But I would neeeever hurt a bee cause they don’t sting randomly xP
That’s what I expected, ppl told me wasps and hornets have no purpose and you gotta kill them rofl
(expected cause pretty much everything has its purpose…besides ticks. Ticks are from hell and nobody needs them)
But they play an absolutely integral role in nature!!!
Also, if you are going to pick a parasitic creature to say is hellspawned I think the tick is rather tame. Insects like diving beetle larvae (water tigers), flies (sometimes called wolf worms) and the invertebrate horsehair worm are all way more aggressive than ticks.
Also, nothing stings randomly, wasps are just more territorial than bees are.
They are the only really really fucky thing around here, so you know…
sure, if I was living in one of these wild and crazy nature parks; America, Australia, Russia you name it, then
maybe I’d say “fuck lions” or “fuck brown recluse spiders”, but I don’t and we only have ticks
(anyway, what’s their role besides being food and carrying disease?)
Afaik that’s a fish in the Amazonas? A tiny fish who lays spiky balls into your bladder
Well that is pretty much it, but disease is incredibly important in an evolutionary context. They are a vector for a number of pathogens and that makes them important.
I aint touching what you turned the water tiger conversation into…
@hivefleetbothan neighbours just got home and a cockroach showed up on our balcony
Caught it asap, beer was in the glass so it’s stuck there and I couldn’t take a pic
Spiky bloodsucking hornets? Can’t say I am familiar with those.
EDIT: I am not responding because I have over 30% of responses and I want other people to get a chance to speak… so instead I am placing my thoughts here.
Thanks @harith, but I had done a google search and found it
And yes, I am familiar… These insects actually play a role in the FOUNDATION of ecosystems. One of the tauted benefits of recent gene-editing technologies was supposed to be the total removal of their populations.
However, I (and other ecologists) was against the use of this technology because mosquitoes play a vital role as a food source for so many other organisms (both as larvae and adult) that their removal will likely be harshly negative in every case. Most importantly, mosquitoes are a basic food source for a lot of organisms.
I will link here to some of the interesting ones:
The scientific paper (most recently)
The less technical side
But of course there is one organism that is absolutely dependent on mosquitoes:
Don’t worry about the automated forum notifications, they have no context sensitivity. Of course we want the resident entomologist to respond to and lead the conversation on insect matters, that’s why the thread exists.
Having only read the abstract but are they suggesting that this particular bat goes specifically for malaria mosquitoes and only this one bat does so? It also seems to suggest it also tends towards picking blood carrying ones meaning they’ve already bitten something and infected them with malaria, so they are not actually a biological control of disease vectors.
I <3 bats so pls keep them alive. But wasn’t the idea only wiping out that specific species of mosquito? So bats could still feed on a billion other insects? Or are these the only mosquitoes living there? (lol fuck that place if so =) )
Why perpetuate it then when it’s just a bunch of pointless quibbling?
While facetious harith inadvertently managed to make about half a point though. The malaria parasite’s life cycle requires an infected host to be bitten again in order for the “adult” parasites to infect a suitable mosquito within which they can mate and spawn which then again have to bite yet another victim to continue the cycle.
Since the malaria parasite’s gestation period is something like 2-3 weeks the mosquito’s survival to bite again is obviously vital for their life cycle. So obviously anything that eats them does help curb the spread. But saying we need keep malaria around because those particular mosquitoes are food for a bat is a bit of a backwards argument in my opinion.
According to the paper linked those particular bats would seem to almost exclusively go for the malaria carrying family of mosquitoes. I don’t know if they tested to see if the bat would be willing to change it’s diet to include any other mosquitoes if it’s #1 choice was not available though.
*Words within this post are not necessarily the scientifically correct terms and the information is not complete and exhaustive as I am not writing a paper on the subject but only trying to convey a concept between laymen.
I’m assuming that you may want to insert a comma after the word facetious? Else I foresee a possible alternative timeline of disaster, where harith gets superpowers and you become his arch-nemesis. (unless it’s something from this list or this reddit thread, in which case you’re probably safe).
Whoops, the blood-meal mosquito favoring predator is actually a spider, not a bat… Although you are correct @Fraggles the spider is not a huge impactor on the spread of malaria (the paper simply broad strokes the concept of there possibly existing specialized predators that can play a major role in disease vectors).
The spider in question is actually more of an odditiy since it is a indirect vertebrate blood feeder, that needs to feed on vertebrate blood but lacks any specialized adaptations to do so because it instead hijacks the specialized blood feeders in the area.
Also, @anon63424221 mosquitos don’t sting, they just have a stylus mouth that can pierce the skin and then go looking for a vein (it is actually really cool). They are incapable of stinging.