in predator population.

Splicer wrote:

Im thinking of a creature that can support a entire ecosystem on itself, let me explain further.

For example scavengers can just bite away at it in glee since there is so much to eat upon it without barely scratching the surface or majorly injuring the animal with it just healing over like a small cut. Whereas moss or certain plant matter like fungi can grow upon it.

excessive feeding may bring about its demise however though a single carcass could feed a entire other ecosystem for a long time with predators coming around for miles and miles in search of a free meal creating competition and a massive rise in predator population.

Are you suggesting something akin to a whale fall? It's not a biome in itself, but a dead animal allows a biome to exist.

Remember the general rule of thumb with organism size - Surface Area to volume ratio that is. Its highly unlikely that an immensely large organism could exist on land - General physics dictates that it just couldn't simply exist to function efficiently, due to every increase in size causing a much larger increase in volume.

However on a less macro scale we ourselves are effectively biomes. We are capable of providing an environment which can house multitudes of bacteria, fungi and parasites.
I guess it could be possible to allocate some niches to particularly large organisms. Actual specifics of a biome such as temperature etc would be determined by where the large organism actually is.

So many large organisms could effectively have niches to go with them - small parasites or scavengers (Bacteria, fungi, insect-like organisms), small and large cleaners (Like remora or cleaner birds - symbiosis).

I appear to be arguing with myself. Basically yes but the largest organisms you'd get in these niches would be bird or remora sized due to the physical restrictions of life as we know it.

I'd imagine that the niches actually got a lot bigger. If we assume Amphicoelias to be an accurate fossil and the largest land organism ever, I'd assume that it had some pterosaurs traveling with it, feeding on skin parasites and such. These pterosaurs could probably be of a relatively large size- maybe as big as a hawk.

Pezzalis wrote:

Remember the general rule of thumb with organism size - Surface Area to volume ratio that is. Its highly unlikely that an immensely large organism could exist on land - General physics dictates that it just couldn't simply exist to function efficiently, due to every increase in size causing a much larger increase in volume.

However on a less macro scale we ourselves are effectively biomes. We are capable of providing an environment which can house multitudes of bacteria, fungi and parasites.
I guess it could be possible to allocate some niches to particularly large organisms. Actual specifics of a biome such as temperature etc would be determined by where the large organism actually is.

So many large organisms could effectively have niches to go with them - small parasites or scavengers (Bacteria, fungi, insect-like organisms), small and large cleaners (Like remora or cleaner birds - symbiosis).

I appear to be arguing with myself. Basically yes but the largest organisms you'd get in these niches would be bird or remora sized due to the physical restrictions of life as we know it.

planets can have lower gravity so things good get immense i mean on Darwin IV there where humungus FLYING creatures like the ebony blister wing(300 metre wingspan 0_o) due to the gravity being only 0.6 of earths also the creatures like in the Darwin IV book could have a form of feeding that was so effienct that it could grow to Massive sizes

You could have massive creatures on low gravity planets supporting their own biomes, but I wouldn't want to try to feed one!

Square/cube law for jman's Blister Wing (using albatross-like proportions) puts its mass at 6592 metric tons, which would require a lot of food. Emphasis on a lot.

In short, a massive biome-beast would be so large as to be unfeedable.

Holomanga wrote:

You could have massive creatures on low gravity planets supporting their own biomes, but I wouldn't want to try to feed one!

Square/cube law for jman's Blister Wing (using albatross-like proportions) puts its mass at 6592 metric tons, which would require a lot of food. Emphasis on a lot.

In short, a massive biome-beast would be so large as to be unfeedable.

QFT, though it's feasible for autotrophs and saprobes.

As soon as I saw this thread I thought of a giant spacewhale the size of planet with life on it.

PTFace wrote:

As soon as I saw this thread I thought of a giant spacewhale the size of planet with life on it.

Yeah but with immense size only comes more problems, such as how it gets energy to all parts of its body etc.

Simply not possible with the Universes Physics.

Physics says no. For that matter, the ecologist (me) says no and probably the programmers too.
On that note, however, Aspen groves (really huge organisms - the thicket is alive!) could, theoretically, influence the formation of microbiomes, but they couldn't be a biome in and of themselves. A whale fall would be handled in game most likely as a concentration of resources. They would definitely influence the biome around them, but not make a new one.

What if the creature never/rarely moved thus preserving its energy. And it just so happened to have its mouth in a cave where freshwater and fish flow into, giving it food. And when it moves, it causes earthquakes like tectonic plates moving around.

Good idea Gman, but I don't think it would work because there would be more than one of those creatures, and even if they moved rarely, there would be problems if multiple moved at once, no matter how unlikely. If it didn't cause earthquakes, then maybe that could work.

Mysterious_Calligrapher wrote:

Physics says no. For that matter, the ecologist (me) says no and probably the programmers too.
On that note, however, Aspen groves (really huge organisms - the thicket is alive!) could, theoretically, influence the formation of microbiomes, but they couldn't be a biome in and of themselves. A whale fall would be handled in game most likely as a concentration of resources. They would definitely influence the biome around them, but not make a new one.

Agree.
Plus Remeber to not watch to many Science fiction movies.

Pezzalis wrote:

PTFace wrote:

As soon as I saw this thread I thought of a giant spacewhale the size of planet with life on it.

Yeah but with immense size only comes more problems, such as how it gets energy to all parts of its body etc.

Simply not possible with the Universes Physics.

Still, it would be pretty neat. Even it's hills of dooky would be epic to a point.

jaws2blood wrote:

Pezzalis wrote:

PTFace wrote:

As soon as I saw this thread I thought of a giant spacewhale the size of planet with life on it.

Yeah but with immense size only comes more problems, such as how it gets energy to all parts of its body etc.

Simply not possible with the Universes Physics.

Still, it would be pretty neat. Even it's hills of dooky would be epic to a point.

From sciocionts's sig:

"Remember our goals: simplicity, science, and playability. Keep them in mind always."

ido66667 wrote:

From sciocionts's sig:

"Remember our goals: simplicity, science, and playability. Keep them in mind always."

From Ido66667's sig:

Rise And Shine...Mr.Thrive
Rise and Shine........ And Stop Quoting Other People's Signatures.

All right, children - settle down. I'm here to tell you why I will have no more flying space whales, space turtles, or whatnot. Granted, they would be cool, but we're trying to do a lot of cool stuff here and they're not compatible with the other cool stuff.

The definition of a biome, according to our lovely Wikipedia:

Quote :

Biomes are climatically and geographically defined as similar climatic conditions on the Earth, such as communities of plants, animals, and soil organisms,[ and are often referred to as ecosystems. Some parts of the earth have more or less the same kind of abiotic and biotic factors spread over a large area, creating a typical ecosystem over that area. Such major ecosystems are termed as biomes. Biomes are defined by factors such as plant structures (such as trees, shrubs, and grasses), leaf types (such as broadleaf and needleleaf), plant spacing (forest, woodland, savanna), and climate. Unlike ecozones, biomes are not defined by genetic, taxonomic, or historical similarities. Biomes are often identified with particular patterns of ecological succession and climax vegetation (quasiequilibrium state of the local ecosystem).

- Wikipedia

An organism cannot be a biome because a biome is a set of climatic conditions and sucession within those conditions, which an organism clearly is not.

An organism cannot be a biome because biomes are too big.

An organism cannot be a biome because it would cause game physics to break.


Feel free to watch as much sci-fi as you like, kids, but be careful when applying it's ideas to our project. Sci-fi writers have great imaginations - visionary ones, sometimes - but in most cases, the storyline is more important than the workability of the science to their eyes, so it can be cool, but very implausible. As opposed to this project, which is cool but strangely practical.

No more arguments about this on the thread, ducklings: I'm getting it put on the FAQ if this keeps up.

Mysterious_Calligrapher wrote:

All right, children - settle down. I'm here to tell you why I will have no more flying space whales, space turtles, or whatnot. Granted, they would be cool, but we're trying to do a lot of cool stuff here and they're not compatible with the other cool stuff.

The definition of a biome, according to our lovely Wikipedia:

Quote :

Biomes are climatically and geographically defined as similar climatic conditions on the Earth, such as communities of plants, animals, and soil organisms,[ and are often referred to as ecosystems. Some parts of the earth have more or less the same kind of abiotic and biotic factors spread over a large area, creating a typical ecosystem over that area. Such major ecosystems are termed as biomes. Biomes are defined by factors such as plant structures (such as trees, shrubs, and grasses), leaf types (such as broadleaf and needleleaf), plant spacing (forest, woodland, savanna), and climate. Unlike ecozones, biomes are not defined by genetic, taxonomic, or historical similarities. Biomes are often identified with particular patterns of ecological succession and climax vegetation (quasiequilibrium state of the local ecosystem).

- Wikipedia

An organism cannot be a biome because a biome is a set of climatic conditions and sucession within those conditions, which an organism clearly is not.

An organism cannot be a biome because biomes are too big.

An organism cannot be a biome because it would cause game physics to break.


Feel free to watch as much sci-fi as you like, kids, but be careful when applying it's ideas to our project. Sci-fi writers have great imaginations - visionary ones, sometimes - but in most cases, the storyline is more important than the workability of the science to their eyes, so it can be cool, but very implausible. As opposed to this project, which is cool but strangely practical.

No more arguments about this on the thread, ducklings: I'm getting it put on the FAQ if this keeps up.

Can we at least have giant critters that can swallow oak trees whole?

From a programming standpoint, making a creature a biome is a problem.

If a creature is a biome, then naturally, class Creature would inherit from class Biome. That sounds painful.

roadkillguy wrote:

From a programming standpoint, making a creature a biome is a problem.

If a creature is a biome, then naturally, class Creature would inherit from class Biome. That sounds painful.

in a nutshell.

roadkillguy wrote:

From a programming standpoint, making a creature a biome is a problem.

If a creature is a biome, then naturally, class Creature would inherit from class Biome. That sounds painful.

It sounds like a good way to compile wrongly. (Hi, Roadkill!)

Mysterious_Calligrapher wrote:

roadkillguy wrote:

From a programming standpoint, making a creature a biome is a problem.

If a creature is a biome, then naturally, class Creature would inherit from class Biome. That sounds painful.

It sounds like a good way to compile wrongly. (Hi, Roadkill!)

Nah it'd compile just fine, once you got through it. Hi MC

Thanks for ending this thread so that I don't have to forcibly ignore it anymore!
[/thread]