digg

Facebook Connect Join Digg About
See the original image at guardian.co.uk

Which is the world's most invaluable species?

guardian.co.uk — Plankton, bats, primates, fungi and bees - which species would have the greatest impact on our planet if it were lost? Five experts set out their case public debate.

Who dugg this? Made popular Nov 16, 2008

Digg DudeWhat is Digg?

Digg is a place for people to discover and share content from anywhere on the web. Digg surfaces the best stuff as submitted and voted on by the community. Take the Tour to learn more.

80 Comments

show profanity settings
expand all
  • blaineg, on 11/14/2008, -1/+34Humans would be the species to have the greatest impact on our planet if they were gone.
  • inactive, on 11/14/2008, -0/+21None of these categories is a single species. Bad scientists.
  • davidtowers, on 11/14/2008, -0/+18How can there be one most invaluable? They are all needed!

    Still, was interesting to learn about Plankton and Fungi!
  • WhatPeriod, on 11/16/2008, -1/+17Buried for not knowing what a species is.
  • Namaha, on 11/16/2008, -0/+13You'd think scientists would be better at setting up this debate. The first question is "which is the world's most invaluable species?" But invaluable to what? Our survival? The planet's well-being? Next in the article description it asks which species would have the greatest impact on our planet if lost, but the answer is very clearly humans.

    Also, there's more than one species of bee, fungi, etc. However they appear to be asking what would happen if all species of bee, fungi, etc. died off.
  • Tynan, on 11/16/2008, -3/+13This is stupid. Species turn over constantly, life is far older than any of these "species".

    Loss of any particular species doesn't have any long term effect on the planet.

    In fact, the only things that could have a long term effect on Earth life the planet are us (chance at spreading Earth life to other planets) and the end of the Sun (end of life on Earth). We've already been through asteroid impacts big enough to make craters 2000km across.
  • Enasni1212, on 11/16/2008, -0/+10If by "all are equally valuable," you actually mean, "not really equal at all," then yes.
  • Jaime2000, on 11/16/2008, -0/+9What the hell? Primates and bats are orders. "Plankton" includes species that are not even in the same domain! I understand if they have to stretch the definition of "species" a bit, but come on, at least the fungi guy had the decency to narrow down his choice down to one. Some experts these guys are...
  • inactive, on 11/16/2008, -1/+10Domain
    Kingdom
    Phylum
    Class
    Order
    Genus
    Species

    None of the things mentioned are a species.
  • LoveAndSeagulls, on 11/16/2008, -0/+8interesting read but i thought the whole primates thing was a bit bogus... aren't there many other animals that help to disperse seeds through forests? i dunno, i'm not really an expert on this or anything, i just didn't really feel like the argument wasn't very strong with that one
  • FLarsen, on 11/16/2008, -0/+6I was quite interested in reading this, then I saw "fungi".

    Yeah, if a whole kingdom disappears, I'm pretty sure it would have an impact...
  • hammburglar, on 11/16/2008, -1/+7how about just one googol?
  • mreade, on 11/14/2008, -0/+6Every living thing has it's place in the food chain, and the way the natural world operates, every loss has an impact in some way.

    I'm waiting to see how many "fun guy" jokes pop up...
  • Azerael, on 11/16/2008, -9/+15For worse. The planet would be reduced to being just another pointless rock with thousands of species incapable of doing more than following their biological imperatives.
  • fuzzy889, on 11/16/2008, -1/+7Thousands? Try billions
  • doingallright, on 11/16/2008, -1/+7Billions? Try trillions
  • ThePastafarian, on 11/16/2008, -0/+5except for the part where they aren't...
  • datastorageguy, on 11/16/2008, -0/+5***** Sapiens.
  • AlaskaLoneWolf, on 11/14/2008, -1/+6Dugg for the mushrooms.
  • cfrog7, on 11/16/2008, -1/+4a great discussion topic but not very indepth
    you should listen to Paul Stamets talk about how mushrooms will save the world:
    http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/paul_stamets_on ...
    a very amazing TED talk
  • GeeksSpeakFont, on 11/14/2008, -0/+3this is fascinating! bats are definitely my favorite, though i feel all are necessary.
  • derbestemann, on 11/16/2008, -0/+3I like turtles
  • flbotavara, on 11/16/2008, -1/+4I would like to know the impact if there will be no more mosquitoes and roaches.
  • wolfshawk, on 11/16/2008, -0/+3Cows, cause I like steak...
  • 15charmaxwtf, on 11/16/2008, -0/+2Perhaps they are just pseudo-scientists.
  • Asianwaste, on 11/16/2008, -0/+2Nature? Intent? Nature is sentient?
  • DeathJux, on 11/16/2008, -2/+4The boobies.
  • riptor666, on 11/16/2008, -0/+2Cows, how could anyone live without steaks, milk and leather?
  • mmittimm, on 11/16/2008, -2/+4BEEEEEEES!!!
  • linuxzap, on 11/16/2008, -0/+2Quadrillions? Try zillions
  • DrunkenPirate34, on 11/16/2008, -0/+2Atalaya I think he meant that you can't choose which animal you want to survive above them all, we need every one of them.
  • pw378, on 11/16/2008, -1/+3Speaking for yourself only, of course...
  • thallium205, on 11/16/2008, -1/+3Trillions? Try quadrillions
  • animaetaeris, on 11/16/2008, -0/+2you missed Family
  • RonaldRaygun, on 11/16/2008, -0/+2I, too have dug for the mushrooms!
    They make me feel like the world's most invaluable species.
  • Hurricane, on 11/17/2008, -0/+1man may be the most influential, but viewed from a biological point of view we are more like a disease.
  • Hurricane, on 11/17/2008, -0/+1Bees have been plants reproductive dispersers for millions of years, without them plants and then animals would die, but fingus is a close second.
  • Hurricane, on 11/17/2008, -0/+1indeed
  • inactive, on 11/16/2008, -2/+3Karl Pilkington?
  • soondot, on 11/17/2008, -0/+1Whichever tastes the best.
  • exscape, on 11/16/2008, -0/+1Hmm? Domains are larger than Kingdoms. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domain_(biology)
  • Hurricane, on 11/17/2008, -0/+1Mosquitoes feed bats and many other animals, roaches are food and a big part of the decay/recycle system
  • earlvanze, on 11/16/2008, -0/+1WILL BLOCK OUT THE SUN!

    (300 PG Version)
  • doublefelix, on 11/16/2008, -0/+1Saved me some typin'. I came to make the same comment.
  • inactive, on 11/16/2008, -2/+3Man is the world's most valuable species. All others are valuable in relation to man.
  • aenima987, on 11/16/2008, -1/+2The bacteria which synthesize oxygen?
  • Tsumuji, on 11/16/2008, -0/+1This really got me thinking about bats, I didn't know they did all of that stuff.

    I thought they just slept all day in caves, did their hunting at night, patroled Gotham City, etc.
  • inactive, on 11/16/2008, -0/+1Dirty Kinky People Can Often Find Good Sex.
  • LordByr0n, on 11/16/2008, -0/+1The circle of life.
  • theword12, on 11/16/2008, -0/+1I do not think that bats hold as much importance as fungi or plankton.

    The person arguing bats had to resort to negative campaigning to try to win. Yes, I also think we should do away with all because because they sting us. Die bees! Die!
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 82 of 82 discussions

  • Add a Comment

    Login or register to comment!
    Or, sign-in super fast with your Facebook account ...

© Digg Inc. 2009 — Content created and posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain | Terms of Use Updated | Privacy Policy
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.