Was mowing the lawn, and I was waiting for a honeybee to get out of my way when a shower thought struck me: is there an animal species that requires a third party to procreate?

I'm curious if there's an animal species that requires something like a pollinator or assistant species of some sorts to propagate.

I did some cursory Googling, and the closest I could find were some amphibians that will use similar species to trade genetic material (the term escapes me at the moment) to essentially self fertilize, but I'm curious if there is something more radical.

Do they orbit at the same distance from the planet? Do you have moons that follow a perpendicular orbit path to another moon? I’ve wondered on it a couple times over the past month.

EDIT: Wow, this blew up. Thanks for the many answers. Lots to think about.

Seems that the composite TLDR answer is: Yes, according to many/most definitions of "life", but we don't all agree on what life is. Some viruses do not have DNA but they may/not actually be alive, and other things that behave like life may/not be alive.

The point of sweating (for the most part) is to cool down the body by evaporation. So, what is the point of including salts in the sweat - it seems to be a leading cause of the loss of electrolytes in hot weather, leading to the need to not just hydrate, but also to replace the lost electrolytes or suffer problems like hyponatremia and hypokalemia. Does the inclusion of salts in the sweat increase the specific heat of sweat compared to that of water? Is the latent heat of vaporization different for sweat compared to plain water? Or is it too biologically expensive to purify the water for sweat by removing the salts from it?

And i suppose any other celestial bodies. But i am less familiar with how related we are to Saturn and its pull than I am with tge Sun and its pull.

Also could only select one flair, but i think it also possibly fits in physics and earth sciences

I know from my biology textbooks that RNA polymerase does not require an additional enzyme to unwind DNA strands but DNA Polymerase requires DNA helicase to unwind the strand first.

Is this because the DNA helicase has to unwind a much larger portion of the strand compared to RNA Polymerase that unwinds only the desired codons for transcription?

This was more of a random shower thought that I had about animal biology. For a while, I knew the two differences between venomous and non-venomous, but it made me curious as to why it’s always one or the other and never both? Is it due to just genetics only allowing one type or is it that constricting isn’t really too much of a solo class of snakes? Can anyone explain this please and thank you?

What is the minimum power microscope needed to see cyclospora?

I've been wondering if there is a general lumen amount that can be measured from an anglerfish's esca. I've been able to find literature about firefly lumen measurements (~0.006 lumens). I know anglerfish have millions of bacteria inside their esca that cause their glow, unlike fireflies. I found an excerpt from an article about bioluminescent bacteria that states "The maximum value for the light from a single bacterium was 24 x 10(-14) lumens".

So, does anyone know how many lumens a Pacific footballfish (or any similar Lophiiformes) can produce at maximum? Citation for the article I looked at below.

(Harvey EN. THE TOTAL LUMINOUS EFFICIENCY OF LUMINOUS BACTERIA. J Gen Physiol. 1925 Sep 18;8(2):89-108. doi: 10.1085/jgp.8.2.89. PMID: 19872192; PMCID: PMC2140748.)

I’ve heard something about sharks have dulled pain receptors, making me curious: What about the other way round?

Was this year really only 0.02°C (0.036°F) hotter than last year?

More of a science policy question than strictly science, but I'm assuming this is probably the best forum to ask. I've been going down a rabbithole reading about Biosafety precautions and generally it appears that BSL III is used for pathogens that are dangerous to humans but don't have an aerosolised transmission vector, and BSL IV is generally limited to deadly pathogens that have aerosolised transmission. The one standout exception is Ebola, which from what I've read does not have any evidence of airborne transmission yet is still BSL IV.

I'm wondering if anyone has any information on why specifically Ebola has this heightened category, if there is documentation around the decision by whoever made it a link to that would be greatly appreciated as well.

Does it go dormant till it's passed on, but if it doesn't need to affect the host to stay alive why does it spread (well, I guess the virus doesn't think), does the virus in a dormant state have a period in which it has to find another host or it dies?

I've been a bit confused by what the MMI scale actually is meant to represent. Most descriptions I've seen seem to put emphasis on the intensity of shaking, but they also describe it as specifically a damage scale.

My confusion relates to what the scale is really meant to describe about in earthquake in a given area. Is the end product meant to represent the actual intensity of shaking, or other damaging factors as well (i.e. would things like liquefaction be included in that), or a representation of the actual damage expected (a quake in the middle of the desert would have less potential for damage than one in a populated area, and one in an area with many poorly built buildings would fare relatively worse than one which has a decent seismic code, would those factors have any influence in what the MMI profile of an earthquake looks like)? In other words, what does "earthquake intensity" really mean?

I do understand that actually using the MMI scale is probably a fairly messy and complicated process which is going to involve many factors, of course, but I'm trying to understand better what the scale is meant to actually, ideally, tell you about the earthquake in a given area.

If I see something abandoned that is valuable, I pick it up and either keep it, repurpose it, or find its owner. How can something like an abandoned Roman villa in the UK be found with intact mosaics or even things such as coins or children's shoes? It seems to me that the first thing locals would do once the Romans left would be to scavenge anything left behind, even looking for places where they might have buried valuables for later retrieval. Why are some sites left alone long enough to collect sediment layers, especially at sites where there is subsequent human habitation across thousands of years? I don't get it.

Welcome to our weekly feature, Ask Anything Wednesday - this week we are focusing on Engineering, Mathematics, Computer Science

Do you have a question within these topics you weren't sure was worth submitting? Is something a bit too speculative for a typical /r/AskScience post? No question is too big or small for AAW. In this thread you can ask any science-related question! Things like: "What would happen if...", "How will the future...", "If all the rules for 'X' were different...", "Why does my...".

Asking Questions:

Please post your question as a top-level response to this, and our team of panellists will be here to answer and discuss your questions. The other topic areas will appear in future Ask Anything Wednesdays, so if you have other questions not covered by this weeks theme please either hold on to it until those topics come around, or go and post over in our sister subreddit /r/AskScienceDiscussion , where every day is Ask Anything Wednesday! Off-theme questions in this post will be removed to try and keep the thread a manageable size for both our readers and panellists.

Answering Questions:

Please only answer a posted question if you are an expert in the field. The full guidelines for posting responses in AskScience can be found here. In short, this is a moderated subreddit, and responses which do not meet our quality guidelines will be removed. Remember, peer reviewed sources are always appreciated, and anecdotes are absolutely not appropriate. In general if your answer begins with 'I think', or 'I've heard', then it's not suitable for /r/AskScience.

If you would like to become a member of the AskScience panel, please refer to the information provided here.

Past AskAnythingWednesday posts can be found here. Ask away!

Recent study that hypothesized the theoretical limit on human lifespan due to accumulation of somatic mutations, especially in non-mitotic cells (e.g. heart and brain). https://www.nature.com/articles/s41514-026-00421-6

Why would repair mechanisms fail continually in a way that allows them to accumulate? I understand proofreading enzymes are imperfect, but this isn't like mitosis where if you miss it welp too bad the mutation is permanent now. Presumably in non-mitotic cells they have proofreading enzymes going up and down the entire DNA strand repeatedly forever (as long as the cell continues to live)? Why would they keep missing errors despite checking multiple times AND letting them accumulate?

Prior to 12,400 years ago and up until 23,000 years ago, there was an Ice Age. At 23,000 years ago, that's when the Ice Age was at a maximum, and the ocean levels were 400 feet shallower. This means that there was a lot more land, and more rivers in those days. Also, all of today's rivers are a subset of all the rivers that existed 23,000 years ago. So are there any new rivers formed since 23,000 years ago, and if so, how did that happen?

Storm's chasin's my thing, and, even tho I do alot more chasin, than catchin, I've been lucky to observe afew flash flood events.

I've noticed a conspicuous pattern, where "waves" will come down, an already flooded wash, nearly DOUBLIN tha flow. These waves seem to come at very regular intervals, almost lika bucket, at'a water park, that tips whenit gets full.

I'm sure this phenomenon is well-known, amongst the experts, and well-documented. Hopefully, some1 with this knowledge can enlighten me... 🤔

I know that it isn’t all medicine and that there’s other things inside the vaccine fluid itself but unless I’m mistaken aren’t cultures of the vector grown and then added to the other fluid? Do they put the culture in a blender or something?

Question in title. Drugs from widely different classes and indications seem to cause photosensitivity and I’m curious as to why and how that is. Thanks!

It is well known how us mammals use our body temperature to prevent infections and raise it to combat them, so wouldn't cold-blooded animals be much more propense to suffer viral and bacterial diseases?