General > Biology

Cell Wall/ Cellulose / Vacuole / Chloroplast

(1/5) > >>

Numsgil:
When comparing animal and plant cells, the most striking difference is wha animal cells don't have.

Cell Walls, cellulose, vacuoles, or chloroplasts.

Well, then I begin to wonder which is the decision and which is the consequence.  That is, because plant cells have cell walls, they need cellulose.  They don't have cell walls because they have cellulose.

That is, cell walls was the decision and cellulose the effect.

So I'm just wondering about the overall cause/effect relationship between the four things above.

edit: basically I'm thinking our bots are most similar to diatoms.  Some diatoms have chloroplasts when it's beneficial to have them, and then lose them and hunt other cells when it's beneficial to do that.

So diatoms represent to me the ultimate form I want Darwinbots to follow.  (Not for just the above reason alone, but for others as well (their highly geometric shapes for another)).

PurpleYouko:

--- Quote ---That is, cell walls was the decision and cellulose the effect.
--- End quote ---
Not necessarily. What if some process evolved to make cellulose then the cell figured out a way to use it afterward?

Other than that I agree that diatoms are probably the most DB like cells in real life.

Zelos:
one mayor thing this cause is that plants dont need to move. they get food where they are. So then they dont have to waste energy on moving. But animals have. And then animals evolve muscles so they can move. But plants dont. But plants have to stand up, so they evolve harder cell wall or what you called to to keep it up with out muscles. And when they have evolved this thing they are basacly stuck, they are hard so the cells cant move or change. And from there is not so much to do. A few plants achived movements by differentthigns I dont know in english

Numsgil:

--- Quote ---one mayor thing this cause is that plants dont need to move. they get food where they are. So then they dont have to waste energy on moving. But animals have. And then animals evolve muscles so they can move. But plants dont. But plants have to stand up, so they evolve harder cell wall or what you called to to keep it up with out muscles. And when they have evolved this thing they are basacly stuck, they are hard so the cells cant move or change. And from there is not so much to do. A few plants achived movements by differentthigns I dont know in english
--- End quote ---
But plants are being eaten by animals.  It would make alot of sense for plants to run when it sees a herbivore coming its way.

Not moving is the effect, not the decision.  Hard outer cells walls and woody plants are the effect, not the decision.  Why?  Because it is clearly advantgeous to move instead of not move unless it effects more critical abilities (like photosynthesizing).

I'm sure it comes back to chloroplasts at some point.  I think they're the root (haha, a pun!) cause, even if indirectly, for the hard cell walls, large vacuoles, and cellulose.

Welwordion:
One reason plants do not move is because it would cost to much energy.
Also for the absorption of minerals plants have to dig into the ground.
Well and the only reason for aplant to move is to defend itself, but to defend itself it does not need to move.
Also the question is whats harder for a plant? to regrow what was eaten or to build up and maintain eyes, muscles,brain etc

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page