What if all species evolved to only eat plants?
This reminds me of one of my favorite fictional species (the one depicted in my avatar actually), from Larry Niven's "Known Space" universe. Called Pierson's Puppeteers (or just Puppeteers) by humans; and referred to as Citizens of the Concordance (or just Citizens) by themselves.
They're a three-legged, two-headed, intelligent (much more knowledgeable than humans, though this may be because they're much older as a species) race of herbivorous herd-beasts, who consider cowardice to be the greatest virtue. They claim to have exterminated all predatory life forms from their home world millennia ago (which is why this topic reminded me of them), along with sharp corners one might bruise oneself against.
However even despite being herbivorous, the Puppeteers exist in a predatory ecological niche. In order to reproduce they require a host-organism inside of which their young gestates; the host does not survive the birth. These hosts - called Brides - were domesticated eons ago (which explains how an herbivore could be nonetheless intelligent).
No clear history or timeline of the development of this species is ever given AFAIK, so maybe the species developed predatory reproduction in order to fill an ecological niche left vacant by the extermination of carnivorous predators.
Point being, a world without carnivorous predation is not necessarily a world without predation.
_________________
From start to finish I've made you feel this
Uncomfort in turn with the world you've learned
To love through this hate to live with its weight
A burden discerned in the blood you taste
They're a three-legged, two-headed, intelligent (much more knowledgeable than humans, though this may be because they're much older as a species) race of herbivorous herd-beasts, who consider cowardice to be the greatest virtue. They claim to have exterminated all predatory life forms from their home world millennia ago (which is why this topic reminded me of them), along with sharp corners one might bruise oneself against.
However even despite being herbivorous, the Puppeteers exist in a predatory ecological niche. In order to reproduce they require a host-organism inside of which their young gestates; the host does not survive the birth. These hosts - called Brides - were domesticated eons ago (which explains how an herbivore could be nonetheless intelligent).
No clear history or timeline of the development of this species is ever given AFAIK, so maybe the species developed predatory reproduction in order to fill an ecological niche left vacant by the extermination of carnivorous predators.
Point being, a world without carnivorous predation is not necessarily a world without predation.
That reproductive strategy is essentially the same as that of many species of wasps on earth.
The mom wasp finds a nice fat caterpillar (or whatever bug her species specializes in) pounces on it - and lays her eggs inside the caterpillar, and then she flies away. Then the baby wasps hatch, and commence to eat the caterpillar from the inside out-make a home out of the caterpillar's hollowed out carcass for while, and then burst out of it -and into the world as juvenile wasps.
Imagine that scaled up to human size.
Imagine a crow laying its eggs inside the body of a cow- days later the cow get kinda lethargic- another few days- she keels over- and then after lying on the ground in a coma for a few days- she bursts open and flock of half grown grows fly out. Yuck!
They're a three-legged, two-headed, intelligent (much more knowledgeable than humans, though this may be because they're much older as a species) race of herbivorous herd-beasts, who consider cowardice to be the greatest virtue. They claim to have exterminated all predatory life forms from their home world millennia ago (which is why this topic reminded me of them), along with sharp corners one might bruise oneself against.
However even despite being herbivorous, the Puppeteers exist in a predatory ecological niche. In order to reproduce they require a host-organism inside of which their young gestates; the host does not survive the birth. These hosts - called Brides - were domesticated eons ago (which explains how an herbivore could be nonetheless intelligent).
No clear history or timeline of the development of this species is ever given AFAIK, so maybe the species developed predatory reproduction in order to fill an ecological niche left vacant by the extermination of carnivorous predators.
Point being, a world without carnivorous predation is not necessarily a world without predation.
I love that idea and can run away with it!! ! What if, on some distant planet, in a galaxy far, far away, just suppose for one single solitary second, creatures are running about with as many as ten heads!! ! That would be ten heads with one (or possibly two or three, who knows?) brain each for a total of at least ten brains that's assuming the skulls only contain one brain each. The possibilities are endless! One organism could have an entire party all by itself, if each head had a mouth and could communicate with all the others.
I just thought of something else that's cool! The thought of all these heads existing in another dimension, all around. We can't see them but they are there, and some of us can experience thought transference and have access to advanced ideas from these wonderfully talented creatures with so much more brain power per individual.
DentArthurDent
Veteran
Joined: 26 Jul 2008
Age: 59
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,884
Location: Victoria, Australia
Apart from the obvious danger of mass starvation and extinctions due to over grazing. The evolutionary pressures are highly unlikely to allow the premiss. At some point various species would take advantage of others and become omnivores leading to predation. What I find interesting are the implications raised in the question what would happen if humanity were to decide to go herbivore.
_________________
"I'd take the awe of understanding over the awe of ignorance anyday"
Douglas Adams
"Religion is the impotence of the human mind to deal with occurrences it cannot understand" Karl Marx
There could be famines but I question if there would be any more extinctions than what is average for species.
Once there is a famine, the plants would grow back and the cycle would start again. It doesn't take plants that long to grow.
DentArthurDent
Veteran
Joined: 26 Jul 2008
Age: 59
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,884
Location: Victoria, Australia
Ranchers in the american west discovered that the hard way-eliminating predators causes soil erosion. Kill off the bobcats, cougars, coyotes, bears, timber wolves. and the deer over populate and strip away all of the foliage -so there is no vegetation to hold the soil when it rains- causing disastrous soil erosion.
A famous photograph taken in rural Australia is bisected by a fence leading from the viewer's eye out to the horizon miles away. To one side of the fence -is a fat grassland much like Kansas, to the other side- bare rock and soil like pics taken by the mars lander. It looks like a pic of Kansas splice to a pic of Mars-but its one actual landscape of the same vista. The fence is a "rabbit proof fence" that keeps parts of Australia free of over grazing by the overpopulated rabbits that were imported from Europe and who had no natural predators in Australia.
Predators are vital to a healthy ecology.
Natures has a food chain. You cant change that. So why ask this question?
A famous photograph taken in rural Australia is bisected by a fence leading from the viewer's eye out to the horizon miles away. To one side of the fence -is a fat grassland much like Kansas, to the other side- bare rock and soil like pics taken by the mars lander. It looks like a pic of Kansas splice to a pic of Mars-but its one actual landscape of the same vista. The fence is a "rabbit proof fence" that keeps parts of Australia free of over grazing by the overpopulated rabbits that were imported from Europe and who had no natural predators in Australia.
Predators are vital to a healthy ecology. Natures has a food chain. You cant change that. So why ask this question?
Without the natural predators you would simply see other mechanisms taking their place. For instance, if many deer died from lack of nutrients you would see this bounty of food and the population of deer would decreased all at once so they would just start their cycle all over again. Everything tends to cycle on.
I ask the question on account of everyone who doesn't like it when humans eat meat, says it's unethical and wrong, so I ask the question of all creatures. What if none of us consumed another's flesh? Could we all exist like that?
That's more about long term climate change.
The area in which I live experienced a prolonged drought during the last century. I am sure desertification was mentioned but the rains returned and the dust bowl look left the area. First, we would need proof long term conditions would cause an area to stay a desert for several hundred years or longer.
Because most plants are fairly low in nutrients herbivores need to spend a far greater proportion of their time foraging for food, leaving not much time for thinking. So no herbivores ever go to evolve into a higher/dominant life form. With most forms of plant food the energy released by digestion isn't that much greater than the energy needed to digest it. Generally we tend to eat stores of nutrients aggregated by plants. Tubers - potatoes, carrots, etc,. Seed pods - grains and legumes plus nuts.
I have always believed that Fire played a significant part in the evolution of humans. The process of heating food enables less digestive effort to be expended in extracting nutrients making the process of eating more efficient. Neanderthals could turn up after predators had finished consuming a fresh kill with virtually nothing left to scavenge, and by placing the major bones on a fire cause them to crack and release the cooked marrow. An incredibly rich source of food, acquired with minimal effort.
Bone marrow is probably the most rich naturally occurring food known to ancient man. Neanderthals could happily survive for days just by heating a few Mammoth leg bones and eating the cooked marrow. Giving them time to grow their brains to encompass critical thinking.
_________________
Rev Mother Bene Gesserit
Sent from my PDP11/05 running RSX-11D via an ASR33 (TTY)
DentArthurDent
Veteran
Joined: 26 Jul 2008
Age: 59
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,884
Location: Victoria, Australia
That's more about long term climate change.
The area in which I live experienced a prolonged drought during the last century. I am sure desertification was mentioned but the rains returned and the dust bowl look left the area. First, we would need proof long term conditions would cause an area to stay a desert for several hundred years or longer.
Ah no its not. From Wikipedia "Considerable controversy exists over the proper definition of the term "desertification" for which Helmut Geist (2005) has identified more than 100 formal definitions.The most widely accepted[2] of these is that of the Princeton University Dictionary which defines it as "the process of fertile land transforming into desert typically as a result of deforestation, drought or improper/inappropriate agriculture"[4]
Desertification has been neatly defined in the text of the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD) as "land degradation in arid, semi-arid and dry sub-humid regions resulting from various factors, including climatic variations and human activities"
As Naturalplastic has already pointed out this process has been shown to occur when humans have introduced species eg rabbits into Australia or removed predators also Australia and the US. In both cases unchecked herbivores turned arable land into desert. as I have already said if you understand the way evolution works the idea of no omnivores or carnivores existing is palpable nonsense.
_________________
"I'd take the awe of understanding over the awe of ignorance anyday"
Douglas Adams
"Religion is the impotence of the human mind to deal with occurrences it cannot understand" Karl Marx