A Planet with No Animals












4














Assuming that an Earth analog was inhabited by both plants and animals like our Earth. Could the non-animal life on the planet survive the absence of animals (excluding sponges and corals) on the planet? Assume that all non-animal life (plants, fungi, bacteria) is unaffected and the animals were wiped out in an extremely short time frame (within weeks or months).










share|improve this question
























  • We need a definition of survival. Some plant species will survive, some will die.
    – Alexander
    yesterday










  • I would define survival as the plants not becoming extinct after animals and continuing their existence long after they (animal life) are gone
    – Thalassan
    yesterday






  • 1




    Some species of plants going extinct or entire plant kingdom going extinct? The latter would not happen.
    – Alexander
    yesterday










  • I apologize for the ambiguity, I do mean that the entire plant kingdom must survive.
    – Thalassan
    yesterday






  • 1




    Many plants have no known dependency on animals in their lifecycle. Unless there are some unknown forces in play, those species should survive.
    – Alexander
    yesterday
















4














Assuming that an Earth analog was inhabited by both plants and animals like our Earth. Could the non-animal life on the planet survive the absence of animals (excluding sponges and corals) on the planet? Assume that all non-animal life (plants, fungi, bacteria) is unaffected and the animals were wiped out in an extremely short time frame (within weeks or months).










share|improve this question
























  • We need a definition of survival. Some plant species will survive, some will die.
    – Alexander
    yesterday










  • I would define survival as the plants not becoming extinct after animals and continuing their existence long after they (animal life) are gone
    – Thalassan
    yesterday






  • 1




    Some species of plants going extinct or entire plant kingdom going extinct? The latter would not happen.
    – Alexander
    yesterday










  • I apologize for the ambiguity, I do mean that the entire plant kingdom must survive.
    – Thalassan
    yesterday






  • 1




    Many plants have no known dependency on animals in their lifecycle. Unless there are some unknown forces in play, those species should survive.
    – Alexander
    yesterday














4












4








4







Assuming that an Earth analog was inhabited by both plants and animals like our Earth. Could the non-animal life on the planet survive the absence of animals (excluding sponges and corals) on the planet? Assume that all non-animal life (plants, fungi, bacteria) is unaffected and the animals were wiped out in an extremely short time frame (within weeks or months).










share|improve this question















Assuming that an Earth analog was inhabited by both plants and animals like our Earth. Could the non-animal life on the planet survive the absence of animals (excluding sponges and corals) on the planet? Assume that all non-animal life (plants, fungi, bacteria) is unaffected and the animals were wiped out in an extremely short time frame (within weeks or months).







fauna flora






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited yesterday

























asked yesterday









Thalassan

597110




597110












  • We need a definition of survival. Some plant species will survive, some will die.
    – Alexander
    yesterday










  • I would define survival as the plants not becoming extinct after animals and continuing their existence long after they (animal life) are gone
    – Thalassan
    yesterday






  • 1




    Some species of plants going extinct or entire plant kingdom going extinct? The latter would not happen.
    – Alexander
    yesterday










  • I apologize for the ambiguity, I do mean that the entire plant kingdom must survive.
    – Thalassan
    yesterday






  • 1




    Many plants have no known dependency on animals in their lifecycle. Unless there are some unknown forces in play, those species should survive.
    – Alexander
    yesterday


















  • We need a definition of survival. Some plant species will survive, some will die.
    – Alexander
    yesterday










  • I would define survival as the plants not becoming extinct after animals and continuing their existence long after they (animal life) are gone
    – Thalassan
    yesterday






  • 1




    Some species of plants going extinct or entire plant kingdom going extinct? The latter would not happen.
    – Alexander
    yesterday










  • I apologize for the ambiguity, I do mean that the entire plant kingdom must survive.
    – Thalassan
    yesterday






  • 1




    Many plants have no known dependency on animals in their lifecycle. Unless there are some unknown forces in play, those species should survive.
    – Alexander
    yesterday
















We need a definition of survival. Some plant species will survive, some will die.
– Alexander
yesterday




We need a definition of survival. Some plant species will survive, some will die.
– Alexander
yesterday












I would define survival as the plants not becoming extinct after animals and continuing their existence long after they (animal life) are gone
– Thalassan
yesterday




I would define survival as the plants not becoming extinct after animals and continuing their existence long after they (animal life) are gone
– Thalassan
yesterday




1




1




Some species of plants going extinct or entire plant kingdom going extinct? The latter would not happen.
– Alexander
yesterday




Some species of plants going extinct or entire plant kingdom going extinct? The latter would not happen.
– Alexander
yesterday












I apologize for the ambiguity, I do mean that the entire plant kingdom must survive.
– Thalassan
yesterday




I apologize for the ambiguity, I do mean that the entire plant kingdom must survive.
– Thalassan
yesterday




1




1




Many plants have no known dependency on animals in their lifecycle. Unless there are some unknown forces in play, those species should survive.
– Alexander
yesterday




Many plants have no known dependency on animals in their lifecycle. Unless there are some unknown forces in play, those species should survive.
– Alexander
yesterday










3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes


















4














Some plants rely on animals for their life, therefore all these animal dependent plant would take a hit from the sudden disappearance of animals.



Think of reproduction: bees are the paradigm of animals helping some plants to reproduce. But there are also seeds which do not develop if they haven't been through the intestine of an animal.



But also think of gathering nutrients: animal feces are a significant part of the food chain. With no animal to spread their feces around, it could be more difficult for some nutrients to return into the food chain. This could affect some organisms, though in a less dramatic way than being unable to reproduce.




Could the non-animal life on the planet survive the absence of animals (excluding sponges and corals) on the planet?




Yes if they do not rely on animals for some part of their life cycle.






share|improve this answer





























    3














    The sudden dissappearance of all animal life fom a planet would lead to a mass-extinction in plants as well.



    As explained by L.Dutch, many plants rely on insects, birds or other animals for reproduction, especially all flowering plants. These wouldn't die as suddenly as the animals, but at the end of their natural life span, there wouldn't be enough seeds to grow a next generation.



    The proverbial apple that doesn't fall too far from the stem would cause increased competition between a mother plant and its seedlings. The lack of animals carrying seeds far from the mother plant leads to crowding of same species plants, which makes them vulnerable to diseases. Some trees have such a dense canopy that seedlings cannot survive beneath them due to lack of sunlight.



    Then there's the matter of the food chain. Many plants that can grow and reproduce very fast are the very bottom of a food chain and other plants that grow slower rely on animals eating their competitors. Once there are no herbivores, fast-growing plants like grass or seaweed would suppress slower plants by suffocating them or using up most nutrients.



    Heath landscapes and bushland would be covered with trees because herbivores don't eat the soft buds of them and keep them short. Coral reefs would be suffocated in algae and seaweed. Grasslands and savannahs would suffocate under the dead grass of last year and a single lightning strike could set half a continent on fire.



    Some plants would survive, but many would die, even if they don't rely on animals to survive.






    share|improve this answer























    • If I remember correctly, technically coral reefs would die off because they're also animals.
      – Andon
      21 hours ago



















    0














    Theoretically, the answer is "yes"




    • Plants are thought to have evolved on Earth starting in the Proterozoic Eon.

    • The first known footprints on land (not exactly animals, but close enough) are from the later Palaeozoic Era.


    So, having evolved that way, it theoretically can return to that condition. However, the more you take from the existing ecosystem, the more difficult (and therefore less likely) it is the ecosystem will survive. Animals, probably. Animals + insects? Maybe not. Humans? Comedian George Carlin posited that the only reason humans evolved is because the Earth needed plastic. So it's probably safe to remove humans.






    share|improve this answer





















      Your Answer





      StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
      return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
      StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
      StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
      });
      });
      }, "mathjax-editing");

      StackExchange.ready(function() {
      var channelOptions = {
      tags: "".split(" "),
      id: "579"
      };
      initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

      StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
      // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
      if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
      StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
      createEditor();
      });
      }
      else {
      createEditor();
      }
      });

      function createEditor() {
      StackExchange.prepareEditor({
      heartbeatType: 'answer',
      autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
      convertImagesToLinks: false,
      noModals: true,
      showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
      reputationToPostImages: null,
      bindNavPrevention: true,
      postfix: "",
      imageUploader: {
      brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
      contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
      allowUrls: true
      },
      noCode: true, onDemand: true,
      discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
      ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
      });


      }
      });














      draft saved

      draft discarded


















      StackExchange.ready(
      function () {
      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f135647%2fa-planet-with-no-animals%23new-answer', 'question_page');
      }
      );

      Post as a guest















      Required, but never shown

























      3 Answers
      3






      active

      oldest

      votes








      3 Answers
      3






      active

      oldest

      votes









      active

      oldest

      votes






      active

      oldest

      votes









      4














      Some plants rely on animals for their life, therefore all these animal dependent plant would take a hit from the sudden disappearance of animals.



      Think of reproduction: bees are the paradigm of animals helping some plants to reproduce. But there are also seeds which do not develop if they haven't been through the intestine of an animal.



      But also think of gathering nutrients: animal feces are a significant part of the food chain. With no animal to spread their feces around, it could be more difficult for some nutrients to return into the food chain. This could affect some organisms, though in a less dramatic way than being unable to reproduce.




      Could the non-animal life on the planet survive the absence of animals (excluding sponges and corals) on the planet?




      Yes if they do not rely on animals for some part of their life cycle.






      share|improve this answer


























        4














        Some plants rely on animals for their life, therefore all these animal dependent plant would take a hit from the sudden disappearance of animals.



        Think of reproduction: bees are the paradigm of animals helping some plants to reproduce. But there are also seeds which do not develop if they haven't been through the intestine of an animal.



        But also think of gathering nutrients: animal feces are a significant part of the food chain. With no animal to spread their feces around, it could be more difficult for some nutrients to return into the food chain. This could affect some organisms, though in a less dramatic way than being unable to reproduce.




        Could the non-animal life on the planet survive the absence of animals (excluding sponges and corals) on the planet?




        Yes if they do not rely on animals for some part of their life cycle.






        share|improve this answer
























          4












          4








          4






          Some plants rely on animals for their life, therefore all these animal dependent plant would take a hit from the sudden disappearance of animals.



          Think of reproduction: bees are the paradigm of animals helping some plants to reproduce. But there are also seeds which do not develop if they haven't been through the intestine of an animal.



          But also think of gathering nutrients: animal feces are a significant part of the food chain. With no animal to spread their feces around, it could be more difficult for some nutrients to return into the food chain. This could affect some organisms, though in a less dramatic way than being unable to reproduce.




          Could the non-animal life on the planet survive the absence of animals (excluding sponges and corals) on the planet?




          Yes if they do not rely on animals for some part of their life cycle.






          share|improve this answer












          Some plants rely on animals for their life, therefore all these animal dependent plant would take a hit from the sudden disappearance of animals.



          Think of reproduction: bees are the paradigm of animals helping some plants to reproduce. But there are also seeds which do not develop if they haven't been through the intestine of an animal.



          But also think of gathering nutrients: animal feces are a significant part of the food chain. With no animal to spread their feces around, it could be more difficult for some nutrients to return into the food chain. This could affect some organisms, though in a less dramatic way than being unable to reproduce.




          Could the non-animal life on the planet survive the absence of animals (excluding sponges and corals) on the planet?




          Yes if they do not rely on animals for some part of their life cycle.







          share|improve this answer












          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer










          answered yesterday









          L.Dutch

          77.8k25185380




          77.8k25185380























              3














              The sudden dissappearance of all animal life fom a planet would lead to a mass-extinction in plants as well.



              As explained by L.Dutch, many plants rely on insects, birds or other animals for reproduction, especially all flowering plants. These wouldn't die as suddenly as the animals, but at the end of their natural life span, there wouldn't be enough seeds to grow a next generation.



              The proverbial apple that doesn't fall too far from the stem would cause increased competition between a mother plant and its seedlings. The lack of animals carrying seeds far from the mother plant leads to crowding of same species plants, which makes them vulnerable to diseases. Some trees have such a dense canopy that seedlings cannot survive beneath them due to lack of sunlight.



              Then there's the matter of the food chain. Many plants that can grow and reproduce very fast are the very bottom of a food chain and other plants that grow slower rely on animals eating their competitors. Once there are no herbivores, fast-growing plants like grass or seaweed would suppress slower plants by suffocating them or using up most nutrients.



              Heath landscapes and bushland would be covered with trees because herbivores don't eat the soft buds of them and keep them short. Coral reefs would be suffocated in algae and seaweed. Grasslands and savannahs would suffocate under the dead grass of last year and a single lightning strike could set half a continent on fire.



              Some plants would survive, but many would die, even if they don't rely on animals to survive.






              share|improve this answer























              • If I remember correctly, technically coral reefs would die off because they're also animals.
                – Andon
                21 hours ago
















              3














              The sudden dissappearance of all animal life fom a planet would lead to a mass-extinction in plants as well.



              As explained by L.Dutch, many plants rely on insects, birds or other animals for reproduction, especially all flowering plants. These wouldn't die as suddenly as the animals, but at the end of their natural life span, there wouldn't be enough seeds to grow a next generation.



              The proverbial apple that doesn't fall too far from the stem would cause increased competition between a mother plant and its seedlings. The lack of animals carrying seeds far from the mother plant leads to crowding of same species plants, which makes them vulnerable to diseases. Some trees have such a dense canopy that seedlings cannot survive beneath them due to lack of sunlight.



              Then there's the matter of the food chain. Many plants that can grow and reproduce very fast are the very bottom of a food chain and other plants that grow slower rely on animals eating their competitors. Once there are no herbivores, fast-growing plants like grass or seaweed would suppress slower plants by suffocating them or using up most nutrients.



              Heath landscapes and bushland would be covered with trees because herbivores don't eat the soft buds of them and keep them short. Coral reefs would be suffocated in algae and seaweed. Grasslands and savannahs would suffocate under the dead grass of last year and a single lightning strike could set half a continent on fire.



              Some plants would survive, but many would die, even if they don't rely on animals to survive.






              share|improve this answer























              • If I remember correctly, technically coral reefs would die off because they're also animals.
                – Andon
                21 hours ago














              3












              3








              3






              The sudden dissappearance of all animal life fom a planet would lead to a mass-extinction in plants as well.



              As explained by L.Dutch, many plants rely on insects, birds or other animals for reproduction, especially all flowering plants. These wouldn't die as suddenly as the animals, but at the end of their natural life span, there wouldn't be enough seeds to grow a next generation.



              The proverbial apple that doesn't fall too far from the stem would cause increased competition between a mother plant and its seedlings. The lack of animals carrying seeds far from the mother plant leads to crowding of same species plants, which makes them vulnerable to diseases. Some trees have such a dense canopy that seedlings cannot survive beneath them due to lack of sunlight.



              Then there's the matter of the food chain. Many plants that can grow and reproduce very fast are the very bottom of a food chain and other plants that grow slower rely on animals eating their competitors. Once there are no herbivores, fast-growing plants like grass or seaweed would suppress slower plants by suffocating them or using up most nutrients.



              Heath landscapes and bushland would be covered with trees because herbivores don't eat the soft buds of them and keep them short. Coral reefs would be suffocated in algae and seaweed. Grasslands and savannahs would suffocate under the dead grass of last year and a single lightning strike could set half a continent on fire.



              Some plants would survive, but many would die, even if they don't rely on animals to survive.






              share|improve this answer














              The sudden dissappearance of all animal life fom a planet would lead to a mass-extinction in plants as well.



              As explained by L.Dutch, many plants rely on insects, birds or other animals for reproduction, especially all flowering plants. These wouldn't die as suddenly as the animals, but at the end of their natural life span, there wouldn't be enough seeds to grow a next generation.



              The proverbial apple that doesn't fall too far from the stem would cause increased competition between a mother plant and its seedlings. The lack of animals carrying seeds far from the mother plant leads to crowding of same species plants, which makes them vulnerable to diseases. Some trees have such a dense canopy that seedlings cannot survive beneath them due to lack of sunlight.



              Then there's the matter of the food chain. Many plants that can grow and reproduce very fast are the very bottom of a food chain and other plants that grow slower rely on animals eating their competitors. Once there are no herbivores, fast-growing plants like grass or seaweed would suppress slower plants by suffocating them or using up most nutrients.



              Heath landscapes and bushland would be covered with trees because herbivores don't eat the soft buds of them and keep them short. Coral reefs would be suffocated in algae and seaweed. Grasslands and savannahs would suffocate under the dead grass of last year and a single lightning strike could set half a continent on fire.



              Some plants would survive, but many would die, even if they don't rely on animals to survive.







              share|improve this answer














              share|improve this answer



              share|improve this answer








              edited yesterday

























              answered yesterday









              Elmy

              9,76611545




              9,76611545












              • If I remember correctly, technically coral reefs would die off because they're also animals.
                – Andon
                21 hours ago


















              • If I remember correctly, technically coral reefs would die off because they're also animals.
                – Andon
                21 hours ago
















              If I remember correctly, technically coral reefs would die off because they're also animals.
              – Andon
              21 hours ago




              If I remember correctly, technically coral reefs would die off because they're also animals.
              – Andon
              21 hours ago











              0














              Theoretically, the answer is "yes"




              • Plants are thought to have evolved on Earth starting in the Proterozoic Eon.

              • The first known footprints on land (not exactly animals, but close enough) are from the later Palaeozoic Era.


              So, having evolved that way, it theoretically can return to that condition. However, the more you take from the existing ecosystem, the more difficult (and therefore less likely) it is the ecosystem will survive. Animals, probably. Animals + insects? Maybe not. Humans? Comedian George Carlin posited that the only reason humans evolved is because the Earth needed plastic. So it's probably safe to remove humans.






              share|improve this answer


























                0














                Theoretically, the answer is "yes"




                • Plants are thought to have evolved on Earth starting in the Proterozoic Eon.

                • The first known footprints on land (not exactly animals, but close enough) are from the later Palaeozoic Era.


                So, having evolved that way, it theoretically can return to that condition. However, the more you take from the existing ecosystem, the more difficult (and therefore less likely) it is the ecosystem will survive. Animals, probably. Animals + insects? Maybe not. Humans? Comedian George Carlin posited that the only reason humans evolved is because the Earth needed plastic. So it's probably safe to remove humans.






                share|improve this answer
























                  0












                  0








                  0






                  Theoretically, the answer is "yes"




                  • Plants are thought to have evolved on Earth starting in the Proterozoic Eon.

                  • The first known footprints on land (not exactly animals, but close enough) are from the later Palaeozoic Era.


                  So, having evolved that way, it theoretically can return to that condition. However, the more you take from the existing ecosystem, the more difficult (and therefore less likely) it is the ecosystem will survive. Animals, probably. Animals + insects? Maybe not. Humans? Comedian George Carlin posited that the only reason humans evolved is because the Earth needed plastic. So it's probably safe to remove humans.






                  share|improve this answer












                  Theoretically, the answer is "yes"




                  • Plants are thought to have evolved on Earth starting in the Proterozoic Eon.

                  • The first known footprints on land (not exactly animals, but close enough) are from the later Palaeozoic Era.


                  So, having evolved that way, it theoretically can return to that condition. However, the more you take from the existing ecosystem, the more difficult (and therefore less likely) it is the ecosystem will survive. Animals, probably. Animals + insects? Maybe not. Humans? Comedian George Carlin posited that the only reason humans evolved is because the Earth needed plastic. So it's probably safe to remove humans.







                  share|improve this answer












                  share|improve this answer



                  share|improve this answer










                  answered 22 hours ago









                  JBH

                  40.5k589194




                  40.5k589194






























                      draft saved

                      draft discarded




















































                      Thanks for contributing an answer to Worldbuilding Stack Exchange!


                      • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                      But avoid



                      • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                      • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                      Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                      To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





                      Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


                      Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


                      • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                      But avoid



                      • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                      • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                      To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                      draft saved


                      draft discarded














                      StackExchange.ready(
                      function () {
                      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f135647%2fa-planet-with-no-animals%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                      }
                      );

                      Post as a guest















                      Required, but never shown





















































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown

































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown







                      Popular posts from this blog

                      1300-talet

                      1300-talet

                      Display a custom attribute below product name in the front-end Magento 1.9.3.8