Costasiella kuroshimae

150

vvinnyglennon 4 days ago 56 commentsRead Article on en.wikipedia.org

RU version is available. Content is displayed in original English for accuracy.

⚡ Community Insights

Discussion Sentiment

79% Positive

Analyzed from 1050 words in the discussion.

Discussion (56 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews

iwd•1 day ago

I just got to see a different species of kleptoplastic sea slugs in the wild last month, on a kayak tour of the mangroves around Key West. Our guide scooped some lettuce sea slugs up in a plastic container (and then returned them safely). They were bigger, about 3 inches long, with a wavy/frilly green border. It made my biologist heart very happy!

throwup238•1 day ago

That was likely a sea slug from the Nudibranchia order (they resemble lettuce sea slugs sometimes) which are a bit different from Sacoglassa order slugs like the one in TFA in that they carry symbiotic algae colonies, rather than digesting them and keeping the chloroplasts like Sacoglassa.

abhikul0•about 6 hours ago

Real Science video on the slug: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IH_uv4h2xYM

corygarms•about 23 hours ago

This is exactly why pokemon devs are looking for biologists! (seriously) https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-026-00960-8

Ericson2314•1 day ago

I remember as a kid wondering if we could give humans chlorolaplasts.

rustyhancock•1 day ago

I believe that mitochondria and chloroplast both were originally independent single celled organisms.

So kind of funny that, chloroplast is being "stolen" again by this sea slug.

chasil•about 13 hours ago

Chloroplasts are but one variety of plastids. Assimilation has occurred multiple times.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plastid

morphle•about 21 hours ago

Yes, it is funny that biological history repeats itself.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbiogenesis

gus_massa•1 day ago

Somewhat related https://what-if.xkcd.com/17/

The surface is too small and you only get like 4% of the energy you need (Assuming you like being naked under full sunlight all day long. The article is for cows, but I guess the number is similar for humans.) 4% of 2400 kcal is almost 100 kcal, that is the content of a small diet treat or 2 apples.

These sea slugs can survive because they move very slowly. For a human, I think it's not enough energy to survive even if all the activity is to watch TV inside a hot swimming pool.

eigenspace•about 22 hours ago

Dietary need scales with volume, whereas incident sunlight would scale with surface area.

Assuming a spherical cow and a spherical human, the calories needed would scale with the radius cubed, whereas the calories gained from sunlight would scale with the radius squared. So while I agree this wouldn't be very many calories, even if you sat under the sun all day, I think the 4% figure is probably quite pessimistic.

gus_massa•about 12 hours ago

Mmm... Cows weight like 5 persons, 5^(1/3)=1.7, so 4%*1.7=7%, so 170 kcal that is still less than a single cheeseburger.

KnuthIsGod•about 17 hours ago

Marvelous...

Finally a good reason to assume a spherical cow!

pfdietz•about 21 hours ago

The square cube law pops up all over the place, my favorite being in fusion reactors, where it is a two edged sword.

stavros•1 day ago

Life is amazing.

squigz•1 day ago

Stuff like this really makes you wonder what life might look like out in the universe.

ljf•1 day ago

https://www.eastoftheweb.com/short-stories/UBooks/TheyMade.s... - love this short story and its take on that question.

squigz•1 day ago

A classic, and regularly shared here on HN :)

I really like this version of it personally: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T6JFTmQCFHg

explodes•1 day ago

Some things on Earth (especially in the ocean) you'd think were extraterrestrial... What a gift to still be able to find such amazing animals out there.

pfdietz•about 21 hours ago

They all, so far, share the same basic biochemistry, derived from the Last Universal Common Ancestor (LUCA).

What would be extraordinarily interesting would be if we could find life on Earth with a fundamentally different biochemstry. Very different genetic code, even. This would be sign that Origin of Life is not the Great Filter. And we don't even have to go to another planet to conduct this search for "alien" life.

squigz•about 23 hours ago

Some of those things down in the ocean are almost too extraterrestrial... they can stay undiscovered!

morphle•1 day ago

Isn't life on this planet also life out in the universe? It depends on your point of view.

[1] Pale blue dot - Carl Sagan https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wupToqz1e2g

squigz•1 day ago

Do you consider things that are inside a house to also be outside a house?

latexr•1 day ago

Sounds like you might be interested in “The Zoologist’s Guide to the Galaxy”.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Zoologist%27s_Guide_to_the...

idiotsecant•1 day ago

Makes you imagine a world with high solar power density and maybe lower gravity or something where larger land animals might be realistically supplemented by solar energy as well.

tbrownaw•1 day ago

Closer to the sun (high solar power density) and smaller (lower gravity)... I think we actually have one of those nearby?

lukan•1 day ago

Some infinite water supply would be probably helpful there.

tbrownaw•1 day ago

Infinite indeed, need to keep it topped off as it all boils away.

idiotsecant•about 18 hours ago

I suppose also 'is capable of supporting life' might be an important factor when considering hypothetical life forms.

makoai•1 day ago

Real Life Bulbasaur

tetris11•about 3 hours ago

I can definitely see the resemblance to the False Minoshiro's from Shinsekai Yori

katspaugh•about 23 hours ago

Probably more like モンメン (Cottonee).

thinkingtoilet•1 day ago

This is one of those times evolution doesn't make sense to me. It's clear how a giraffe's neck evolves, the ones that could reach higher leaves in trees had an advantage. In examples like this, how does this evolve when there is no gradual change? An animal had to exist that had an offspring that somehow both absorbed the chloroplasts of the food it ate in a way that it could use (not just simple digestion), then have a place to store them, then have a mechanism to move the chloroplasts to the storage space, then have the mechanisms in their body to use the energy the stored chloroplasts create. How does that happen gradually when each step is totally useless without the others?

(please note I am not challenging the scientific truth of evolution, I simply do not understand how something like this happens)

largbae•1 day ago

They look kind of translucent to me, maybe the first of this kind of slug just had a digestive problem that didn't break down the chloroplasts, and the minimal energy through their bodies made those individuals more successful because they didn't need to eat as often as those who digested theirs. Yada yada other errors among the indegestible-chloroplast population showed further advantages when it's closer to the skin, they outcompeted their peers, etc.

crustaceansoup•1 day ago

The article notes that the chloroplasts are like a larder that the slug can digest when needs be, so storage could have come well before photosynthesis was actually utilized.

Or maybe it was photosynthesis first. The chloroplasts just did their thing for a while, and slugs that digested them slower (and eventually ones that stored them) got more benefit than ones that didn't.

andy99•1 day ago

> please note I am not challenging the scientific truth of evolution

Evolution isn’t a matter of faith, you’re welcome to challenge it and try to poke holes in it.

dekhn•about 20 hours ago

While true, the predominance of evidence for evolution has reached the point that anybody attempting to argue against it would have to produce absolutely enormous amounts of self-consistent evidence that explains our observations better than modern theories of evolution. It's sort of like the laws of thermodynamics, or relativity, or quantum physics- if you found convincing evidence that any one of those was not accurate, and came up with a better explanation, it would both completely transform science, and open up new avenues for discovery.

And if you want to do that, you should probably get a deep set of experience; otherwise, it's not much different from a flat earther.

thin_carapace•about 14 hours ago

theres nothing stopping the entirety of existence as being experienced via wires connected to some brain matter suspended in a jar, one would have to disprove this issue at a meta level to conclusively state any given existential theory as true. therefore all existential theories including atheism are faith based, so to state any one particular theory as true is dogmatic and unscientific

hackerbeat•1 day ago

We‘re all solar—powered animals.

morphle•about 21 hours ago

Many bacteria and animals are chemically-powered or electrically-powered. Just one group: https://www.whoi.edu/oceanus/feature/lost-city-pumps-life-es...

jimbokun•1 day ago

You know what they meant.

infogulch•about 20 hours ago

Well it says "indirectly". How much indirect do they mean?