this post was submitted on 27 Feb 2026
106 points (100.0% liked)

Biodiversity

3762 readers
56 users here now

Welcome to c/Biodiversity @ Mander.xyz!

A community about the variety of life on Earth at all levels; including plants, animals, bacteria, and fungi.

Notice Board

This is a work in progress, please don't mind the mess.

2023-06-16: We invite our users to contribute resources for the sidebar.

2023-06-15: Looking for mods!

About

Biodiversity is a term used to describe the enormous variety of life on Earth. It can be used more specifically to refer to all of the species in one region or ecosystem. Biodiversity refers to every living thing, including plants, bacteria, animals, and humans. Scientists have estimated that there are around 8.7 million species of plants and animals in existence. However, only around 1.2 million species have been identified and described so far, most of which are insects. This means that millions of other organisms remain a complete mystery.

Over generations, all of the species that are currently alive today have evolved unique traits that make them distinct from other species. These differences are what scientists use to tell one species from another. Organisms that have evolved to be so different from one another that they can no longer reproduce with each other are considered different species. All organisms that can reproduce with each other fall into one species. Read more...

Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Be kind and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.

Quick Links

Resources

Bypass Paywalls

Similar Communities

Sister Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Plants & Gardening

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Memes

Find us on Reddit!

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
fossilesque@mander.xyz
AlchemicalAgent@mander.xyz
kevin@mander.xyz
SciBot@mander.xyz
Botrychium@mander.xyz
106
Parasitic ant species where every individual is a queen discovered in Japan (www.independent.co.uk)
submitted 1 day ago by Salamence@mander.xyz to c/biodiversity@mander.xyz
16 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

cross-posted from: https://hexbear.net/post/7777980

A new study has now provided the first proof of an ant species that lacks both workers and males and consists exclusively of queens.

💅💅💅💅

top 16 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] TacoButtPlug@sh.itjust.works 8 points 15 hours ago

Ahhh, yes. Ants. My favorite 'missed the mark' discussion on my lack of hope in humanity was from my fellow anarchist friends. I am a staunch evolution nerd and they were like, 'nah - traits that favor trashy brute behavior aren't valid - just read Paul Kropotkin's Mutual Aid to have a better feels.' I did and got to chapter six before wanting to beat Paul's ass because his argument was basically ' trust in humanity and the world because insects like ants can get along'. Never mind the fact that if one ant doesn't share what it has with another than the colony will dismember it. Or how other animals fear ant colonies when they move into their territory. Hope in humanity not restored and I also hate ants even more.

[–] tristynalxander@mander.xyz 7 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Vibes say these are more ant-parasites than parasite-ants, but they're pretty interesting regardless. I was hoping to read about a clonal super-organism, but it seems like these supplant existing ant-queens, so I presume they are less collectivist than I was hoping. Still pretty cool.

[–] piranhaconda@mander.xyz 2 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago) (1 children)

"Now, the latest study shows that on top of killing the host queen, T kinomurai also reproduces asexually by producing clones of itself, and tricks the surviving host workers into rearing the offspring."

So do the clones then convince the workers to kill the original clone? Repeat until the colony falls apart because workers aren't being produced?

[–] tristynalxander@mander.xyz 1 points 16 hours ago

I don't know. I think queens have wings, so I presumed they flew off to kill a new ant nest, but maybe they split the nest or maybe there is some in-fighting. A good question for ant-biologists.

[–] 4am@lemmy.zip 21 points 1 day ago

Conservatives seen sweating, drafting bills to ban them

[–] Lemmyoutofhere@lemmy.ca 18 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Somebody phone Ru Paul.

[–] RaoulDuke85@piefed.social 9 points 1 day ago

Yaass Queen!

[–] protist@mander.xyz 7 points 1 day ago (2 children)

There's gotta be a point at which sexual reproduction comes into play, otherwise it's an evolutionary dead end

[–] reallykindasorta@slrpnk.net 18 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Cloning!

Note: Typically ‘workers’ are non sexually reproducing females for ants

They then analysed the queen ants under a microscope and found that their mating structures were not used, essentially indicating that the offspring were all clones.

After observing multiple colonies and multiple populations of the species, researchers confirmed that the species completely lacked workers and males.

“Our data therefore suggest that the life history of T. kinomurai is characterised by the unique combination of workerless parasitism and parthenogenesis, i.e., the ability to produce female offspring from unfertilised eggs,” scientists wrote in the study published in the journal Current Biology.

[–] protist@mander.xyz 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yeah I read it, I'm saying that if an animal is only reproducing via cloning forever, it's an evolutionary dead end, because they will have completely lost the ability to adapt to environmental changes

[–] gid@piefed.blahaj.zone 11 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Not necessarily: mutations will still happen. But there will not be any genetic crossing over that will contribute to greater variance.

[–] protist@mander.xyz 2 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

How many animals can you name that reproduce only asexually? The rate of evolution in an asexually reproducing species will always be significantly slower than a species that reproduces sexually, and over time it will be out-competed.

[–] gid@piefed.blahaj.zone 2 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

The rate of evolution in an asexually reproducing species will always be significantly slower than a species that reproduces sexually, and over time it will be out-competed

Again: not necessarily. That there are still asexually-producing organisms suggests that it's not enough of a disadvantage for the environment they're in.

This form of reproduction can also be an advantage: the rate of reproduction tends to be faster and more offspring are produced. In the case of this organism, instead of one queen producing all the offspring, every ant is able to produce offspring.

tl;dr: it isn't the case that sexual reproduction is always favoured over asexual reproduction. Evolutionary pressure isn't fixed like that.

[–] protist@mander.xyz 1 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Again, what other animals are there that reproduce only asexually? Of course there can be advantages to reproducing asexually, however every other multicellular animal that does it also reproduces sexually at times, because those that don't reproduce sexually have gone extinct

[–] gid@piefed.blahaj.zone 1 points 3 hours ago

From some quick research just now, all these species are female-only and reproduce asexually:

It's nowhere near as common as sexual reproduction, but it doesn't mean it's an evolutionary dead-end.

those that don't reproduce sexually have gone extinct

Plenty of sexually-reproducing species have gone extinct too: that's not an argument that sexual reproduction is unfavourable.

[–] wizzor@sopuli.xyz 5 points 1 day ago

Or an en evolutionary peak