this post was submitted on 24 Mar 2025
581 points (100.0% liked)

Science Memes

13681 readers
2886 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
all 49 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 6 points 10 hours ago
[–] [email protected] 7 points 11 hours ago

You like seeking patterns, don't you?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 12 hours ago

Not a single mention of how pink and sparkly

[–] [email protected] 115 points 1 day ago (6 children)

I read this thing's entire wiki page and it's fascinating!!

  • Imo it's not even an animal it's just a collection of cells that can survive on their own but just don't want too
  • It will rip itself into multiple parts spontaneously because cells don't coordinate too much. They don't have dedicated neurons but they have a decently complex peptide based protocol.
  • You can put a single Trichoplax animal through a sive that is fine enough not to damage the cells but separate them, and the cells will reform into the same animal
  • They can reproduce sexually but they don't have any of the markers that all males of all sexually reproducing species have. Plus because they only ever sexually reproduce when there's a high density of Trichoplaxs, it's basically a pattern of Trichoplax cells choosing to break away and combine with other cells to create new individuals.
  • They're just about as simple as e.coli and they're the simplest animals with about 50mill base pairs divided into 6 chromosomes
  • They can take the organelles of the cells they eat just because. The wiki article calls it symbiosis but that implies that organelles are alive and I don't think they are. I think Trichoplaxs can just take tools from other creatures to use.
[–] [email protected] 43 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

I think you misread wikipedia when it talks about its endosymbioses. Whole bacteria are found within an organlle (the endoplasmic reticulum) of Trichoplaxs.

That being said what you described does happen in a number of organisms (including 'complex' ones like nudibranchs): they steal the chloroplasts from the algae they eat in a process called kleptoplasty. Seeing as mitochondria and chloroplasts originated as bacterial endosymbionts that were then heavily integrated into their hosts, calling kleptoplasty a form of symbiosis isn't that unusual.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Whole bacteria are found within an organlle

That is even more mind blowing to me

[–] [email protected] 4 points 11 hours ago

Then I have to ask if you were aware that mitochondria were originally external, invasive organisms

[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Fun fact: Animal embryos can be disassociated by depriving them of calcium (E-cadherin, the molecule that holds the cells together, needs to calcium to work) and then can be allowed to reassociate by adding back calcium. If you do this in early enough stages then the embryo will function and develop normally once reaggregated, despite all the cells being jumbled up

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 day ago (1 children)

"peptide-based protocol" is a pretty good band name

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago

Cellular peptide cake with mint frosting

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 day ago

Thank you for the summary. I don't have time to go down a rabbit hole at the moment, so this was just enough to sate my curiosity until I do have time.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 day ago

ISTR you can do the sieve thing with true living sponges, too. Life on earth is wild. I wonder if it will be considered mild once we find some interesting life off-planet.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago

Fucking interesting!

[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 day ago
[–] [email protected] 44 points 1 day ago (1 children)

how it looks like

This phrase drives me crazy.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 day ago (2 children)
[–] [email protected] 39 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Valid options are:

  • What it looks like
  • How it looks

Not:

  • How it looks like
[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 day ago (2 children)

this is really controversial, but as long as I can understand it, I think it's ok.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 day ago

Objectively correct take. The goal of communication has been met, anything else is just pedantry.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It's not at all controversial, it's the rules of English grammar.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The "rules" of a language describe how people use the language, but those conventions are subject to constant change because communication is a collaborative art. Some might say it's better to use a semicolon rather than a comma, for example.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago

*than a comma; for example

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago

Because this should now include an explanation of how it's looking like it does. What is the reason it has that color, and takes that exact form? This was obviously not the point of the post.

[–] [email protected] 50 points 1 day ago
[–] [email protected] 36 points 1 day ago

A M O G U S

[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 day ago
[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 day ago

“Ancestors, please guide me. What should I do?”

“Blob zlorg bzz”

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 day ago

There is an organism among us.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Early animals were likely very similar to Trichoplax, but they weren't Trichoplax. Trichoplax adherins is a modern species with just as many millions of years of evolution between it and the first animal as between us and the first animal. Just bugs me when people end up implying that orthogenisis is real

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 day ago

Yo, if our universe is just the innards of a primordial microorganism, where can we find the mitochondria?

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 day ago

Get out of my head, get out of my head!!

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago

Gramgram is that you

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

Written by a Geordie like.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago

Trumps brain

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 day ago

No actually. If you consider the plants to be Archaeplastida (glaucophytes, red algae, and Viridiplantae) or Viridiplantae (the green algae including Embryophyta) then the common plant ancestor is unicellular (greens and reds evolved multicellularity independently). If you consider the plants to just be Embryophyta (the land plants) then they already had highly specialized cells and looked plant-like before they split off from the rest of the green algae.

I'm not sure if the fungal common ancestor is believed to have been unicellular or multicellular but if it was multicellular then it would've been filamentous like modern multicellular fungi, rather than a sheet of cells

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago

Hmm.. Looks like a nebula...

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I just recovered from the boomerang nebula :(

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

With the amount of things that kinda look like that, im surprised people havent started making conspiracy theories

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

In how many ways is this thing going to kill us?