I struggle to understand why animals like primates aren’t colonies but manowar are. Looking at the wikipedia page, a manowar is composed of zooids that are genetically identical and have a variety of functions that all support the organisms survival.
humans, too, are composed of smaller units (cells, tissues, organs) that are genetically identical and have a variety of functions that all support the organisms survival.
in fact, id even argue a human is *more* of a colony than a manowar. humans have a variety of microbiota both within their body and on their skin without which we would not survive. we couldn’t process the nutrients we take in without gut bacteria. mitochondria are endosymbionts that are required to even allow multicellular life to really get off the ground at all. our very dna carries around viruses, an obligate parasite pseudo life form.
We have a far wider array of constituent members with far more diverse functions, many of which our brain (which i think of as the “lead member” of the colony) has no direct control over. your body can take action based purely on signals between your spinal cord and muscles without waiting for your brain to get into the loop.
so is the difference just one or “this terminology is all specific and arbitrary” or is there something obvious i’m missing?
In: Biology
The simplest explanation is that you are one individual made up of numerous individual cells.
A colonial animal is made up of numerous zooids, which are all individual **multi-cellular** organisms.
A human colonial organism would look something like The Rotten in Dark Souls, a single organism made up of numerous human bodies working together.
Latest Answers