What oxygen concentration range does low oxygen refer to here?
For organisms, efficient respiratory and circulatory systems can help adapt to hypoxic environments. Just like the air sac of birds, the hemoglobin of vertebrates.
In fact, the oxygen index of many fuels is lower than 16%, such as 4% for charcoal. Dry dead wood can still catch fire, and there are also flammable plants like pine. If fire resistance is also seen as an evolution of plants, perhaps the fire resistance of plants in hypoxic environments may also be relatively low?
A low oxygen environment does not necessarily mean that there is no fire, but natural fire will be more difficult to occur, and the maintenance and ignition of fire will also be more difficult. Metallurgy will also have higher requirements for technology, fuel, and blowers.
I believe they are asking where it was brought up within the underwater civilization discussion, they’re well aware that it was brought up here because they brought it up
Please stop making posts that could just be reactions. I’ve noticed that you do that a lot, and it goes against the forum rules;
In this instance, you could have just left a . If you had just done this once or twice, I wouldn’t mention it, but it has been repeatedly done, to the point where almost half of your posts that I have read are like this.
Edit: It proves up to metal smelting, but not how they would properly shape the metal or any other components of civilization past the point of smelting the metal. As such, Hhyyrylainen’s challenge of a full essay with citations has yet to be completed
Edit 2: Regardless, this is off topic. Back to low oxygen civilizations!
3 Likes
Dawn
(she/her or you will be known only in history books)
21
hmm, internal lungs would probably not evolve due to the sheer size they’d have to be to fuel something the size of a human or everything with internal lungs would have to be really slow to not use up all its oxygen, unless they took the oxygen from the water in their bodies but with that what’s the point of having lungs, at that point they’re just a liability.
external lungs or more likely external gills would probably be used instead but if an organism started making poisonous gasses either it would completely dominate the ecosystem or things would start turning their gills into something that is most definitely not a gill, for example a leaf or a stub. though it’s far more likely that they’d just adapt to be immune to the poison instead of forming a symbiotic relationship with something that makes oxygen unless they fed with their gills which would be a good strategy for filter feeders, their gill cells would probably be pretty big as well if that was the case, and likely also use as little oxygen as possible instead using lactic or alcoholic fermentation like muscles or yeast.
axolotls would probably be the second best suited to a low oxygen planet out of pretty much all earth animals, though i wonder what their lungs would evolve into since their gills would have to expand enough to make their lungs pretty much useless, maybe more stomachs, maybe water storage organs, maybe venom bladders.
naked mole rats would be the best animal to put on a low oxygen planet though since they can metabolize fructose instead of glucose and oxygen if they need to. they’d definitely need a source of fructose and glucose though.
but combine the two and you get the pinnacle of low oxygen capable animals. a salamander with lungs and gills, the ability to use glucose where it can get enough oxygen and fructose where it can’t, hibernation for long periods of time for both healing and surviving anoxic environments, eyes, long limbs, and a long tail perfect for swimming fast and efficiently through low oxygen waters. and since most animals can use lactic fermentation it’d probably evolve to swim to whatever level oxygen concentration is the highest when it starts using fructose more than normal
The cells inside your own body actually live in an environment with 1% to 6% oxygen content. During embryonic development, this concentration is further limited to 1% to 3%. The oxygen content of the planet is variable: for Earth, during the Mesozoic era, the oxygen content in the atmosphere was about 12-15%, much lower than the current 21%, but still higher than the requirements for cell operation.
For the low oxygen stage of a planet, what is important is the oxygen supply efficiency brought by the respiratory and circulatory systems.
Although many animals have the ability to move under low or anaerobic conditions. But it must be considered that for intelligent organisms that establish civilization, the oxygen supply requirements for the brain are extremely high.
and that’s where photosynthesis would come in, even if the oxygen content of your planet is 0% if you can photosynthesize and you have enough surface area to get enough oxygen that would still let you keep a brain active. and if you intake and release gasses then enough animals in one glass room will make everyone need less light to keep their brains active. another way to do it is to have your lung or gill cells actively take oxygen from the air and not use oxygen, for example, they could use lactic fermentation, or if it’s advantageous to contain alcohol, alcoholic fermentation.
i have told you not to refer to me as you would a man. and again. you don’t need to reply to everything, just leave a reaction. spam and fluff posts go against the rules.
I have read some information about naked mole rates and fructose metabolism. Fructose metabolism is similar to glucose glycolysis, but its advantage is that it does not have a rate limiting enzyme like glycolysis(PFK). To some extent, it can be considered as rapid glycolysis, which is sufficient to maintain the survival of the brain in a low consumption state in the short term.
Naked mole rates have a unique ability to convert fructose in animals.
But fructose seems unlikely to be added to the game.
Allowing animals to engage in chloroplast self photosynthesis is definitely not a good idea, especially since it is only for the purpose of obtaining oxygen. This oxygen is not enough to support animal movement, let alone thinking, and needs to be maintained under light.
It’s better to directly convert light energy to ATP instead of fixing carbon and consuming energy to decompose water to obtain oxygen. Haha
plenty of animals don’t actually need oxygen in their skeletal muscles to move them, it’s just heavily preferred as using them without oxygen damages them more, the other tissues that aren’t brain could use fructose while the brain is the thing using the oxygen, and axolotls grow their gills depending on the amount of gill they need to get enough oxygen though it is limited by genetics, the atmosphere would probably have enough oxygen to allow them to adapt to having gills that make oxygen though assuming it’s high enough oxygen for small animals that get oxygen by being long(like worms) to stay in the bottom of the ocean.
i’m mainly just trying to find the best starting animal or amalgamation for a low oxygen world
. If you had just done this once or twice, I wouldn’t mention it, but it has been repeatedly done, to the point where almost half of your posts that I have read are like this.