There’s No Such Thing As “Warm-” Or “Cold-” Blooded
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 1 окт 2024
- The concept of warm-blooded and cold-blooded animals is outdated because there are actually tons of different animal thermoregulation strategies.
LEARN MORE
**************
To learn more about this topic, start your googling with these keywords:
- Thermoregulation: the strategy through which the body maintains its internal temperature.
- Endotherm: an animal that generates most of its heat internally.
- Ectotherm: an animal that relies on environmental heat sources.
- Mesotherm: an animal with an intermediate heat generating strategy.
- Poikilotherm: an animal whose internal temperature varies considerably.
- Heterotherm: an animal that sometimes keeps its body temperature the same and sometimes lets it vary.
- Homeotherm: an animal whose internal temperature does not change much.
SUPPORT MINUTEEARTH
**************************
If you like what we do, you can help us!:
- Become our patron: / minuteearth
- Share this video with your friends and family
- Leave us a comment (we read them!)
CREDITS
*********
David Goldenberg | Script Writer, Narrator and Director
Sarah Berman | Illustration, Video Editing and Animation
Aldo de Vos | Music
MinuteEarth is produced by Neptune Studios LLC
neptunestudios...
OUR STAFF
************
Lizah van der Aart • Sarah Berman • Cameron Duke
Arcadi Garcia i Rius • David Goldenberg • Melissa Hayes
Alex Reich • Henry Reich • Peter Reich
Ever Salazar • Leonardo Souza • Kate Yoshida
OUR LINKS
************
Merch | dftba.com/minut...
MinuteEarth Explains Book | minuteearth.co...
RUclips | / minuteearth
TikTok | / minuteearth
Twitter | / minuteearth
Instagram | / minute_earth
Facebook | / minuteearth
Website | minuteearth.com
Apple Podcasts| podcasts.apple...
REFERENCES
**************
Tøien, Ø., Blake, J. & Barnes, B.M. Thermoregulation and energetics in hibernating black bears: metabolic rate and the mystery of multi-day body temperature cycles. J Comp Physiol B 185, 447-461 (2015). doi.org/10.100...
Paladino, F.V., O’Connor, M.P., Spotila, J.R. 1990. Metabolism of Leatherback Turtles, Gigantothermy, and Thermoregulation of Dinosaurs. Nature. Vol.344;858-860. REtrieved from: www.nature.com...
Morrissette, J.M. (2003). Characterization of ryanodine receptor and Ca2+-ATPase isoforms in the thermogenic heater organ of blue marlin (Makaira nigricans). Journal of Experimental Biology, 206(5), 805-812. Retrieved from: pubmed.ncbi.nl...
Polymeropoulos, Elias. (2022) Personal Communication. University of Tasmania. www.utas.edu.a...
Check out our store at dftba.com/minuteearth We just released new PINS and STICKERS and a MAGNET, all featuring science stories that inspire love and curiosity about our wonderful planet!
Buen video, me imagino también los bordes de los animales biológicos mamíferos de hervivoro, omnivoros y carnívoros sean entonces una escala de grises mínimo en habitables biológicas para sobrevivir como este ejemplo, no me extrañaría ver entonces a futuro similitudes entre especies inteligentes biológicas mamíferos afines como startreck con los vulcano y los caitian en ejemplo burdo, ya ni hablar entre mentalistas naturales de cada especie inteligente biológica, como la segunda fundacion de Isaac assimov y dune de frank herbert las bene jeserit sugerencia.
Pacific Coast Trail.. Fact Check or Proof Read Much?? Your a phony
Do an update on the spotted hyena hierarchy. I have emailed you the newer one. Female spotted hyenas don't dominate males because of aggression but because of social support and most males are immigrants. Males can also become in a high-ranking position if they're related to a high-ranking mother. A male can lead his clan. Immigrant males can also lead the clan if the high-ranking males die. Females can also be low ranking if they leave their clan
Hello sir
What is the natural year-round climate?
As a science teacher, it's because there is SO MUCH to learn. In this example, you are teaching young children about the basics of taxonomy, so when they advance to the next level, which is a bit more nuanced and complicated, they will have a greater chance of understanding it. This continues at each step in the learning process. Even undergraduate science is still sometimes completely wrong and often only partially correct.
"Assume a spherical cow in a vacuum"
Sometimes to learn something, it has to be simplified to the point where it's useless for anything but learning, so that later you can correct it little by little until it starts to become useful again :)
Part of why "it's first-grade science" is so infuriating to hear. It doesn't mean it's the most fundamental, core, objectively solid piece of science relating to the subject, it means it's the most parsed-down, simplistic interpretation developed solely to teach children what they need to get to university where they are told to forget what they know apart from how to learn
@@TaliesinMyrddin in first grade we learned that 3 - 5 doesn't exist, now we know it's -2. Which is more correct? First grade or now?
@@xXJ4FARGAMERXx I'm not entirely sure what point you're aiming to make, but yeah, school children are taught a limited view of topics and when they start learning higher level versions of the subjects it becomes murkier and depends on what you're talking about. In physical terms you can't subtract five apples from three apples because there's no such physical thing as a negative apple, but if you're looking at it from an accounting perspective you can say you have -2 apples because you owe someone two
Further to simplifying subjects into discrete boxes, we do the same with 'truth' itself, ie we like to think of 'scientific facts' as right or wrong.
The truth is always a lot more complicated, there is no objective way to categorize animals, because the universe simply doesn't do this. So the 'correctness ' if any taxonomic system is entirely subjective and depends on context.
It is no more useful to say 'animals are not simply just warm or cold blooded', than it is to say 'real pizzas don't have pineapple'
RUclipsrs play on this to form click baity titles, as it allows them to justify saying something a lot of people believe to be true is actually false.
The reality is that it is not objectively true or false, rather, given a particular context it is more or less accurate.
We teach children less accurate descriptions of the world as it makes it easier to grasp certain concepts more quickly, this gives schools the opportunity to teach a broad range of material instead of spending large amounts of time focusing on specialized subject material that may be of no use to a given child in later life.
Loved the greater message about resisting the human tendency to see things in black and white
All my homies hate binary systems
Yea
So would their be a spectrum based system between conditions of life and death. Or is that one of the few actual binary systems?
@@poenpotzu2865 id say spectrum. Viruses are confusing and when somebody dies is arguabel from heart stopping to brain activity mostly ceasing to completely ceasing.
Parallels with human gender are quite obvious. I will show this video to my trans-denying friends, as a gentle introduction of non-binarity of most things natural.
I remember looking at similar discussions when talking about "mesothermic" animals (which really means, they are "in between"/in the median between endothermic ("warm blooded") and exothermic (cold-blooded).
On that category (mesothermic animals) there are some species of fish with high metabolism, some dinossaurs (which makes sense, since they are between reptiles (cold-blooded) and birds (warm blooded).
And it is a lovely way to point out how speacially in biology, there are many cases that don't fit our categorizations perfectly, and also a very large number of different strategies for the same goal.
not a biologist, but i suspect the term 'mesotherm' will end up mostly being a placeholder for outliers rather than an actual formal category -- since the entire category really should be refined anyway. it feels like a stopgap to help folks who're stuck in the old paradigm move on to the more accurate understanding we now have.
mainly because... almost every animal with some deviance from the old hot/cold-blooded paradigm could be considered a mesotherm.
"Whatever you think of as a dichotomy is almost always a spectrum." (John Green)
As with most things in bio it's a spectrum not a binary.
@@alveolate there are a bunch of terms under mesotherm for different specific types, like there's one for what bears do, one for what tuna do and more I can't remember rn
Dinosaurs aren't between reptiles and birds. Birds are theropod dinosaurs that managed to be the only dinosaurs that survived the KT extinction to the present day.
I was suprisingly old before I learned that "carnivores" don't actually exclusively eat meat. Even the frightening term "hypercarnivore" just means an animal that gets more than 70% of its dietary requirements from meat.
Wait what? I thought they only ate grass to fight parasites
wait, they don't? i thought their digestive system could not properly handle (large amounts of) plants? also, where do they get the other 30+% of their dietary requirements?
@@hamzahkhan8952
Plants themselves are a very vague category in terms of describing the nutritional value offered by various parts of plants.
For example, nuts, tubers or berries are not the same as leaves or grasses in terms of how easy it is to gain energy from them and what kind of energy they provide.
One of them has fairly accessible energy in form of starches, sugars or oils, the other has very little energy that can be accessed without specialized symbiotic bacteria like cows and such have. Think eating salad leaves vs. eating bread and peanut butter.
(One may even argue for splitting up plant eating the way we have split up eating meat vs. eating plants into eating parts of plants with very easily accessible energy mostly vs. eating a lot of roughage.)
A lot of facultative carnivores (that is, animals that get a lot of their food from meat but that aren't hyper specialized for it) (Depending on how specific you are they may also be called meso- or hypocarnivores) like foxes and bears would eat a lot of berries, fruit, tubers, seeds as well as flowers and fresh, tender shoots (so, a lot like us, just with a bit more meat).
A lot of these are comparatively high in fairly easily accessible energy or, in the latter case, may provide other benefits (like micronutrients).
There's also the issue of insects sometimes not being considered "meat" or "animals" for reasons that are social rather than scientific, which further muddies the waters.
(Though in terms of comparison, it makes more sense to compare obligate carnivores to more run-of-the-mill ones than "Hypercarnivores" since the latter describes an animal that gets most of their nutrition from the meat of other critters - which is to say, a pattern in dietary habits rather than a limit - while obligate carnivore describes one that is unable to get much nutrition from many/most of the plant sources they would have available to them at all.)
@@hamzahkhan8952dogs loves nuts and grass, for example
@@Manuel73618i didnt know that. thx for the info
Life is all spectrums and complexity. Our tendency to put things into hard categories is a useful tool when first learning about something, but then too many never embrace curiosity to look closer and see how fuzzy those boundaries are.
It's a useful tool at all stages of learning about something. The process of embracing curiosity and looking closer is really just the process of dividing things into finer and finer categories
I think of it like light and color, sure the truth is that light is just electromagnetic radiation oscillating on a continuous spectrum of frequencies and the colors we see are a result of the precise mixing of these frequencies.
But that doesn't make it less useful to slap some broad categories on it for things like red, blue, radio, UV-A, ect. Both for teaching how to describe the world, and for knowing what effects wavelengths in the general category's range will have. (The difference between blue 450nm and 451nm is basically imperceptible, but between Blue and UV-C is very important as one lets you see and the other gives you cancer)
Basically I don't see a reason why just because something is a spectrum we can't also put some categories for parts of the spectrum as those categories are useful even if lacking in some of the nuances.
Yep. Many get close-minded. Gender and sexuality are prominent examples. Many people learned as kids that there are only men and women and that it's only normal for them to love heterosexually - and then they took that as gospel and refused to follow our changing societal awareness.
Can I ask, were you into Guardians of Ga'hoole as a kid?
@@murph_mustela good stuff, but it did get weird as the books kept going. Owl magic is intricate stuff. Wish more movies looked as good as the one it got
I think a part of this is keeping things simple for younger children that might not be ready for the nuances of how things really work. Similar to the topic of an episode of StarTalk about the shape of the Earth: a sphere, but more specifically an oblate spheroid... that's not perfectly smooth because of mountains, valleys, and such. I think it's more a matter of resolution and specificity. But, as adults I agree it is not a good idea to continue thinking things are as simple as black and white
Which is where the problem lies. Our minds are less flexible as adults and the further we push back learning the intricacies of reality the more you get people who are just unable or unwilling to adjust and relearn. I think it's valuable to teach kids that things are complex from the get go, as long as there is no expectation that they have to get everything right. Boiling it down is fine, but the occasinal reminder that everything is not that simple really helps trains kids to be more open minded about new topics later in life.
@@ruolbu I don’t think it’s such a good idea to teach complex topics to kids from the get go.
Like imagine trying to teach algebra and calculus to a 6 years old or asking them how thermodynamics works.
Disagree that splitting animals into cold-blooded and warm-blooded is particularly simpler. Saying that animals vary in how much heat they produce and how much their temperature can change isn't particularly more difficult. Simlarly, saying that Earth is "pretty close to" a sphere would be simple while also being true
@@theangrysuchomimus5163 Math is different from biology though. You need to first learn basics to understand calculus and other things. With this example of warm and cold blooded animals, it would be easier to teach about it being more nuanced from the start. It isn't very hard to understand that Marlins would like to keep their heads warmer than the rest of their bodies.
The earth is the most sphere like object on the planet, that's how smooth it is.
Calling it anything but a sphere is like denying the existence of geometrical objects in general.
If earth is not a sphere, it may as well be flat
That's why we call them poikilotherm and homeotherm nowadays. One group relies mainly on their metabolism to keep their core temparature a certain heat for long periods of time and the others don't. That way, it's quite easy to categorize them into these two groups.
The terms you gave are actually the vertical axis of the chart, so a sea turtle is an exothermic homeotherm, while a hedgehog is an endothermic poikilotherm...
It's literally just different words for the same thing...
@@Archimedes.5000 no, they're not. Look up the definition and be surprised. ;)
@@afhdfh
*Endotherm:* organism that gets most of it's heat from internal processes (implicitly having control over them)
*Homeotherm:* organism that can maintain it's temperature in wide range of outside conditions (implicitly producing most of the energy)
So yeah, same thing.
The reason why "homeotherm" is the preferred term for some is because "endotherm" conflicts with the thermodynamics definition
Finaly someone who understands biology
I think that while it is true that it is true that things rarely fit into 2 absolute categories, this video misses the point in the classification of warm-cold blooded animals, which is their ability to generate enough heat internally to passively regulate their temperature. Some of the examples such as with penguins and hibernating animals is taking one characteristic of specific animals and using it to refute "disprove" a specific different characteristic. I agree more critical thinking is needed, but i disagree with this video.
I wasn't really thinking much but I think I agree. It isn't so much than animal temp fluctuates, it is a question of can the creature produce it's own heat or not? There is some grey area though as evidenced by the creatures that shiver to warm parts but the rest is up to environment. In a lot of cases the dichotomy works though.
it would depend on their environment, wouldn’t it? A human would look cold blooded to a polar bear in the artic.
@@Appletank8 Uh, no. People would still produce their own heat, it just wouldn't be enough to stop them from dying.
@@Appletank8 in a sense, yes, yet at that point we are going into extreme cases and taking creatures out of their regular habitat
Yeah, like warm blooded and cold blooded isn't about actual temperature of the animal (bears an hedgehogs in this video) as much as it is about _how_ they regulate their temperature (warm blooded animals produce it). And using the naked mole rat, the tuna and the bumblebee are more commentary on the fact that all categories animals don't fit into one box which isn't exactly news; I'm pretty sure I've always had to learn about exceptions to rules or trends. I get the sentiment of the video, but they kinda chose a pretty bad way to exemplify and illustrate that sentiment.
I think the categories are still useful because cold-blooded animals haven't evolved an endocrine basis for body heat, in the hypothalamus to be exact. Any cold or warm-blooded animal can boost their body temperature by exerting themselves, so the bee and fish examples don't really check out. Also there's value in simplification, which comes at a very low cost in this case. It's just not efficient to approach this in granular terms unless your job depends on it or it's for hobby's sake.
I don’t know much about the other animals but I know for a fact sea turtles can get cold stunned basically hypothermia in waters below 10C so witch isn’t that cold at all for water. So I don’t understand where he got the information that their body temperature doesn’t change in colder bodies of water.
@@jimmynesbit1803jump in a cold water pool and see if your complex body wont get hypothermia
1:13 "Immediately you can see things get even more complicated." -- Yes, far too complicated. A simple model that works in most cases is better than a complicated model that tells you nothing useful in any case.
Simple categorisation is needed to allow people to communicate quickly and efficiently. Not everything is a damn failure.
I'm sorry, did you just deliberately confuse 'regulated temperature' with 'stable temperature'? Yes, hedgehogs and bears get cold in the winter, but that's because they want to get cold and they can stay at a consistent temperature during hibernation.
Yeah, this video is kind of garbage, tbh.
Great exposition on the range of animal body heat strategies, I'm surprised at the complexity and diversity! But writing off categories altogether throws the baby out with the bathwater; categories can still be *useful* even in the presence of exceptions. It all depends on the level of resolution and your expectations. A better perspective would allow the categories to exist and provide useful generalizations to people that only require a coarse resolution description, while noting that there are exceptions and the categories get fuzzier as you look closer.
sure, but the actual definitions of warm/cold-blooded just have a strong tendency to mislead non-specialists. this basic terminology is still taught at grade school science, which may lead to unintended consequences, like children having a sort-of built-in bias against reptiles as pets because they're "cold-blooded", or parents thinking they need to leave warming pads on overnight for reptile pets to "help" them (they can overheat and lose sleep, which would rapdily deteriorate reptile pet health).
we can start with these terms/categories, but immediately follow up with clearer explanations. the reality is that the whole warm/cold-blooded dichotomy has been taught to so many generations of the general public that most adults probably still have the wrong idea about it. the need to clear up these misconceptions might be greater than the need to keep the bathwater baby.
I agree that simple models/simplifications are often helpful and shouldn’t be avoided completely.
Yes exactly - because a 3 minutes and 35 second long explanation is far far far too complex and totally impossible for an 8th-grader to grasp.
The map is not the territory: if a model isn't simplified, it's not useful as a model.
@@qwertyTRiG True, we should always remember that "all models are false some are useful", or to paraphrase Einstein: Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler.
So some animals are capable of generating their own heat and some rely on the environment. I don't see what's been disproved here
Sorry, the catagories still work. Just because everything doesn't fit 100% perfectly into them doesn't change that fact. If someone has brown hair then suddenly has 1 grey hair would you suddenly say that person no longer has brown hair and make up a new catagory? No you wouldn't.
I feel like this video is reaching pretty hard. Because your starting statement is not how it is described. Warm blooded means they self regulate their temperature (common speak), it doesn't necessarily mean they keep it one temp year round. Cold blooded means they do not self regulate as much as they rely on external heating and a lot of species that do so can't almost freeze with little to no consequences compared to warm blooded animals. Those definitions can still stand with literally every example you showed.
No where do those two definitions limit which animals can and can't be either. Being able to self regulate temperature lower for hibernation does not mean they are still not self regulating their temperatures. I feel like you were phrasing and splitting hair on your own self bias examinations of "warm" and "cold" blooded to make a point on things being on a "spectrum" sort of like how gender theorists do for their faulty logic in their field.
The world works on spectrum, but those spectrum typically still fall in some sort of binary. Warm and cold blooded are pretty valid ways of describing two primary ways of regulating temperatures that still leave the abilities for life to also fit in between with certain adaptations that we can then further define and observe.
I am not great with my words so I hope this made a good enough critic on your video.
I was taught warm blooded were animals that produced enough internal heat to not need external heat normally. Cold blooded animals still produce heat just not quite enough all the time.
That makes sence, and I thought of making a similar comment, but saw they put 2 boxes for diet and had to make a correction.
Well, even warm-blooded animals need external heat. For example, we can't survive in freezing conditions. Yes, we can generate internal heat, but only a certain amount. So I'd say the only question is *how much* external heat an organism needs, and that's a spectrum, not a yes or no.
@@Neme112 Exactly. And every animal produces some internal heat.
The last bit, i kinda disagree on. It is useful to relate an animal to how it's environment affects it. It's pretty crucial if you keep things like fish or reptiles.
And how does that relate to being warm/cold-blooded. As a human I can only survive within a relatively narrow temperature band without external thermoregulation aids. Maybe you just need to know the environment that an animal thrives in when making an artificial habitat for it.
@@dex6316 it relates to cold and warm blooded animals in that a 68 degree house is more than comfortable for you but deathly cold for tropical fish because while you use your metabolism to maintain the proper body temperature in 68 degrees, a tropical fish can not, because it is cold blooded.
I really hate having to explain the very basic idea being expressed here to glasses pushing “well ackshually” nerds.
It’s a generalization and a useful one at that.
@@Mostlyharmless1985 I am not comfortable in 68° house lol. 74° is good though. I am meant to hang out with my tropical fish brethren lol
Nature is inherently extremely messy and just weird, and in order for humans and many animals to make sense of their surroundings we developed these boxes. It's a way to quickly make the distinction between safe and dangerous. One could be aware that every box that exists is only that, a grotesque simplification of reality. That every scientific concept, such as cold-blooded and warm-blooded, is only an attempt to describe reality. It's an attempt to make reality comprehendible. It should be judged by its usefulness as a tool: is it simple enough to use versus the value it adds? Simplicity: only 2 options to remember, and broad animal categories that are common knowledge to attribute bloodedness to. Added value: starting point to study biology, useful for pet-caring, some other spurious situations when such knowledge comes in handy. When in doubt, use occam's razor.
If you think about evolution of our brain, I'd say that actually nature has created the boxes...
For an "info" channel, I'm baffled that you put carnivore and vegetarian as two boxes...🤦
If there were boxes, they'd be carnivore, herbivore and omnivore. Vegetarian is a philosophy and lifestyle choice, not a biology term ffs... 🤦🤦🤦
This channel has been pretty ideologically based the last couple years.
Lockdowns seem to have caused them to become insane
There's absolutely no reason to teach it in a more complex way than it has been, though. This information is utterly useless to anyone that isn't a zoologist. Sure, it makes an interesting RUclips video, but don't pretend this is some serious gap in the knowledge of the general public who, by and large, could not care less about the intricacies of every animal's body heat regulation techniques.
I feel as though you're making videos on my A-level biology topics. 😂 The last few have aligned just neatly.
It's not because there are exceptions to a classification that the classification is necessarily wrong. You misunderstand the purpose of the classification. It's not only because people like to label things or of historical inertia. There can not be understanding without classifying. Exceptions do not detract from the usefulness of the classification, it's thanks to the classification that you get to understand the exceptions. Moreover a general classification is a useful teaching tool. No one would learn anything if you started by laying the whole complex shebang on them. Not the best video.
You mistook "being unable to generate your own heat to keep your body running and depending on the environment" with "oh, this animal changes temperature, that's why it's not warm-blooded." WTF
He did not say that. he said why does this so called warm blooded, who is supposed to have a consistent temperature, changed body temperature during winter(or some other time) or only somepart of them change the temperature
You should watch the video again, he also clearly stated that there are cold blooded animals that cant generate heat and they also depend on the environment and other aspects
Generalizing is good for long term memory. Just because some animals are blurry in their method of thermoregulation doesnt make cold and warmblooded useless terms, just misleading
All models are wrong, some models are useful. This just falls into the category of yet another model that we humans use to make sense of things.
Happy Halloween
Hope you had a spooktacular night!
😂😂
Ah yes, the good old "What you learned 3 years ago was kinda mostly wrong, please allow me to clarify", repeat multiple times through schooling stages / levels / grades.
I mean that's how education works. You start with simpler concepts even if they aren't entirely correct. People figured it would be a better way to educate kids then straight up facing them with college level science. Imagine trying to teach a kid that doesn't know anything about atoms, the hybridization theory.
I love this lesson on the falseness of most dichotomies when it comes to biology. Indeed, too often we put things like sexuality, gender identity, and autism into neat little boxes, which can do more harm than good. Embrace the spectrums!
Erm... Scientifically none of those are in neat little boxes.
And human beings need neat little boxes to even function, otherwise the brain runs on overdrive
It makes you happy due to your pre-conceived political ideas, but it's wrong.
Most animals are either warm or cold blooded, with a few outliers that were presented in this video. It isn't binary, but it isn't a spectrum either. It's a bimodal distribution, which also applies to sexuality and sex.
Hibernating animals like bears and hedgehogs vary their temperature, but they do it in a controlled manner, based on their inner metabolism rather than environment. Most fish, however, have body temperature very close to the water they swim in. Notable exceptions, like tuna, are actually warm blooded and keep their temperature nearly constant. They evolved heat exchangers in gills, which is the same mechanism that allows penguins to keep their feet cold.
I feel that there is a kind of meta-spectrum going on here with regard to various biological traits, both in humans and across the animal kingdom. Some traits really are binary - people either have the gene which gives them detached earlobes, or they don't. Some traits are a continuum, like people's height or intelligence or whatever. And some traits are mostly black-and-white with a little bit of grey, such as biological sex (let's steer clear of gender for now, which is a murkier concept); 99.9% of us can easily be assigned either male or female, but intersex conditions do exist. So the notion of "is this trait a binary or a spectrum?" is actually itself a spectrum, not a binary.
@@szkoclaw , you seem to be doing exactly what the video said we should try not to do, likely due to *your* preconceived political ideas. 😜
There's two sexes, and that's it. Anything else are mutations. Somr things are not scientifically disputed anymore.
Honestly this is just making things needlessly complicated and somewhat misleading.
The categories of warm and cold blooded are fine and serve their function well.
Once again, it is not just one or the other. It's more like a spectrum.
No, like a graph. This is getting more complex when you think about it...
...just like complex numbers.
a color coded 3 dimensional graph, when 3 axis aren't enough.
Imaginary numbers
As someone who had a hedgehog as a pet recently (sadly passed away of wobbly hedgehog syndrome a few months ago). Placing hedgehogs high and to the left sounds about right.
I legitimately thought you made up Wobbly hedgehog syndrome that's crazy that we study animals so thoroughly to the point there's neurodegenerative disease named for them !
Humans wants to perceive everything in Black and White, reminded me of the Organic Chemistry where you get to have more exceptions than rules to describe them!
WRONG WRONG WRONG!.... TYPICAL PROPAGANDA CLICKBAIT GARBAGE....I have absolutely no idea why anyone would watch this nonsense.
I've heard of how most dinosaurs were mesothermic, aka somewhere too far in between to try to label them as either cold or warm blooded, and in my own life I've noticed my cats, while definitely warm blooded, are good at absorbing heat and then just producing whatever amount they still need to keep their temperature consistent, hence why they love warm people things and places, but we humans aren't like that. If our environment gets hotter, we just overheat and have to get rid of the excess. Now this does eventually happen with cats too, but they have a pretty wide range of flexibility. Also just to make this fully clear this is entirely my personal observations of my 2 house cats compared to humans, this is by no means scientific or a large representative sample size or anything of the sort.
Interesting hypothesis. What makes you think they do this? Have you tried using a thermometer to corroborate this?
Actually though, it seems like something a cat would do, lazy as the can be at times
To all the people asking why you weren't taught this in elementary, answer me this: assuming you aren't in a field where the temperature regulation of animals is actually a vital part of your job (so vets, zookeepers, ecologists, and various subcategories of biologists with specializations in this please don't answer), how often do you think of this for your day-to-day life? How often do you need to apply these concepts to your job? My wager is not often to never.
We, as hindsighted commenters, often try to point out examples of "how your elementary teacher failed you" without actually pointing out examples of how to improve education. We fail to realize that teaching isn't about giving children every little bit of information about every subject known to man before they graduate. We fail to acknowledge that the majority of kids won't use a good portion of what they learn in large classroom settings on an everyday basis. We think teachers need to be able to give every kid their full attention, much like private tutors of olden days, when they only see these kids for 6 to eight hours a day and they're seeing thirty to sixty students at a time (and that's on the smaller scale). We get offended that we didn't learn something we're only going to forget in a month or so, like it was truly a big deal that warm-blooded and cold-blooded are actually just simplifications used to help explain a concept in science almost none of us will use on even a cool-fact-for-parties occasion. We do this for all manner of subjects, then complain that students shouldn't need to take calculus in high school because "you don't use it anyways unless that's your career" (ok, I may be a little biased because I like math, but the point still stands).
Instead, we should consider how we can make education better and more efficient. Figure out what skills will be needed and useful for everyone (or at least the majority of everyone) in the future and teach those. Skills like money management, problem solving, writing and language, how to do your own deep dives into topics you're passionate about, etc. After, we introduce basic concepts for a lot of different topics so that students can later engage more deeply with those topics they're interested in, be it through trade school, college, apprenticeships, or going straight to the work force. These concepts may and should be simplified, both to maximize the possible breadth of the pool available and to further encourage genuinely driven deep dives into those subjects.
In the end, if you only read the last paragraph of my rant, think about this: it's okay to understand some things in black and white ways. As long as you realize there is a possibility of that thing being much more complicated than the black and white explanation, you're doing okay. No one has to know everything about everything. I don't need my mechanic to know that there is actually a spectrum of warm-blooded and cold-blooded animals, just how to fix my engine.
A tale as old of time: when people realize the world is not a binary
There's ALWAYS more complexity and no categorization will ever capture all of it, If it did, it wouldn't be a category but a proper noun or name or designation.
This does not invalidate the category, or take away from the practicality of the distinction when applied correctly.
I fundametnally disgaree with the way you misrepresent the category or categorization, and start using fuzzy logic like 'things hibernate and you have a fever so you bodytemp isn't really constant' to be absolute BS unbefitting of a 'science educator'
It's actually "basically" correct! Ultimately reductive but basically very acceptable. What's next a rainbow flag for blood temperature 😂😂😂
I'm fascinated with the amount of kindergarten teachers that came here to comment why is it better to teach children in simpler ways. You really know your audience 😂
Keep the good work! I loved it
Cuz it's kindergarten.....
Kindergartners are kinda dumb
@@gaelurquiz5755 yes, but its children. If you blast all that knowledge to someone then they wouldn't understand a single thing.
The problem is how this knowledge never gets corrected in the internet, not that it exist.
@@reddytoplay9188 maybe teach them that different animals have different strategies to maintain their body temperatures. Some like humans rely primarily on internal heat generation. Others like generally reptiles rely primarily on their environment. Some animals use a combination of the two, and some animals have different temperature zones for different parts of the body. Human core temperature is about 5*C hotter than extremity temperature. Accurate, simple, and quick. No need for this oversimplified binary nonsense. Most things in biology fall along a spectrum, so kids should be taught that there is an in between.
I believe you are missing a point. I don't know about this specific example, but labelling things in science can be usefull or even desirable, not juste a flaw of human brain or historical artefacts. Every representation of reality is inprecise and flawed. Your 2 axes are a good example of that. You got more precision, but it was still not "true". Alors it was waaay more complex. When analysing data, simple classification can be usefull. For exemple, modeling variability is hard. Is it really usefull to do it, or is modeling a flawed "warm/cold" classification enough for what we want to do with it ? The answer to this question changes depending on what we are trying to do, but imprecision and approximations in science is not a flaw. It's is a feature.
I believe saying "this is actually more complex" without explaining why the simple version is usefull brings confusion about what science works. There is a big risk in presenting imprecissions as flaws without explaining why we really use these simplifications. Scientific results using more simplifications can actually be better than scientific results using less simplifications. And if people don't understand that, they might dismiss scientific results base on simplifications used, not realising more precision would give worst results
Hmmm? We use warm/cold blooded as a stepping stone.
This is no different from General Relativity actually disproves or shows that Newtonian Physics is wrong (inaccurate). I asked a professor before why they still teach Newtonian if that is the case and his reply is that you need to know walk first before you run into the deeper concepts and more "accurate" models.
This is the same as the whole 3 states of matter thing. Most people who never go beyond elementary physics will only know about solid, liquid, and gas, but those who have learned a bit more science will probably be able to name plasma as a 4th state. But talk to an actual physicist and they'll start naming a dozen primary states of matter and dozens more subcategories. For the most part, people only need to know about the 3 to go about their daily life and have an passing scientific understanding of how things work. Obviously the "truth" is much more interesting, but it is also much more complex and confusing and not something the average person would want to or need to deal with.
Really a pointless video that fails to prove it's own point, you can't fight oversimplification with even worse oversimplification
Animals hibernating has literally nothing to do with their ability to maintain body heat, and says nothing about the fraction of heat produced internally, or their metabolic rates, or brown adipose tissue production, or their insulation abilities or anything actually used to categorize animals as endothermic or ectothermic.
You'd be better off looking at a wikipedia article
So there's still a spectrum, and it can be mostly categorized that way, with exceptions? Just have to keep in mind animals have lots of interesting strategies for temperature regulation.
Like just being big for example.
how about "self-regulated" and "adaptive" ?
most of taxonomy is arbitrary lines that only exist to make the life of biologist not a living hell. it makes the classic anti-evolution belief that animals are divided into "kinds" very comical considering that it were humans that defined the "kinds".
I grew up with "wechselwarm" (alternating warm in German) instead of "cold blooded".
A video how to be wrong , bees can heat up but that is different, hot blooded mean that your body metabolism generate heat even standing still , then come with hibernation to state that mammals aren´t hot blooded , hibernation in mammals is lowering is metabolism to survive the winter , and fever really , that a strategy to fight diseases like swelling. And turtles still cold blooded because theirs metabolism can't generate heat that why you dont have them on colder waters and being big just mean they got a bigger heat inertia mean that heat slow but also lose it slower. And pinguins keep is feet cold so they don't waste energy heating them .
This video is a contradiction of itself.
Would it be cost-effective to throw out my old oven and buy a bunch of bees to cook my dinners?
If you can train them 🤔
Good Video, Minute Earth... 💙💙💙 I always look forward to your, Earth AND Space, Science Videos On, RUclips!!!
I thought we already moved trom warm-cold blood classification to endothermic vs non endothermic classification which has discrete evolutionary history by looking at mitochondrial uncoupling protein (UCP) and brown adipose tissue huh
Evolutionary what? Im biologist and i can assume to you its not such thing as cold-warm blood in any phylogeny ever
@@PixJunior explain birds
@@nedisawegoyogya birds evolved from sauropsids, a sister clade to synapsids, wich evolved perpendicularly to mammals, whom are also considered "warm blooded". The point is that there is no such thing as defining warm blood as a evolutionary parameter, its the same as considering coelomates to define if something is "newer" than something. It was cool past times but today evolution is ruled by genetics, and genetics says otherwise about parameters like endothermy.
@@PixJunior explain ucp gene
Nice video, but the argument with cold penguins feet is the stupidest thing i heard today
the other axis i've wondered about is where different animals feel "comfortable/uncomfortable" i assumed that cold blooded didn't feel it much but now i'm thinking maybe i can't just assume a lack of agitate response is an indicator of discomfort. i suppose if i had a pet i could try exposing it to two temperature zones and see which produces marked preferences even in the presence of distractors like food. since they can't complain i'd want to know they're probably comfortable in a given setting.
What is the Pacific Coast Trail? I'm Googleing and can't find anything. Did you mean the PCT the Pacific Crest Trail?
He meant to say "Pacific Crest Trail" - one of the photos is of Mount Whitney in the High Sierra (which the Pacific Crest Trail passes through).
Why would you NOT want to hibernate? I would absolutely love to hibernate from mid-May to mid-September! I hate summer. I hate not being able to go outside because it’s 105° every afternoon. I’d rather just sleep through it - and wake up skinny in the fall!
Isn't it called the Pacific Crest Trail?
Everything is on a spectrum, woke liberals took over science.
Just kidding.
... but also, some people do think like this, which is sad.
anyways, I learned something new today and I'm very happy about that.
Wow! I really like the categorization by multi-dimension analog chart! Really good explanation for easy understanding!
Pretty sure I saw this video with at least 3 different thumbnails throughout the past few hours. Hope it's just the standard experimenting and not a sign of a bad upload. Anyways, thought I'd give it some love 'cause you guys deserve it for all the amazing work you do and interesting animal (and more) facts you've taught me!
It's the latest clickbait meta. Was popularized by Veritasium.
Are there any things we learned in elementary school that isn’t technically “wrong?”
No such thing as fish either but you don’t see anybody going around making internet content about it. Sheesh.
That would be ridiculous: ruclips.net/video/yyeDgBm1Du8/видео.html
If you're going to boil it down to the simplest level, maybe to explain to a child. It's still hot vs cold. So there is nuance, higher complexities... Of course! It's not wrong. And it's not "historical inertia". This is dumb. Everybody always has to find something to talk about. Instead of being educational you are naive and condescending.
You should stick to talking about average body temperatures, not animals getting a bit chilly on a Tuesday afternoon and pretending that means something different. You also don't seem to know that various types of mammals have different average body temperatures. Monotremes have an average body temperature of 88F, marsupials 95F, and placentals 99F. Since blood temperature will likely be just about the same as body temperature, your video title is wrong. There are warm and cold blooded animals.
You guys really understand your audience. That first frame is a nostalgia trip.
So according to wikipedia
"Warm blooded is an informal term which refers to an animal species which can maintain a body temperature higher than their environment"
Far as I can tell your chart measures no such thing. For example. A bear lowering its temperature in winter doesn't mean its temperature is lower than its environment.
Further more, the wiki goes on to say that:
"species that can maintain that heat level via their metabolism are called 'homeothermic"
There are other categories of warm and cold blooded, not just black and white, not just 2 labels.
So to echo the message of this video, black and white labels are dangerously naive, but assuming they exist is also dangerous.
Before we jump to conclusions, we must be prepared to prove ourselves wrong first.
Well, I would not call it exactly "wrong", but, say, "overly simplified". As almost always, reality is far more complex that can fit into a fifth-grader textbook.
'black and white...' is nothing but crooked crafty simpleton judgemental 'formatory apparatus' (mechanical part of centers) which works on 'yes and 'no'. i learnt this term from gurdjieff-sufi system which is the only true mathematical science worth knowing. the books as far as i know of this system are 'in search of being', 'in search of miraculousness', 'The Fourth Way', 'all and everything trilogy', etc. this science is explained on a superficial level which can be easily misinterpreted especially by superficial people who lie in the mechanical parts and anyways almost all people on earth lie in the mechanical or emotional parts as far as i decoded. there are many questions i have based on this science & i am dying to learn deeply since years but whom to discuss with? btw i got few very deep spiritual experiences also with proof. if you read the entire comment then atleast let me know
I disagree with what appears to me to be the point this video is trying to "prove", that it is wrong to use labels/buckets in categorizing animals (and, I'm sure, by extension, other things in science). That these labels do not tell the whole story does not belie the fact that they tell *much* (if not most) of the story. And that's called a "starting point". Hopefully a 4th grade science teacher can still use these categories, adding the caveat that these things are "generally true", but acknowledge there is more to learn about the topic later. After all, when a second grade teacher is confronted by a kid who has written his subtraction expression backwards ("six minus eight"), it is not incumbent upon her to immediately elaborate on negative numbers. She "corrects" him and has him write "eight minus six". If he happens to be insistent and wants to know what would happen, sure, she can give him a bit of insight individually. But it will not help the class if she drops everything and teaches negative numbers to everyone right away that day. Same thing for endothermic and exothermic animals.
Remember, Wikipedia was not built in a day.
So... the title is clickbait? This feels like another example of trying to dismiss terminology just because there are exceptions and the full picture is more complicated, even though those terms can still be useful. It still sounds like there are animals that generate enough heat to regulate their temperature (warm blooded) and animals that rely on their surroundings (cold blooded). the fact that it is not an absolute does not mean "there's no such thing." Humans like to label things for a reason. It helps us understand the world in an occasionally imperfect way, when understanding it perfectly would require too much overhead. Let's not throw away these words. I'm not trying to dismiss the effort and educational value of this video. It is helpful to learn that these aren't some discrete categories we can expect reality to conform to. For the average person, however, I think it's usually good enough. We're not biologists.
Dude the penguin example is just ridiculous, even people in the winter have body temp of 37 °C and feet/hands temperature of 25 °C, what should matter is average body temperature
The split categories are a matter of simplistic priority. What is a thing "mostly" over what is a thing "actually". "Mostly" is good enough to understand what a thing is for the majority of its existence so it is a "good enough". "Actually" takes up the brain with information that won't lead to "survival" or "reproduction" so most if it is thrown out or deemed "unimportant". Simple as.
2 types of animals
Male and Female
The categories warm and cold-blooded-ness really is simple, it's the means at which the animal keeps the majority of its vital organs warm. Warm-blooded means solely regulated by metabolism. Cold-blooded means a slow resting metabolism and precise temperature regulation at biological standards is not vital. All these are considering the animal is in its normal, active state of living.
Generating heat from muscle (which is what all muscle does when used), having cold extremities, and the extremely slight variation of body temperature we can safely live with, do not conflict with the above two categories. All you're doing is trying to confuse the concept by inserting invalid variables at the level of these definitions instead of recognizing them as separate phenomena.
To recap, the definitions are _solely_ defined by resting metabolism and requirement for precise internal temperature while in an active state, and the effects typically exist in distinct pairs.
Man, what a satisfying video for someone like me who always wondered why this distinction felt so arbitrary to me.
I think in fixating on the nuance of the real system you ignore the nuance of these categories.
They're descriptive categories, basically any such category could be "technically"ed away like this, because they don't really exist to be absolute definitions.
But even with that said I feel its worth pointing out that the video is stretching the already pretty vague definitions and even just stretching the truth sometimes, such as with the supposed central focus of the video, bears. Bears may allow their body temp to drop considerably during hibernation, but unlike the hibernation of some reptiles or insects it's still maintaining its temperature above the ambient temperature through metabolic processes, even during this period it still fits very unambiguously in the definition we have for warm blooded.
Your message is wrong about why we label things. You state we divide things because of historical inertia. But the reality is that all teaching starts off with simplifications, and continues with simplifications in order to lead people to the complexities. For example species do not exist. It is a term of simplification you could say due to historical inertia. But how to teach evolution without the concept of species? Chuck it out because it is a simplification but what replaces it? Second you state humans like to put things in black and white terms, but this is a historical inertia comment also. Study much psychology? You are lumping all humans with the broad brush that you say is bad about animal temperature regulation. I think those that study psychology would have a problem with your simplification of human behavior, yet you are using simplification in black and white terms to get your message out without any realization of your hypocrisy. It’s the moral lectures on societal behavior that i find annoying.
I had no idea how complex this topic is! I was aware that some animals are called mesothermic, neither endothermic (warm-blooded) or exothermic (cold-blood), but this just breaks the mold entirely!
We made it black-and-white so it'll be easier to teach the younger generation abt the concept, simplification so they could grasp the idea first before in time they would stumble upon this video and understands the true fact with less effort
So it's not "lying" or "we like to give tag", it's by design for educational purpose
To animals that have mixed warm blooded and cold blooded traits will be called poly blooded animals.
Emperor penguins(and their cousins) have evolved cold blooded feet, to avoid using more energy to warm up their legs, and save that valuable energy for making their own eggs and for surviving the harsh winter environment of Antarctica, and thus avoid trying to melt the ice underneath them(if the feet are heat productive and they can melt the ice).
There are beings who try to separate everything into two groups, and then there are those who don't.
So there are still 2 groups 😉
Got’em
elementary school STEAM teacher here: i'd love to see a video about why we educate the way that we do, starting with simple models that aren't entirely accurate and increasing complexity along with the developing brains of young humans. for instance, it's important as an educator to note that a preschooler has a wildly different ability to comprehend simple categorization than a 1st grader, due to neural development. a 2-dimensional graph like you show would be lost on most below middle school. teaching with simple models isn't lazy education, it's providing the framework for greater complexity later on. and it would certainly be nice to not have to look at the comments and see people suggesting that we teach kids as though they were "dumb" rather than in a developmentally-appropriate manner.
I think it is a mix of both tbh. Some teaching methods/teachers are mediocre, but some subjects need simplification to some extent. You don't start with multiplication, you start with recognizing numbers.
I will say though, there is a reason my niece and I were well above the other kids. She is in elementary, but frequently gets commendation for being so advanced. It starts at home, with parents/siblings showing the kid how to do stuff and showing them learning is fun, starting very early like 2 or 3. I always showed my niece cool things that could be done with numbers and weird facts. I even told her about nuance at times. Sure she doesn't quite understand atoms, but she is aware of them and how insanely tiny they are.
I tell her important parts and also some other stuff she won't quite understand. She likes to learn because we made it fun. I virtually never studied even through my college degree, and my niece will probably actually study. She had a better upbringing than I, but nonetheless my dad did a similar thing with me when I was tiny and it showed through my school performance. School is a joke in America, but at the same time when parents expect schools to do all the work then maybe school isn't so bad.
_All models are wrong but some are useful._
-- George E.P. Box
I remember the Idhun saga. Cold blooded serpents with ice power. Solid grasp of biology right there.
Why are you overcomplicating this?
Animals that can use metabolic processes to maintain a stable body temperature are warm blooded, those that can't, are not.
Bears are warm blooded because they can do this, they don't have to do it all the time. Penguins are warm blooded because they can do this, the fact they don't apply it to all of their body, doesn't matter.
Bees and tuna can't do this, they're not warm blooded. Marlin can heat their brains for short periods, but not their whole bodies, therefore not warm blooded.
Ummmm, I’d say in general the distinction is still a good description. Penguins having cold feet doesn’t really throw off the paradigm.
Yeah, okay. This one? I don't care about it. Other subjects? Yeah, sure. But I have a bone to pick with this one in particular.
The categories are a generalization.
It's not wrong, but it wouldn't hold true for all cases.
There are bound to be special states or in-betweens.
It is merely a communication tool for us to for us to compare and contrast both animals we have seen and have not seen.
The definition of cold is based on human perception, so it is cold blood because it is a lower temperature than our own to the touch, warm is just the same, on touch it is warm so it is warm blood, people put things in boxes not because of some black and white definition, but because it makes things simpler, specially for immature minds complicated stuff can be confusing, so no only this video is wrong about the reasons but also pass the wrong message trying to deconstruct a perfect natural concept that is easier to assimilate, the video could have stopped at 2:06.
I disagree a little bit, even if the whole picture is more complex than warm and cold blooded, it is still a good starting point for children who tend to learn this at a young age. Instead of disregarding this knowledge we should expand upon our initial assumptions.
Keep up your good work 👍
The information in this video doesn’t support the title. Why not make the title match the claim? There are indeed animals that match the common descriptions of warm and cold blooded and you provide examples
I guess "it's more complicated" wasn't catchy enough for a title?
Be honest, you hacks.
i mean it makes sense to label things in easy terms.
in basically every field you will learn that some simplifications are wrong if you look closely. but simplifcations are just that. they are here to make things easier to understand for people that have no real need to know every little detail.
You clearly never had a cat or dog sleep on you befor if you had you wut know the make more heat then the sun
There is, though.
You as a single person don't get to make these distinctions for everyone in the world when there are commonly excepted ways to categorize these things
This is 10th grade biology class all over again.
I’m not going to let this guy brainwash me especially when it comes to male and female.
The spectrum makes sense but are the examples listed more so outliers and most do fall heavly on 1 side of specrtum?