From the article:

Ant-attended aphids are known to excrete high-quality honeydew when ants are present. Ant attendance has a negative effect on the growth and reproduction of the attended aphids. Therefore, trade-offs should occur between the quality of honeydew and the growth and fecundity of aphid individuals. Thus, if attending ants prefer the morph excreting a high-quality honeydew, such trade-offs and resulting competitive interactions are expected between the color morphs in M. yomogicola. The morph excreting high-quality honeydew is known to have a lower reproductive rate than the other morphs[9,10]. This fact implies that if the attending ants prefer one morph, this morph is expected to excrete high-quality honeydew. Note that any such difference between morphs leads to the exclusion of the inferior morphs. Surprisingly, nearly all colonies consist of both green and red morphs in the field.

  • SkyeStarfall@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Can an animal understand the moral implications of the exploitative logistics chain of creating a smartphone and your part in it as a consumer? And what alternatives could be used in its stead? From environmental, to exploitative of the workers, to the health issues of resource extraction or factory work. Or about the ethics and consequences of fast fashion, or political policies or phenomena such as universal healthcare or gentrification?

    If you are incapable of understanding the structural reason for why someone does something, I think it’s fair to say you cannot be a moral agents. Stealing is bad, yes, but is stealing bread because your children are starving bad? Is stealing still bad when the laws and moral framework that is set in the society determined by those who get rich off of exploiting the same people who steal? I think it’s fair to say you need a lot of abstract thinking to fully comprehend these scenarios.

    • eatthecake@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      So industry, agriculture, modern tech, oil use, anything that harms the environment is non vegan, yes? That makes perfect sense.

      • SkyeStarfall@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I get you are being intentionally obtuse for some fucking reason, probably to absolve yourself of your own moral harm you are causing, but yeah, veganism is about reducing harm as much as individually possible. Is it really that hard to understand?

        • Dkarma@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Because your logic is twisted and makes no sense. Maybe reevaluate your conclusions based on fallacies and anthropomorphized creatures.