12
$\begingroup$

As far as I have been able to determine, the majority of life reuses the same plumbing for reproductive and digestive/excretory systems. In fact, the anus is believed to be derived from the male gonopore.

This is seen in all vertebrates and arthropods, as the anus and reproductive organs are derived from the same region. In cnidarians, where the mouth and anus are the same orifice, gametes are released from inside this blind gut. Only in planarians is the gonopore separate from the anus (which is also the mouth).

Improve this question
$\endgroup$
7
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ This really feels more like a biology question than a world-building one. $\endgroup$
    – Ummdustry
    Commented Jun 25, 2018 at 18:55
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Life could evolve differently, but having as few holes in your body as possible is a very useful trait and the fact that you keep it relatively clean by excreting is a bonus. $\endgroup$
    – Demigan
    Commented Jun 25, 2018 at 19:17
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Demigan "you keep it relatively clean by excreting" the toilet paper industry disagrees. $\endgroup$
    – The Square-Cube Law
    Commented Jun 25, 2018 at 19:19
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ @Renan I was talking about the penis. Men have far lower chance on inflamed bladders than women as peeing pushes any bacteria etc out before it reaches the bladder (or reproductive organs), which is also why men with inflamed bladders are treated with more concern as whatever made it is far more persistent than most infections. This feature has the happy advantage that with sex you arent first spraying a mass of bacteria before the children seeds. So Yeah its pretty clean! Aside from the piss. $\endgroup$
    – Demigan
    Commented Jun 25, 2018 at 19:36
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ As the old joke tells us: "God is an architect. 'Cause only an architect could have put toiled plumbing pipes straight through a recreational zone!" $\endgroup$
    – Oleg Lobachev
    Commented Jun 25, 2018 at 19:36

5 Answers 5

Reset to default
8
$\begingroup$

Yes, of course.

In your examples you are only including a very minor portion of all life that exists. Granted, by having the arthropods there, you've included insects which alone may count for more than one million species, with no other class in the animal kingdom having more variety.

But don't forget that plants and fungi have no anus. Their reproductive systems are not necessarily linked to their excretory ones. Plants mostly excrete through their leaves, and flower petals are modified leaves, but many plants do not have flowers.

And then there are microorganisms. I think those speak by themselves.

Last but not least: virii. Whether they are alive or not is debatable, but supposing you count them as living, remember they have no excretion by definition.

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$
4
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ The singular of “virii” is “virius”. ;-) Or, put differently, the plural of “virus” is “viruses”. But at any rate they have neither secretory nor complete reproductive system so I don’t see how they’re relevant here. $\endgroup$
    – Konrad Rudolph
    Commented Jun 26, 2018 at 11:05
  • $\begingroup$ @KonradRudolph I see their capsides as part of their reproductive system. They do reproduce after all. $\endgroup$
    – The Square-Cube Law
    Commented Jun 26, 2018 at 11:58
  • $\begingroup$ That’s a bit like saying that your skin is part of your reproductive system. $\endgroup$
    – Konrad Rudolph
    Commented Jun 26, 2018 at 12:25
  • $\begingroup$ Plants and fungi do not have digestive systems, or any organ systems for that matter. Microorganisms are typically so simple they lack tissues. I do not think they are a good example, since my question relates to organ systems. $\endgroup$
    – Anonymous
    Commented Jun 27, 2018 at 13:16
7
$\begingroup$

Molluscs have separate excretory and reproductive systems. Among the hermaphrodite land snails, the reproductive system opens onto a genital pore on the right side of the head. Male squid pass spermatophores into the female's mantle cavity around her mouth.

There is some sense in using the "get stuff out of the body" system for both gametes and waste, but not all animals do this, and there is no reason to require it in any new creatures that you design.

Remember the Centauri of Babylon 5. They look humanoid, but the females have six slits on their back and the males have six corresponding prehensile penises, quite separate from their excretory system.

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$
1
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Used for cheating at cards $\endgroup$
    – Separatrix
    Commented Jun 25, 2018 at 20:53
3
$\begingroup$

Octopuses: Penis in a hand

You should take a look at the reproductive system of the octopuses. The male has the reproductive conduct inside (along) one of his tentacles (called hectocotylus), which by all means works like any other tentacle. When mating, he inserts that specific tentacle inside the female. You can see more detailed information here:
https://www.quora.com/How-do-octopuses-reproduce

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$
1
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ You need to be careful when googling octopus sex by the way. The results are not always accurate. $\endgroup$
    – pipe
    Commented Jun 26, 2018 at 7:21
1
$\begingroup$

The fact that the same approach is used across several species to implement the same functionality (the functionality being excrete the wastes and excrete the seminal cells) is a prove of how effective this implementation is.

If you look at the implementation, it makes more sense to slightly modify an existing system rather than inventing a new one. The existing system being the tubing used for excreting the discards.

In this way the existing structures are used more effectively than the case where the reproductive system was completely separate. Having two separate lines, one for wastes and one for semen, would cost more in terms of energy, and would also pose the challenge of how implementing the complementary part for the receiving side (the female).

Not that another implementation would be impossible, rather it would have to be extremely more competitive to be successful in the present world. We cannot exclude that alternative implementation were present but did not survive through the mass extinctions happened in the past.

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ “is a prove of how effective this implementation is.” — not really: it’s merely a proof that it’s ancient (and thus a common precursor). It could be woefully sub-optimal if it’s enough of an evolutionary one-way street to be hard to evolve out of. $\endgroup$
    – Konrad Rudolph
    Commented Jun 26, 2018 at 11:07
  • $\begingroup$ @KonradRudolph, I am not so sure. We have had plenty of mass extinctions to reset the board, if no alternative model has emerged there must be some good reason. $\endgroup$
    – L.Dutch ♦
    Commented Jun 26, 2018 at 11:11
  • $\begingroup$ Right but alternative approaches have evolved (see Renan’s answer). Just not in animals, which is where my comment comes in. In fact, I’m convinced that this solution is pretty bad (e.g. lots of diseases caused by it) and hard to evolve out of (due to being part of the fundamental body plan, which is highly evolutionarily conserved due to the fact that single mutations are almost invariably fatal). $\endgroup$
    – Konrad Rudolph
    Commented Jun 26, 2018 at 11:12
0
$\begingroup$

Many organisms have reproductive systems completely apart from the excretory system, for example arachnids, millipedes, and some crustaceans. Also, even if the ancestor of a creature has the reproductive and excretory systems combined, it is still possible that they might evolve to split the two functions, as has partially happened in mammals

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .