Bad Parents
October 13, 2008 5:47 PM Subscribe
what animals are terrible parents?
I'm looking for animal offspring with a very low chance of survival. Bonus points if's its a forest dwelling creature.
I'm looking for animal offspring with a very low chance of survival. Bonus points if's its a forest dwelling creature.
Some bony fish (freshwater and saltwater alike) spawn by simply releasing streams of their sperm or clumps of their eggs in the general vicinity of the mating population. The eggs then become fertilized, or not, in the general manner of flowers being pollinated by the wind. I never understood how such a chancy system could work, but it seems to.
Sharks bear live young, which they will sometimes then eat, if the young aren't fast enough.
Mantises, as well as other insects, will eat their young.
posted by Countess Elena at 5:52 PM on October 13, 2008
Sharks bear live young, which they will sometimes then eat, if the young aren't fast enough.
Mantises, as well as other insects, will eat their young.
posted by Countess Elena at 5:52 PM on October 13, 2008
Response by poster: That is exactly the type of answer I'm looking for. Thanks!
posted by Rlocurto at 5:53 PM on October 13, 2008
posted by Rlocurto at 5:53 PM on October 13, 2008
Well, you could look at birds that are brood parasites, like the cuckoo, which lay their eggs in the nests of other birds and leave their young to be raised by someone else. Bad parenting, but ultimately a good strategy. ;-)
posted by Cool Papa Bell at 5:56 PM on October 13, 2008
posted by Cool Papa Bell at 5:56 PM on October 13, 2008
On review, "as well as other insects" is far too general a parenthetical, considering how many, many species of insects there are. But I understand that most species of insect do not take an active part in parenting at all. Bees, ants, and other hive species, of course, make good parents, in a smothering, life-planning sort of way.
posted by Countess Elena at 5:56 PM on October 13, 2008 [1 favorite]
posted by Countess Elena at 5:56 PM on October 13, 2008 [1 favorite]
A lot of stick insects, like the Mantis, eat their young, so chances of survival for many of their young equals small. And Hyenas have been known to do so as well, apparently.
posted by Effigy2000 at 5:57 PM on October 13, 2008
posted by Effigy2000 at 5:57 PM on October 13, 2008
Sea turtles bury their eggs in the sand and leave, and the newly hatched young must dig themselves out an make it to the sea, a perilous journey during which many are eaten by birds and other animals.
posted by Rinku at 6:06 PM on October 13, 2008
posted by Rinku at 6:06 PM on October 13, 2008
Thirding sea turtles as animals that do no parenting whatsoever.
posted by rhizome at 6:50 PM on October 13, 2008
posted by rhizome at 6:50 PM on October 13, 2008
Basically, you want a big list of r-strategists.
posted by Kid Charlemagne at 6:57 PM on October 13, 2008 [1 favorite]
posted by Kid Charlemagne at 6:57 PM on October 13, 2008 [1 favorite]
Pandas aren't "evil" parents like sharks and hamsters, they're just incompetent. Their babies are too small for them to handle, and they barely know how to breathe, much less take care of another animal. Also, they tend to not even realize they've given birth and so often step on the babies or neglect them to death because it hasn't occurred to them that they have a baby. That's assuming the get pregnant at all, considering they have no discernible sex drive and can barely manage to figure out the mechanics of sex.
Basically, Panda's are just begging evolution to get it over with and let them go extinct already.
posted by muddylemon at 7:01 PM on October 13, 2008 [18 favorites]
Basically, Panda's are just begging evolution to get it over with and let them go extinct already.
posted by muddylemon at 7:01 PM on October 13, 2008 [18 favorites]
If you're talking about genuinely bad parenting, their are many examples. But there's a bit of a difference between that and offspring with a low chance of survival; most insects are r-selected, have lots of babies but don't take care of any of them. Very few of them make it to adulthood. But that isn't parenting at all, since the insects either die or abandon their young.
But there are plenty of animals which seem to take great care of their kids, but will do atrocious things in certain circumstances.
If a mommy rabbit thinks it can't save its burrow full of baby bunnies from a predator, it will quickly run in and gobble them up as fast as possible. So they don't go to waste.
A lioness who is rearing cubs doesn't go through estrus; however if a new male comes and takes over the pride, he will kill her cubs. This stimulates the female to go into heat again, and the lion then mates with her.
Many animals have runts in their litter, which they totally ignore and allow to die, unless the larger, healthier offspring die. The piggy from "Charlotte's web" would have had a miserable, short life if the girl hadn't rescued it.
Humans are known to be terrible parents too, in times of famine. Hansel and Gretel? That kind of thing really happened; families with too many kids would take the ones they couldn't feed and abandon them somewhere, so there would be enough food for those who were left.
Here's a good article about bad animal parents. Nature's a bitch.
posted by Citizen Premier at 8:52 PM on October 13, 2008
But there are plenty of animals which seem to take great care of their kids, but will do atrocious things in certain circumstances.
If a mommy rabbit thinks it can't save its burrow full of baby bunnies from a predator, it will quickly run in and gobble them up as fast as possible. So they don't go to waste.
A lioness who is rearing cubs doesn't go through estrus; however if a new male comes and takes over the pride, he will kill her cubs. This stimulates the female to go into heat again, and the lion then mates with her.
Many animals have runts in their litter, which they totally ignore and allow to die, unless the larger, healthier offspring die. The piggy from "Charlotte's web" would have had a miserable, short life if the girl hadn't rescued it.
Humans are known to be terrible parents too, in times of famine. Hansel and Gretel? That kind of thing really happened; families with too many kids would take the ones they couldn't feed and abandon them somewhere, so there would be enough food for those who were left.
Here's a good article about bad animal parents. Nature's a bitch.
posted by Citizen Premier at 8:52 PM on October 13, 2008
Rainbow Finches are notoriously incapable parents. They'll lay eggs while sitting on a perch, resulting in scrambled finch eggs all over the bottom of the cage, rather than in their nest. If, by some odds, they happen to be in their nest when an egg pops out, you'd better sneak it in with the eggs of your other birds, because mama Rainbow finch won't sit on it. After the chick hatches- don't count on easily integrating it back in with its own parents, because they aren't going to recognize it and they're going to treat it like an intruder.
My parents' trials trying to breed these things when I was a teenager were an endless source of amusement for me. The one and only egg of theirs we managed to get hatched, died very shortly after we reintroduced it to its parents. Beautiful birds though.
posted by tumbleweedjack at 8:53 PM on October 13, 2008
My parents' trials trying to breed these things when I was a teenager were an endless source of amusement for me. The one and only egg of theirs we managed to get hatched, died very shortly after we reintroduced it to its parents. Beautiful birds though.
posted by tumbleweedjack at 8:53 PM on October 13, 2008
Basically, Panda's are just begging evolution to get it over with and let them go extinct already.
Say that about Species A now and a hundred years down the line, you're saying it about elephants or whales or dogs. Any species in the "web of life" supports other species; some just support more than others; pretty much any animal supports more than humans right now.
(/derail)
posted by Citizen Premier at 8:59 PM on October 13, 2008
Say that about Species A now and a hundred years down the line, you're saying it about elephants or whales or dogs. Any species in the "web of life" supports other species; some just support more than others; pretty much any animal supports more than humans right now.
(/derail)
posted by Citizen Premier at 8:59 PM on October 13, 2008
My vote goes to the cuckoo. They're "brood parasites". What that means is that the females lay their eggs in the nests of other birds, other species. The cuckoo egg hatches first, and the chick grows faster, and it will push out the eggs and chicks that belong there.
Anyway, once the egg has been laid, the female cuckoo never sees it or the chick again.
Cowbirds do the same thing.
posted by Class Goat at 9:11 PM on October 13, 2008
Anyway, once the egg has been laid, the female cuckoo never sees it or the chick again.
Cowbirds do the same thing.
posted by Class Goat at 9:11 PM on October 13, 2008
You want to ask about r-selection versus K-selection. Simplified, it's a spectrum. r is large brood size, little or no parental care, small probability of surviving to reproduce, short generation time, in a species exploiting an empty environmental niche. K is one or few offspring, lots of parental care, high probability of surviving to reproduce, long generation time, crowded ecological niche. You also want to look at precocial versus altricial species. Altricial species are necessarily K-selected.
Note that parents in r-selected species aren't "bad parents"; they're doing what works for that species in that ecological niche. It may not be pretty, but putting parental effort into having lots of offspring, most of which die before themselves becoming parents, rather than into a few well-cared for offspring, is what members of those species have to do; their existence (instead of extinction) is proof that they're doing what, in the long run, works best to ensure the continence of that species.
posted by orthogonality at 9:11 PM on October 13, 2008
Note that parents in r-selected species aren't "bad parents"; they're doing what works for that species in that ecological niche. It may not be pretty, but putting parental effort into having lots of offspring, most of which die before themselves becoming parents, rather than into a few well-cared for offspring, is what members of those species have to do; their existence (instead of extinction) is proof that they're doing what, in the long run, works best to ensure the continence of that species.
posted by orthogonality at 9:11 PM on October 13, 2008
Class Goat writes "Cowbirds do the same thing."
Cowbirds share, they share what others have, as Walt Kelly put it.
posted by orthogonality at 9:12 PM on October 13, 2008
Cowbirds share, they share what others have, as Walt Kelly put it.
posted by orthogonality at 9:12 PM on October 13, 2008
The largest (often first-hatched) peregrine chick will badger, bully, and ultimately force out of the nest the other chicks, long before there are flight feathers. All under the watchful eye of Mama & Papa Peregrine, who did it to their siblings, too.
Mother Nature's a real bitch.
posted by IAmBroom at 9:13 PM on October 13, 2008
Mother Nature's a real bitch.
posted by IAmBroom at 9:13 PM on October 13, 2008
Some strains of laboratory mice are notoriously cannibalistic of their pups. Black 6 mice, in particular, are known to be bad mums and also generally nasty.
posted by greatgefilte at 5:39 AM on October 14, 2008
posted by greatgefilte at 5:39 AM on October 14, 2008
Effigy2000 writes "And Hyenas have been known to do so as well, apparently."
Mostly conjecture based on studies of captive-bred hyenas in California. Not really supported by field research, at least by the group I am familiar with in Kenya. A bit of a sticking point with hyena researchers. Same-sex sibling pairs will fight, sometimes viciously, to establish dominance after birth (they are born with teeth fully erupted, highly unusual for mammals). Seems that any fatality during nursing is generally not due to lack of diligence on the part of the mother, but can be caused by exclusion of one pup by its sibling, depending on how well-fed the mother is. However, once again field and captive studies are somewhat at odds.
I tend to believe the field studies, myself. Heck, read about them for yourself.
posted by caution live frogs at 7:04 AM on October 14, 2008
Mostly conjecture based on studies of captive-bred hyenas in California. Not really supported by field research, at least by the group I am familiar with in Kenya. A bit of a sticking point with hyena researchers. Same-sex sibling pairs will fight, sometimes viciously, to establish dominance after birth (they are born with teeth fully erupted, highly unusual for mammals). Seems that any fatality during nursing is generally not due to lack of diligence on the part of the mother, but can be caused by exclusion of one pup by its sibling, depending on how well-fed the mother is. However, once again field and captive studies are somewhat at odds.
I tend to believe the field studies, myself. Heck, read about them for yourself.
posted by caution live frogs at 7:04 AM on October 14, 2008
Diary cows who have had their young taken away shortly after birth for countless generations (to keep milk production for people) have absolutely no mothering instincts left. Beef cattle which often raise their calves in pasture with little human intervention are usually much better mothers.
posted by jrishel at 7:15 AM on October 14, 2008
posted by jrishel at 7:15 AM on October 14, 2008
It's interesting that "bad" parenting on the individual scale results in "good" parenting on the species scale. Like the turtles that leave their young to fend for themselves. Incredibly wasteful in that lots of the young die, but the end result is that only the very strongest hatchlings survive to go on to reproduce. And probably the only thing turtles could do as a species, since what's a mother turtle going to do to protect her young anyway?
I also wonder what the evolutionary history of the panda is. How did they survive with such seemingly bad instincts?
posted by gjc at 7:42 AM on October 14, 2008
I also wonder what the evolutionary history of the panda is. How did they survive with such seemingly bad instincts?
posted by gjc at 7:42 AM on October 14, 2008
Rabbits can produce a litter of 7 every 28-31 days, and they can get pregnant immediately after giving birth. Also, it doesn't take long for a baby rabbit to grow up and start having her own babies. If rabbits commonly fed or attended to their young, or if they were not such easy prey, this world look like that Star Trek episode with the Tribbles.
When I was younger, I had a pet rabbit that accidentally or purposefully chewed off both her babies' heads when they were born. Some of the pet books declared that was a common result of "aggressive grooming." I'm not so sure.
posted by dosterm at 10:12 AM on October 14, 2008
When I was younger, I had a pet rabbit that accidentally or purposefully chewed off both her babies' heads when they were born. Some of the pet books declared that was a common result of "aggressive grooming." I'm not so sure.
posted by dosterm at 10:12 AM on October 14, 2008
I also wonder what the evolutionary history of the panda is. How did they survive with such seemingly bad instincts?
Pandas found a niche that nobody else wanted, namely living in bamboo forests. As carnivores, it was a horrible idea, as there aren't many other tasty animals living near them. This gave them a little advantage, in that there isn't much competition, but plenty of downsides... like having to eat bamboo to survive. Bamboo is not a very nutritious food, one commenter described it as cardboard with a glaze of sugar.
It's especially not nutritious if you have the short gastric tract of a carnivore. So they cope by eating constantly. Most of the energy they gain from their cardboard diet they use to eat more cardboard, leaving them tired and listless for the few hours they're awake.
It also doesn't leave much energy to feed the brain, so the compensate by being outlandishly stupid.
Also, eating bamboo is hard to do physically, you need powerful jaws with strong jaw muscles. In order to use those you need a big skull. In order to get a big skull, all of your bones have to grow (One, to support the weight of your big stupid head, and two, because the same genes that create big bones in your head have no reason to make other bones small.) Having that much mass makes it necessary to have strong muscles all over to move around. Unfortunately the bamboo diet doesn't leave enough energy around to produce particularly big muscles, and since there aren't any other big animals around chasing them, there's no evolutionary pressure to bother with being strong or fast.
So that means they don't go anywhere. They just sit around in the forest chewing bamboo. Since there's only so much bamboo that can grow in a given area, pandas couldn't survive living in big groups, as that would necessitate moving around to seek new patches of food. It would also require a brain that could
So at this point we have a large, tired, weak, stupid animal spending it's entire day eating sugary foods with low nutritive value and trying to remember to breathe. Sounds like a typical thursday night in Arkansas.
Just to make things more absurd, male and female panda's genitals don't match. In particular, boy panda's have disproportionately small penises so that if by some miracle they manage to have sex, their pandasperm rarely makes it far enough to do any good. And by miracle, I mean that if the fat, tired and stupid panda boy with the embarrassingly small member happens to run across a fat, tired and stupid panda girl, it's exceedingly unlikely to occur to him to do try anything as their sex drive is basically nil. If he does decide to give her the ol' heave ho, it'd be amazing if he figures out what to do as male pandas have no discernible instinct that would tell him what goes where and what to do once it gets there. And to top it off, female pandas are almost never ovulating and even when they are they notably irritable and always seem to have a headache, also, they exhibit no outward signs that they are in heat.
So, say everything went right and a two pandas actually succeeded in mating. Now you have to deal with 1their babies being born literally the size of a stick of butter. The babies are notoriously high maintenance and need to nurse constantly. With twins, the mother will pick one and abandon the other because they can't handle more than one. That is, if they can handle one. In captivity the mothers don't typically show any natural competence at mothering and seem surprised that the thing wants to eat. A panda cub is very lucky if it manages to avoid getting stepped on or sat on.
So, yeah, Pandas suck at being alive.
posted by muddylemon at 7:26 PM on October 14, 2008 [8 favorites]
Pandas found a niche that nobody else wanted, namely living in bamboo forests. As carnivores, it was a horrible idea, as there aren't many other tasty animals living near them. This gave them a little advantage, in that there isn't much competition, but plenty of downsides... like having to eat bamboo to survive. Bamboo is not a very nutritious food, one commenter described it as cardboard with a glaze of sugar.
It's especially not nutritious if you have the short gastric tract of a carnivore. So they cope by eating constantly. Most of the energy they gain from their cardboard diet they use to eat more cardboard, leaving them tired and listless for the few hours they're awake.
It also doesn't leave much energy to feed the brain, so the compensate by being outlandishly stupid.
Also, eating bamboo is hard to do physically, you need powerful jaws with strong jaw muscles. In order to use those you need a big skull. In order to get a big skull, all of your bones have to grow (One, to support the weight of your big stupid head, and two, because the same genes that create big bones in your head have no reason to make other bones small.) Having that much mass makes it necessary to have strong muscles all over to move around. Unfortunately the bamboo diet doesn't leave enough energy around to produce particularly big muscles, and since there aren't any other big animals around chasing them, there's no evolutionary pressure to bother with being strong or fast.
So that means they don't go anywhere. They just sit around in the forest chewing bamboo. Since there's only so much bamboo that can grow in a given area, pandas couldn't survive living in big groups, as that would necessitate moving around to seek new patches of food. It would also require a brain that could
So at this point we have a large, tired, weak, stupid animal spending it's entire day eating sugary foods with low nutritive value and trying to remember to breathe. Sounds like a typical thursday night in Arkansas.
Just to make things more absurd, male and female panda's genitals don't match. In particular, boy panda's have disproportionately small penises so that if by some miracle they manage to have sex, their pandasperm rarely makes it far enough to do any good. And by miracle, I mean that if the fat, tired and stupid panda boy with the embarrassingly small member happens to run across a fat, tired and stupid panda girl, it's exceedingly unlikely to occur to him to do try anything as their sex drive is basically nil. If he does decide to give her the ol' heave ho, it'd be amazing if he figures out what to do as male pandas have no discernible instinct that would tell him what goes where and what to do once it gets there. And to top it off, female pandas are almost never ovulating and even when they are they notably irritable and always seem to have a headache, also, they exhibit no outward signs that they are in heat.
So, say everything went right and a two pandas actually succeeded in mating. Now you have to deal with 1their babies being born literally the size of a stick of butter. The babies are notoriously high maintenance and need to nurse constantly. With twins, the mother will pick one and abandon the other because they can't handle more than one. That is, if they can handle one. In captivity the mothers don't typically show any natural competence at mothering and seem surprised that the thing wants to eat. A panda cub is very lucky if it manages to avoid getting stepped on or sat on.
So, yeah, Pandas suck at being alive.
posted by muddylemon at 7:26 PM on October 14, 2008 [8 favorites]
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by fairytale of los angeles at 5:51 PM on October 13, 2008