Would a carnivorous diet be able to support a giant worm?how would the carnivorous grassland work?Biological...
How to properly translate the key phrase of Erdoğan's 2016 letter to Putin, "kusura bakmasınlar," to Russian
Intern not wearing safety equipment; how could I have handled this differently?
Non-Chromatic Orchestral Instruments?
Why AI became applicable only after Nvidia's chips were available?
Why different specifications for telescopes and binoculars?
Reference request: quantifier elimination test
A sequence that changes sign finally at infinity?
When I press the space bar it deletes the letters in front of it
Category-theoretic treatment of diffs, patches and merging?
What could cause the sea level to massively decrease?
First Entry Member State schengen visa
Why does the Antonov AN-225 not have any winglets?
What's it called when the bad guy gets eaten?
How does one acquire an undead eyeball encased in a gem?
Quoridor rules when faced the opponent
Need a non-volatile memory IC with near unlimited read/write operations capability
Is it okay to use open source code to do an interview task?
What exactly is a "murder hobo"?
QR codes, do people use them?
Appropriate conduit for several data cables underground over 300' run
US citizen traveling with Peruvian passport
Did depressed people far more accurately estimate how many monsters they killed in a video game?
Are there red cards that offer protection against mass token destruction?
What factors could lead to bishops establishing monastic armies?
Would a carnivorous diet be able to support a giant worm?
how would the carnivorous grassland work?Biological and ecological considerations for a giant wormWhat evolutionary history would support Neophobic sapienceHow big would a farming spaceship have to be to support a country-sized population?What would prey actually die from after being being swallowed whole by my fictional carnivorous species?How would a giant marine snake-like creature survive?How feasible would a civilization of carnivorous organisms that subsist off fish farming be?How large would a Yacht need to be in order to support a crew?What changes to civilization would exist if a humanoid species evolved with a diet of feces?Is it feasible for a Dune-style sand worm to have silica scales?
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0;
}
$begingroup$
In my fantasy world there is a large valley. At the northern end lies the 'endless desert' called the "Sea of Glass" due to its shimmering sands. Within these deserts live great wyrms that swim through the sand as if it was an ocean.
The wyrms/worms would roughly have these dimensions: 4 meters high and wide and stretching to lengths between 10 to 30 meters. The 'mouth' of the beast is cylindrical however their mouth is protected by a beak that is enclosed during burrowing (making a cone shape).
The worms most likely breath oxygen and would need to resurface (think about the same time as a humpback whale). Their main hunting strategy is to stalk their prey using echolocation to hear footsteps above the sand then the worm would launch its self forward and open their beak aiming to suddenly swallow and enclose their prey.
These worms are pretty big critters. I'm wondering if a purely carnivorous diet would be able to sustain a worm of this size as well as possible eating habits as a bonus (ex: would it be better to eat one large meal and then sleep or would they be more like sharks and constantly on the move)
Note:
One animal species that does exist in this world, but not the Sahara, is a creature similar to a Bantha from Star Wars. They'd be furry animals comparable to yaks in size, but relating more to elephants in nature.
creature-design food
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
In my fantasy world there is a large valley. At the northern end lies the 'endless desert' called the "Sea of Glass" due to its shimmering sands. Within these deserts live great wyrms that swim through the sand as if it was an ocean.
The wyrms/worms would roughly have these dimensions: 4 meters high and wide and stretching to lengths between 10 to 30 meters. The 'mouth' of the beast is cylindrical however their mouth is protected by a beak that is enclosed during burrowing (making a cone shape).
The worms most likely breath oxygen and would need to resurface (think about the same time as a humpback whale). Their main hunting strategy is to stalk their prey using echolocation to hear footsteps above the sand then the worm would launch its self forward and open their beak aiming to suddenly swallow and enclose their prey.
These worms are pretty big critters. I'm wondering if a purely carnivorous diet would be able to sustain a worm of this size as well as possible eating habits as a bonus (ex: would it be better to eat one large meal and then sleep or would they be more like sharks and constantly on the move)
Note:
One animal species that does exist in this world, but not the Sahara, is a creature similar to a Bantha from Star Wars. They'd be furry animals comparable to yaks in size, but relating more to elephants in nature.
creature-design food
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
they remind me of the creatures of Tremors
$endgroup$
– L.Dutch♦
8 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
I was thinking more of the Dune sandworms. Their metabolism was pure handwavium though, with very high internal body temperatures and oxygen production. Pretty certain they were opportunistic hunters and carnivores, rather than obligate ones, though.
$endgroup$
– Starfish Prime
7 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
In my fantasy world there is a large valley. At the northern end lies the 'endless desert' called the "Sea of Glass" due to its shimmering sands. Within these deserts live great wyrms that swim through the sand as if it was an ocean.
The wyrms/worms would roughly have these dimensions: 4 meters high and wide and stretching to lengths between 10 to 30 meters. The 'mouth' of the beast is cylindrical however their mouth is protected by a beak that is enclosed during burrowing (making a cone shape).
The worms most likely breath oxygen and would need to resurface (think about the same time as a humpback whale). Their main hunting strategy is to stalk their prey using echolocation to hear footsteps above the sand then the worm would launch its self forward and open their beak aiming to suddenly swallow and enclose their prey.
These worms are pretty big critters. I'm wondering if a purely carnivorous diet would be able to sustain a worm of this size as well as possible eating habits as a bonus (ex: would it be better to eat one large meal and then sleep or would they be more like sharks and constantly on the move)
Note:
One animal species that does exist in this world, but not the Sahara, is a creature similar to a Bantha from Star Wars. They'd be furry animals comparable to yaks in size, but relating more to elephants in nature.
creature-design food
$endgroup$
In my fantasy world there is a large valley. At the northern end lies the 'endless desert' called the "Sea of Glass" due to its shimmering sands. Within these deserts live great wyrms that swim through the sand as if it was an ocean.
The wyrms/worms would roughly have these dimensions: 4 meters high and wide and stretching to lengths between 10 to 30 meters. The 'mouth' of the beast is cylindrical however their mouth is protected by a beak that is enclosed during burrowing (making a cone shape).
The worms most likely breath oxygen and would need to resurface (think about the same time as a humpback whale). Their main hunting strategy is to stalk their prey using echolocation to hear footsteps above the sand then the worm would launch its self forward and open their beak aiming to suddenly swallow and enclose their prey.
These worms are pretty big critters. I'm wondering if a purely carnivorous diet would be able to sustain a worm of this size as well as possible eating habits as a bonus (ex: would it be better to eat one large meal and then sleep or would they be more like sharks and constantly on the move)
Note:
One animal species that does exist in this world, but not the Sahara, is a creature similar to a Bantha from Star Wars. They'd be furry animals comparable to yaks in size, but relating more to elephants in nature.
creature-design food
creature-design food
edited 8 hours ago
Cyn
16.5k2 gold badges33 silver badges75 bronze badges
16.5k2 gold badges33 silver badges75 bronze badges
asked 8 hours ago
Celestial Dragon EmperorCelestial Dragon Emperor
4,7094 gold badges30 silver badges64 bronze badges
4,7094 gold badges30 silver badges64 bronze badges
2
$begingroup$
they remind me of the creatures of Tremors
$endgroup$
– L.Dutch♦
8 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
I was thinking more of the Dune sandworms. Their metabolism was pure handwavium though, with very high internal body temperatures and oxygen production. Pretty certain they were opportunistic hunters and carnivores, rather than obligate ones, though.
$endgroup$
– Starfish Prime
7 hours ago
add a comment |
2
$begingroup$
they remind me of the creatures of Tremors
$endgroup$
– L.Dutch♦
8 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
I was thinking more of the Dune sandworms. Their metabolism was pure handwavium though, with very high internal body temperatures and oxygen production. Pretty certain they were opportunistic hunters and carnivores, rather than obligate ones, though.
$endgroup$
– Starfish Prime
7 hours ago
2
2
$begingroup$
they remind me of the creatures of Tremors
$endgroup$
– L.Dutch♦
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
they remind me of the creatures of Tremors
$endgroup$
– L.Dutch♦
8 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
I was thinking more of the Dune sandworms. Their metabolism was pure handwavium though, with very high internal body temperatures and oxygen production. Pretty certain they were opportunistic hunters and carnivores, rather than obligate ones, though.
$endgroup$
– Starfish Prime
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
I was thinking more of the Dune sandworms. Their metabolism was pure handwavium though, with very high internal body temperatures and oxygen production. Pretty certain they were opportunistic hunters and carnivores, rather than obligate ones, though.
$endgroup$
– Starfish Prime
7 hours ago
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Your worms are ambush predators. They very rarely move.
https://www.bbcearth.com/blog/?article=snapping-death-worms-can-hide-undetected-for-years
These giant polychaete marine worms
(Eunice aphroditois, also known as the sand striker)
are real. They lurk, waiting for something to pass by in reach and then they pounce. They get big; at least 3 meters. For big predators they move so little they can go unrecognized in plain sight for many years.
In 2013 a metre-long worm was found by staff at Maidenhead Aquatics in
Woking, Surrey, which they estimate had been living in the tank for 10
years undetected. An even larger worm was found in 2009 at the Blue
Reef Aquarium in Newquay, which had been devouring fish and even
snapping bits of coral off the tank’s reef installation; the staff
nicknamed it “Barry”. Further afield, a 3m long worm was discovered in
a mooring raft in Japan's Seto Fishing Harbour in 2009 – one of the
largest specimens ever discovered.
This is how your sandwyrms work. They do not cruise around looking for prey like the worms in Dune. That would expend a colossal amount of energy. They hold very, very still, and the main movement is a quick attack and then swallowing the prey.
The larger they are the less they move from place to place, and the truly big ones only move under extreme duress. They live in a desert, but this desert hosts a seasonal migration of large ungulates between their winter and summer homes. That migration is pretty much when the worms reliably feed. Feed they do - their bodies can expand to contain pretty much as many animals as they can catch, and they can catch one after another during the peak of migration. With those reserves the worms can go many years between feedings, and big ones can even metabolize their body segments and shrink in size during prolonged lean times.
The ones you find cruising around out and about are the juveniles looking for a new home. Those little ones relocate often and have been known to chase down prey. One might encounter several juveniles at once which can be a bad situation. Those can definitely be trouble but are unlikely to kill you outright. Some people might dig them out and reinstall them like biologic land mines.
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
+1 This does really remind me of a movie I once saw, where there where huge, ambush-predetor sandworms. They dug themselfs large pits in the sand and maintained those to keep the slope so steep that falling down into their mouth was the victims certain fate once they stepped into the pit. This might even be more efficient than the hunting strategy you suggested for the adults.
$endgroup$
– TheDyingOfLight
5 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
Sounds like the Sarlacc from Return of the Jedi. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarlacc That thing would have eaten a lot of sand.
$endgroup$
– Willk
5 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
4 meters high and wide and stretching to lengths between 10 to 30 meters is a huge beast.
Having to burrow in the sand to move takes quite some energy, as it requires displacing a dense medium. Plus ambushing the prey is another additional effort.
A carnivorous diet seems adapt to supply that much energy, however here is the issue: you state they live in a desert.
Large animals in the desert are rare or even absent, and smaller animals, though present, are scattered around.
For this it would be better a hunting strategy similar to whales: ingest and filter large amounts of medium (water for the whales, sand for the worms), capturing all the edible content.
Additional issue: in a desert with such a massive body heat dissipation might be an issue. Therefore a more lean body might be helpful.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
A carnivorous worm is not unlike a snake and we have data about what snakes eat (they're all carnivores).
Giant snakes may only eat 4 to 6 times yearly. (ref) And snakes can lower their metabolic rates, become more protein efficient, and survive months without any food at all. Though most snakes eat every 5-14 days.
The largest snake in the world is the giant anaconda (Eunectes murinus). They weigh about 550 pounds (250 kilos), average 17 feet (just over 5 meters) in length, and can have a circumference of 3 feet (just under a meter, which is about 1/3 of a meter in diameter).
This snake has a volume of about .44 cubic meters. Your creature has a volume of 125 to 375 cubic meters (assume 4 meters diameter and 10-30 meters in length...which is very very thick and not very wormlike, especially at shorter lengths).
If volume is proportional to caloric needs, your worm would need at least 284 times the calories of a giant anaconda. It's not really proportional though, so the actual need for your worm would be less. Let's round down to 200 times.
A giant anaconda can go months between meals, especially a large meal like a deer (120 lbs. (54 kg)). If we assume a giant anaconda eats 480 pounds (218 kg) of live prey a year, this would mean something in the ballpark of 96,000 pounds (43545 kg) a year for your worm.
So something in the vicinity of one of the following (or a combination):
- 800 deer (or humans, average weight 120 lbs).
- 60 cows (female average weight 1600 lbs).
- 40 bulls (male average weight 2400 lbs).
These are just estimates. I haven't found exact feeding requirements for giant snakes, we don't know how caloric needs scale up with mythical creatures, and we don't know how the caloric needs of a giant worm compare with a snake. But the order of magnitude should be right.
This is pretty doable for worms in an environment with lots of prey and not a lot of competition for it. But in the desert? That is rough. What other animals are there they could eat? That is what you need to answer. If you assume herds of roving flocks, and very few worms, you're good.
As for time between meals, they could rest for a long time after large meals but, given how much they have to eat (because there aren't other animals big enough to sustain them for a meal), they wouldn't rest too much. Weeks vs months.
Note that sometimes giant snakes eat each other. This isn't sustainable of course but it could reduce competition and keep a worm alive another several months.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I'll hazard a guess that anacondas will expend less energy on motion than a 4m wide thing that needs to dig through the ground.
$endgroup$
– Starfish Prime
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
@StarfishPrime You're probably right. Though some sand is easy to push through and anacondas often live in water, which has its own challenges.
$endgroup$
– Cyn
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
light, windblown surface sand is easy to dig through, but you don't have to go very deep before the weight of sand above you becomes quite difficult to deal with. Water depth places limits on survivability (via distance and pressure), but not on movement. Or to cheat and sidestep the problem; living and moving through water is a largely solved problem for one version of metazoa or another, with a huge variety of sizes and lifestyles and diets on offer. Tunnelling on the other hand is more more constrained, especially when it comes to size or depth.
$endgroup$
– Starfish Prime
6 hours ago
add a comment |
Your Answer
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
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f150363%2fwould-a-carnivorous-diet-be-able-to-support-a-giant-worm%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
$begingroup$
Your worms are ambush predators. They very rarely move.
https://www.bbcearth.com/blog/?article=snapping-death-worms-can-hide-undetected-for-years
These giant polychaete marine worms
(Eunice aphroditois, also known as the sand striker)
are real. They lurk, waiting for something to pass by in reach and then they pounce. They get big; at least 3 meters. For big predators they move so little they can go unrecognized in plain sight for many years.
In 2013 a metre-long worm was found by staff at Maidenhead Aquatics in
Woking, Surrey, which they estimate had been living in the tank for 10
years undetected. An even larger worm was found in 2009 at the Blue
Reef Aquarium in Newquay, which had been devouring fish and even
snapping bits of coral off the tank’s reef installation; the staff
nicknamed it “Barry”. Further afield, a 3m long worm was discovered in
a mooring raft in Japan's Seto Fishing Harbour in 2009 – one of the
largest specimens ever discovered.
This is how your sandwyrms work. They do not cruise around looking for prey like the worms in Dune. That would expend a colossal amount of energy. They hold very, very still, and the main movement is a quick attack and then swallowing the prey.
The larger they are the less they move from place to place, and the truly big ones only move under extreme duress. They live in a desert, but this desert hosts a seasonal migration of large ungulates between their winter and summer homes. That migration is pretty much when the worms reliably feed. Feed they do - their bodies can expand to contain pretty much as many animals as they can catch, and they can catch one after another during the peak of migration. With those reserves the worms can go many years between feedings, and big ones can even metabolize their body segments and shrink in size during prolonged lean times.
The ones you find cruising around out and about are the juveniles looking for a new home. Those little ones relocate often and have been known to chase down prey. One might encounter several juveniles at once which can be a bad situation. Those can definitely be trouble but are unlikely to kill you outright. Some people might dig them out and reinstall them like biologic land mines.
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
+1 This does really remind me of a movie I once saw, where there where huge, ambush-predetor sandworms. They dug themselfs large pits in the sand and maintained those to keep the slope so steep that falling down into their mouth was the victims certain fate once they stepped into the pit. This might even be more efficient than the hunting strategy you suggested for the adults.
$endgroup$
– TheDyingOfLight
5 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
Sounds like the Sarlacc from Return of the Jedi. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarlacc That thing would have eaten a lot of sand.
$endgroup$
– Willk
5 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Your worms are ambush predators. They very rarely move.
https://www.bbcearth.com/blog/?article=snapping-death-worms-can-hide-undetected-for-years
These giant polychaete marine worms
(Eunice aphroditois, also known as the sand striker)
are real. They lurk, waiting for something to pass by in reach and then they pounce. They get big; at least 3 meters. For big predators they move so little they can go unrecognized in plain sight for many years.
In 2013 a metre-long worm was found by staff at Maidenhead Aquatics in
Woking, Surrey, which they estimate had been living in the tank for 10
years undetected. An even larger worm was found in 2009 at the Blue
Reef Aquarium in Newquay, which had been devouring fish and even
snapping bits of coral off the tank’s reef installation; the staff
nicknamed it “Barry”. Further afield, a 3m long worm was discovered in
a mooring raft in Japan's Seto Fishing Harbour in 2009 – one of the
largest specimens ever discovered.
This is how your sandwyrms work. They do not cruise around looking for prey like the worms in Dune. That would expend a colossal amount of energy. They hold very, very still, and the main movement is a quick attack and then swallowing the prey.
The larger they are the less they move from place to place, and the truly big ones only move under extreme duress. They live in a desert, but this desert hosts a seasonal migration of large ungulates between their winter and summer homes. That migration is pretty much when the worms reliably feed. Feed they do - their bodies can expand to contain pretty much as many animals as they can catch, and they can catch one after another during the peak of migration. With those reserves the worms can go many years between feedings, and big ones can even metabolize their body segments and shrink in size during prolonged lean times.
The ones you find cruising around out and about are the juveniles looking for a new home. Those little ones relocate often and have been known to chase down prey. One might encounter several juveniles at once which can be a bad situation. Those can definitely be trouble but are unlikely to kill you outright. Some people might dig them out and reinstall them like biologic land mines.
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
+1 This does really remind me of a movie I once saw, where there where huge, ambush-predetor sandworms. They dug themselfs large pits in the sand and maintained those to keep the slope so steep that falling down into their mouth was the victims certain fate once they stepped into the pit. This might even be more efficient than the hunting strategy you suggested for the adults.
$endgroup$
– TheDyingOfLight
5 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
Sounds like the Sarlacc from Return of the Jedi. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarlacc That thing would have eaten a lot of sand.
$endgroup$
– Willk
5 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Your worms are ambush predators. They very rarely move.
https://www.bbcearth.com/blog/?article=snapping-death-worms-can-hide-undetected-for-years
These giant polychaete marine worms
(Eunice aphroditois, also known as the sand striker)
are real. They lurk, waiting for something to pass by in reach and then they pounce. They get big; at least 3 meters. For big predators they move so little they can go unrecognized in plain sight for many years.
In 2013 a metre-long worm was found by staff at Maidenhead Aquatics in
Woking, Surrey, which they estimate had been living in the tank for 10
years undetected. An even larger worm was found in 2009 at the Blue
Reef Aquarium in Newquay, which had been devouring fish and even
snapping bits of coral off the tank’s reef installation; the staff
nicknamed it “Barry”. Further afield, a 3m long worm was discovered in
a mooring raft in Japan's Seto Fishing Harbour in 2009 – one of the
largest specimens ever discovered.
This is how your sandwyrms work. They do not cruise around looking for prey like the worms in Dune. That would expend a colossal amount of energy. They hold very, very still, and the main movement is a quick attack and then swallowing the prey.
The larger they are the less they move from place to place, and the truly big ones only move under extreme duress. They live in a desert, but this desert hosts a seasonal migration of large ungulates between their winter and summer homes. That migration is pretty much when the worms reliably feed. Feed they do - their bodies can expand to contain pretty much as many animals as they can catch, and they can catch one after another during the peak of migration. With those reserves the worms can go many years between feedings, and big ones can even metabolize their body segments and shrink in size during prolonged lean times.
The ones you find cruising around out and about are the juveniles looking for a new home. Those little ones relocate often and have been known to chase down prey. One might encounter several juveniles at once which can be a bad situation. Those can definitely be trouble but are unlikely to kill you outright. Some people might dig them out and reinstall them like biologic land mines.
$endgroup$
Your worms are ambush predators. They very rarely move.
https://www.bbcearth.com/blog/?article=snapping-death-worms-can-hide-undetected-for-years
These giant polychaete marine worms
(Eunice aphroditois, also known as the sand striker)
are real. They lurk, waiting for something to pass by in reach and then they pounce. They get big; at least 3 meters. For big predators they move so little they can go unrecognized in plain sight for many years.
In 2013 a metre-long worm was found by staff at Maidenhead Aquatics in
Woking, Surrey, which they estimate had been living in the tank for 10
years undetected. An even larger worm was found in 2009 at the Blue
Reef Aquarium in Newquay, which had been devouring fish and even
snapping bits of coral off the tank’s reef installation; the staff
nicknamed it “Barry”. Further afield, a 3m long worm was discovered in
a mooring raft in Japan's Seto Fishing Harbour in 2009 – one of the
largest specimens ever discovered.
This is how your sandwyrms work. They do not cruise around looking for prey like the worms in Dune. That would expend a colossal amount of energy. They hold very, very still, and the main movement is a quick attack and then swallowing the prey.
The larger they are the less they move from place to place, and the truly big ones only move under extreme duress. They live in a desert, but this desert hosts a seasonal migration of large ungulates between their winter and summer homes. That migration is pretty much when the worms reliably feed. Feed they do - their bodies can expand to contain pretty much as many animals as they can catch, and they can catch one after another during the peak of migration. With those reserves the worms can go many years between feedings, and big ones can even metabolize their body segments and shrink in size during prolonged lean times.
The ones you find cruising around out and about are the juveniles looking for a new home. Those little ones relocate often and have been known to chase down prey. One might encounter several juveniles at once which can be a bad situation. Those can definitely be trouble but are unlikely to kill you outright. Some people might dig them out and reinstall them like biologic land mines.
answered 5 hours ago
WillkWillk
129k32 gold badges241 silver badges538 bronze badges
129k32 gold badges241 silver badges538 bronze badges
1
$begingroup$
+1 This does really remind me of a movie I once saw, where there where huge, ambush-predetor sandworms. They dug themselfs large pits in the sand and maintained those to keep the slope so steep that falling down into their mouth was the victims certain fate once they stepped into the pit. This might even be more efficient than the hunting strategy you suggested for the adults.
$endgroup$
– TheDyingOfLight
5 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
Sounds like the Sarlacc from Return of the Jedi. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarlacc That thing would have eaten a lot of sand.
$endgroup$
– Willk
5 hours ago
add a comment |
1
$begingroup$
+1 This does really remind me of a movie I once saw, where there where huge, ambush-predetor sandworms. They dug themselfs large pits in the sand and maintained those to keep the slope so steep that falling down into their mouth was the victims certain fate once they stepped into the pit. This might even be more efficient than the hunting strategy you suggested for the adults.
$endgroup$
– TheDyingOfLight
5 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
Sounds like the Sarlacc from Return of the Jedi. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarlacc That thing would have eaten a lot of sand.
$endgroup$
– Willk
5 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
+1 This does really remind me of a movie I once saw, where there where huge, ambush-predetor sandworms. They dug themselfs large pits in the sand and maintained those to keep the slope so steep that falling down into their mouth was the victims certain fate once they stepped into the pit. This might even be more efficient than the hunting strategy you suggested for the adults.
$endgroup$
– TheDyingOfLight
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
+1 This does really remind me of a movie I once saw, where there where huge, ambush-predetor sandworms. They dug themselfs large pits in the sand and maintained those to keep the slope so steep that falling down into their mouth was the victims certain fate once they stepped into the pit. This might even be more efficient than the hunting strategy you suggested for the adults.
$endgroup$
– TheDyingOfLight
5 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
Sounds like the Sarlacc from Return of the Jedi. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarlacc That thing would have eaten a lot of sand.
$endgroup$
– Willk
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
Sounds like the Sarlacc from Return of the Jedi. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarlacc That thing would have eaten a lot of sand.
$endgroup$
– Willk
5 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
4 meters high and wide and stretching to lengths between 10 to 30 meters is a huge beast.
Having to burrow in the sand to move takes quite some energy, as it requires displacing a dense medium. Plus ambushing the prey is another additional effort.
A carnivorous diet seems adapt to supply that much energy, however here is the issue: you state they live in a desert.
Large animals in the desert are rare or even absent, and smaller animals, though present, are scattered around.
For this it would be better a hunting strategy similar to whales: ingest and filter large amounts of medium (water for the whales, sand for the worms), capturing all the edible content.
Additional issue: in a desert with such a massive body heat dissipation might be an issue. Therefore a more lean body might be helpful.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
4 meters high and wide and stretching to lengths between 10 to 30 meters is a huge beast.
Having to burrow in the sand to move takes quite some energy, as it requires displacing a dense medium. Plus ambushing the prey is another additional effort.
A carnivorous diet seems adapt to supply that much energy, however here is the issue: you state they live in a desert.
Large animals in the desert are rare or even absent, and smaller animals, though present, are scattered around.
For this it would be better a hunting strategy similar to whales: ingest and filter large amounts of medium (water for the whales, sand for the worms), capturing all the edible content.
Additional issue: in a desert with such a massive body heat dissipation might be an issue. Therefore a more lean body might be helpful.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
4 meters high and wide and stretching to lengths between 10 to 30 meters is a huge beast.
Having to burrow in the sand to move takes quite some energy, as it requires displacing a dense medium. Plus ambushing the prey is another additional effort.
A carnivorous diet seems adapt to supply that much energy, however here is the issue: you state they live in a desert.
Large animals in the desert are rare or even absent, and smaller animals, though present, are scattered around.
For this it would be better a hunting strategy similar to whales: ingest and filter large amounts of medium (water for the whales, sand for the worms), capturing all the edible content.
Additional issue: in a desert with such a massive body heat dissipation might be an issue. Therefore a more lean body might be helpful.
$endgroup$
4 meters high and wide and stretching to lengths between 10 to 30 meters is a huge beast.
Having to burrow in the sand to move takes quite some energy, as it requires displacing a dense medium. Plus ambushing the prey is another additional effort.
A carnivorous diet seems adapt to supply that much energy, however here is the issue: you state they live in a desert.
Large animals in the desert are rare or even absent, and smaller animals, though present, are scattered around.
For this it would be better a hunting strategy similar to whales: ingest and filter large amounts of medium (water for the whales, sand for the worms), capturing all the edible content.
Additional issue: in a desert with such a massive body heat dissipation might be an issue. Therefore a more lean body might be helpful.
answered 8 hours ago
L.Dutch♦L.Dutch
103k32 gold badges246 silver badges494 bronze badges
103k32 gold badges246 silver badges494 bronze badges
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
A carnivorous worm is not unlike a snake and we have data about what snakes eat (they're all carnivores).
Giant snakes may only eat 4 to 6 times yearly. (ref) And snakes can lower their metabolic rates, become more protein efficient, and survive months without any food at all. Though most snakes eat every 5-14 days.
The largest snake in the world is the giant anaconda (Eunectes murinus). They weigh about 550 pounds (250 kilos), average 17 feet (just over 5 meters) in length, and can have a circumference of 3 feet (just under a meter, which is about 1/3 of a meter in diameter).
This snake has a volume of about .44 cubic meters. Your creature has a volume of 125 to 375 cubic meters (assume 4 meters diameter and 10-30 meters in length...which is very very thick and not very wormlike, especially at shorter lengths).
If volume is proportional to caloric needs, your worm would need at least 284 times the calories of a giant anaconda. It's not really proportional though, so the actual need for your worm would be less. Let's round down to 200 times.
A giant anaconda can go months between meals, especially a large meal like a deer (120 lbs. (54 kg)). If we assume a giant anaconda eats 480 pounds (218 kg) of live prey a year, this would mean something in the ballpark of 96,000 pounds (43545 kg) a year for your worm.
So something in the vicinity of one of the following (or a combination):
- 800 deer (or humans, average weight 120 lbs).
- 60 cows (female average weight 1600 lbs).
- 40 bulls (male average weight 2400 lbs).
These are just estimates. I haven't found exact feeding requirements for giant snakes, we don't know how caloric needs scale up with mythical creatures, and we don't know how the caloric needs of a giant worm compare with a snake. But the order of magnitude should be right.
This is pretty doable for worms in an environment with lots of prey and not a lot of competition for it. But in the desert? That is rough. What other animals are there they could eat? That is what you need to answer. If you assume herds of roving flocks, and very few worms, you're good.
As for time between meals, they could rest for a long time after large meals but, given how much they have to eat (because there aren't other animals big enough to sustain them for a meal), they wouldn't rest too much. Weeks vs months.
Note that sometimes giant snakes eat each other. This isn't sustainable of course but it could reduce competition and keep a worm alive another several months.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I'll hazard a guess that anacondas will expend less energy on motion than a 4m wide thing that needs to dig through the ground.
$endgroup$
– Starfish Prime
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
@StarfishPrime You're probably right. Though some sand is easy to push through and anacondas often live in water, which has its own challenges.
$endgroup$
– Cyn
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
light, windblown surface sand is easy to dig through, but you don't have to go very deep before the weight of sand above you becomes quite difficult to deal with. Water depth places limits on survivability (via distance and pressure), but not on movement. Or to cheat and sidestep the problem; living and moving through water is a largely solved problem for one version of metazoa or another, with a huge variety of sizes and lifestyles and diets on offer. Tunnelling on the other hand is more more constrained, especially when it comes to size or depth.
$endgroup$
– Starfish Prime
6 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
A carnivorous worm is not unlike a snake and we have data about what snakes eat (they're all carnivores).
Giant snakes may only eat 4 to 6 times yearly. (ref) And snakes can lower their metabolic rates, become more protein efficient, and survive months without any food at all. Though most snakes eat every 5-14 days.
The largest snake in the world is the giant anaconda (Eunectes murinus). They weigh about 550 pounds (250 kilos), average 17 feet (just over 5 meters) in length, and can have a circumference of 3 feet (just under a meter, which is about 1/3 of a meter in diameter).
This snake has a volume of about .44 cubic meters. Your creature has a volume of 125 to 375 cubic meters (assume 4 meters diameter and 10-30 meters in length...which is very very thick and not very wormlike, especially at shorter lengths).
If volume is proportional to caloric needs, your worm would need at least 284 times the calories of a giant anaconda. It's not really proportional though, so the actual need for your worm would be less. Let's round down to 200 times.
A giant anaconda can go months between meals, especially a large meal like a deer (120 lbs. (54 kg)). If we assume a giant anaconda eats 480 pounds (218 kg) of live prey a year, this would mean something in the ballpark of 96,000 pounds (43545 kg) a year for your worm.
So something in the vicinity of one of the following (or a combination):
- 800 deer (or humans, average weight 120 lbs).
- 60 cows (female average weight 1600 lbs).
- 40 bulls (male average weight 2400 lbs).
These are just estimates. I haven't found exact feeding requirements for giant snakes, we don't know how caloric needs scale up with mythical creatures, and we don't know how the caloric needs of a giant worm compare with a snake. But the order of magnitude should be right.
This is pretty doable for worms in an environment with lots of prey and not a lot of competition for it. But in the desert? That is rough. What other animals are there they could eat? That is what you need to answer. If you assume herds of roving flocks, and very few worms, you're good.
As for time between meals, they could rest for a long time after large meals but, given how much they have to eat (because there aren't other animals big enough to sustain them for a meal), they wouldn't rest too much. Weeks vs months.
Note that sometimes giant snakes eat each other. This isn't sustainable of course but it could reduce competition and keep a worm alive another several months.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I'll hazard a guess that anacondas will expend less energy on motion than a 4m wide thing that needs to dig through the ground.
$endgroup$
– Starfish Prime
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
@StarfishPrime You're probably right. Though some sand is easy to push through and anacondas often live in water, which has its own challenges.
$endgroup$
– Cyn
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
light, windblown surface sand is easy to dig through, but you don't have to go very deep before the weight of sand above you becomes quite difficult to deal with. Water depth places limits on survivability (via distance and pressure), but not on movement. Or to cheat and sidestep the problem; living and moving through water is a largely solved problem for one version of metazoa or another, with a huge variety of sizes and lifestyles and diets on offer. Tunnelling on the other hand is more more constrained, especially when it comes to size or depth.
$endgroup$
– Starfish Prime
6 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
A carnivorous worm is not unlike a snake and we have data about what snakes eat (they're all carnivores).
Giant snakes may only eat 4 to 6 times yearly. (ref) And snakes can lower their metabolic rates, become more protein efficient, and survive months without any food at all. Though most snakes eat every 5-14 days.
The largest snake in the world is the giant anaconda (Eunectes murinus). They weigh about 550 pounds (250 kilos), average 17 feet (just over 5 meters) in length, and can have a circumference of 3 feet (just under a meter, which is about 1/3 of a meter in diameter).
This snake has a volume of about .44 cubic meters. Your creature has a volume of 125 to 375 cubic meters (assume 4 meters diameter and 10-30 meters in length...which is very very thick and not very wormlike, especially at shorter lengths).
If volume is proportional to caloric needs, your worm would need at least 284 times the calories of a giant anaconda. It's not really proportional though, so the actual need for your worm would be less. Let's round down to 200 times.
A giant anaconda can go months between meals, especially a large meal like a deer (120 lbs. (54 kg)). If we assume a giant anaconda eats 480 pounds (218 kg) of live prey a year, this would mean something in the ballpark of 96,000 pounds (43545 kg) a year for your worm.
So something in the vicinity of one of the following (or a combination):
- 800 deer (or humans, average weight 120 lbs).
- 60 cows (female average weight 1600 lbs).
- 40 bulls (male average weight 2400 lbs).
These are just estimates. I haven't found exact feeding requirements for giant snakes, we don't know how caloric needs scale up with mythical creatures, and we don't know how the caloric needs of a giant worm compare with a snake. But the order of magnitude should be right.
This is pretty doable for worms in an environment with lots of prey and not a lot of competition for it. But in the desert? That is rough. What other animals are there they could eat? That is what you need to answer. If you assume herds of roving flocks, and very few worms, you're good.
As for time between meals, they could rest for a long time after large meals but, given how much they have to eat (because there aren't other animals big enough to sustain them for a meal), they wouldn't rest too much. Weeks vs months.
Note that sometimes giant snakes eat each other. This isn't sustainable of course but it could reduce competition and keep a worm alive another several months.
$endgroup$
A carnivorous worm is not unlike a snake and we have data about what snakes eat (they're all carnivores).
Giant snakes may only eat 4 to 6 times yearly. (ref) And snakes can lower their metabolic rates, become more protein efficient, and survive months without any food at all. Though most snakes eat every 5-14 days.
The largest snake in the world is the giant anaconda (Eunectes murinus). They weigh about 550 pounds (250 kilos), average 17 feet (just over 5 meters) in length, and can have a circumference of 3 feet (just under a meter, which is about 1/3 of a meter in diameter).
This snake has a volume of about .44 cubic meters. Your creature has a volume of 125 to 375 cubic meters (assume 4 meters diameter and 10-30 meters in length...which is very very thick and not very wormlike, especially at shorter lengths).
If volume is proportional to caloric needs, your worm would need at least 284 times the calories of a giant anaconda. It's not really proportional though, so the actual need for your worm would be less. Let's round down to 200 times.
A giant anaconda can go months between meals, especially a large meal like a deer (120 lbs. (54 kg)). If we assume a giant anaconda eats 480 pounds (218 kg) of live prey a year, this would mean something in the ballpark of 96,000 pounds (43545 kg) a year for your worm.
So something in the vicinity of one of the following (or a combination):
- 800 deer (or humans, average weight 120 lbs).
- 60 cows (female average weight 1600 lbs).
- 40 bulls (male average weight 2400 lbs).
These are just estimates. I haven't found exact feeding requirements for giant snakes, we don't know how caloric needs scale up with mythical creatures, and we don't know how the caloric needs of a giant worm compare with a snake. But the order of magnitude should be right.
This is pretty doable for worms in an environment with lots of prey and not a lot of competition for it. But in the desert? That is rough. What other animals are there they could eat? That is what you need to answer. If you assume herds of roving flocks, and very few worms, you're good.
As for time between meals, they could rest for a long time after large meals but, given how much they have to eat (because there aren't other animals big enough to sustain them for a meal), they wouldn't rest too much. Weeks vs months.
Note that sometimes giant snakes eat each other. This isn't sustainable of course but it could reduce competition and keep a worm alive another several months.
answered 7 hours ago
CynCyn
16.5k2 gold badges33 silver badges75 bronze badges
16.5k2 gold badges33 silver badges75 bronze badges
$begingroup$
I'll hazard a guess that anacondas will expend less energy on motion than a 4m wide thing that needs to dig through the ground.
$endgroup$
– Starfish Prime
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
@StarfishPrime You're probably right. Though some sand is easy to push through and anacondas often live in water, which has its own challenges.
$endgroup$
– Cyn
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
light, windblown surface sand is easy to dig through, but you don't have to go very deep before the weight of sand above you becomes quite difficult to deal with. Water depth places limits on survivability (via distance and pressure), but not on movement. Or to cheat and sidestep the problem; living and moving through water is a largely solved problem for one version of metazoa or another, with a huge variety of sizes and lifestyles and diets on offer. Tunnelling on the other hand is more more constrained, especially when it comes to size or depth.
$endgroup$
– Starfish Prime
6 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I'll hazard a guess that anacondas will expend less energy on motion than a 4m wide thing that needs to dig through the ground.
$endgroup$
– Starfish Prime
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
@StarfishPrime You're probably right. Though some sand is easy to push through and anacondas often live in water, which has its own challenges.
$endgroup$
– Cyn
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
light, windblown surface sand is easy to dig through, but you don't have to go very deep before the weight of sand above you becomes quite difficult to deal with. Water depth places limits on survivability (via distance and pressure), but not on movement. Or to cheat and sidestep the problem; living and moving through water is a largely solved problem for one version of metazoa or another, with a huge variety of sizes and lifestyles and diets on offer. Tunnelling on the other hand is more more constrained, especially when it comes to size or depth.
$endgroup$
– Starfish Prime
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
I'll hazard a guess that anacondas will expend less energy on motion than a 4m wide thing that needs to dig through the ground.
$endgroup$
– Starfish Prime
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
I'll hazard a guess that anacondas will expend less energy on motion than a 4m wide thing that needs to dig through the ground.
$endgroup$
– Starfish Prime
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
@StarfishPrime You're probably right. Though some sand is easy to push through and anacondas often live in water, which has its own challenges.
$endgroup$
– Cyn
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
@StarfishPrime You're probably right. Though some sand is easy to push through and anacondas often live in water, which has its own challenges.
$endgroup$
– Cyn
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
light, windblown surface sand is easy to dig through, but you don't have to go very deep before the weight of sand above you becomes quite difficult to deal with. Water depth places limits on survivability (via distance and pressure), but not on movement. Or to cheat and sidestep the problem; living and moving through water is a largely solved problem for one version of metazoa or another, with a huge variety of sizes and lifestyles and diets on offer. Tunnelling on the other hand is more more constrained, especially when it comes to size or depth.
$endgroup$
– Starfish Prime
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
light, windblown surface sand is easy to dig through, but you don't have to go very deep before the weight of sand above you becomes quite difficult to deal with. Water depth places limits on survivability (via distance and pressure), but not on movement. Or to cheat and sidestep the problem; living and moving through water is a largely solved problem for one version of metazoa or another, with a huge variety of sizes and lifestyles and diets on offer. Tunnelling on the other hand is more more constrained, especially when it comes to size or depth.
$endgroup$
– Starfish Prime
6 hours ago
add a comment |
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.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f150363%2fwould-a-carnivorous-diet-be-able-to-support-a-giant-worm%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
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
2
$begingroup$
they remind me of the creatures of Tremors
$endgroup$
– L.Dutch♦
8 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
I was thinking more of the Dune sandworms. Their metabolism was pure handwavium though, with very high internal body temperatures and oxygen production. Pretty certain they were opportunistic hunters and carnivores, rather than obligate ones, though.
$endgroup$
– Starfish Prime
7 hours ago