Would it be adventageous for a mammal to be poisonous?

Question

This is a different aspect to my previous question.

Would it help it to hunt?

Would it protect it from being hunted?

And if it is advantageous, why aren't there more of them?

Answer 1

It can be advantageous, but producing it is also biologically costly, so it's a tossup. Male Platypuses have venomous (NOT poisonous) spurs, which are used for defense against other males, as well as predators. Some shrews have a neurotoxic venom, and can bite insects and paralyze them, so they have a little cache of fresh insects for when food is scarce (they have incredibly fast metabolisms, so not finding food for a few hours could prove fatal). It's also recently been discovered that the slow loris (primate) may have a venom gland under their arm, and they take up the venom into their mouth if threatened. Mothers will also comb it into a baby's fur if leaving it unattended...

Point being, yes, it can be beneficial, for all the reasons you mentioned, but they need to strike a balance in how energy is utilized. If it does not provide the organism with enough of an advantage, it's not worth the trouble/resources it takes to produce.

Answer 2

The only mammal I can think of off the top of my head that is poisonous is a duck-billed platypus. These strange creatures have spurs on the hind legs that are actually hollow - and they can inject poison into predators. I think for the duck-billed platypus, this mechanism is only used in defensive situations. I don't know why it is more advantageous for this mammal to have poison and not others - but of course, the duck-billed platypus is a strange creature to start with! Good question!

Answer 3

Every mammal has it's different advantages and disadvantages. It would help it to hunt and protect itself. But also a mammal who has the flexibillity to change its color it would have the exact same percentage of advantages and disadvantages. So whether or not a mammal could be poisonous it doesn't make difference but the point is whether or not the mammal uses its advantages correctly or not.

Answer 4

You can take a look at the duck-billed platypus which is a mammal and has poisonous spurs on it's hind legs. They are used for defensive purposes and people who've been hit with them say they work quite well.

Answer 5

Well, frankly speaking, I must say that I know a few human mammals whose mouths and tongues are as venomous as any snake I've come accross. But in the end their venom will always bite themselves in the butt and they die in agony by thier own poison. Just like a scorpion.

Answer 6

nature isn't perfect. Many different types of adaptations can confer a benefit in terms of survival and reproduction (genetic fitness). Mammals just have different features. It would help us all if we had perfect vision and venomous fangs, but remember that the blind designer is natural selection. Adaptations are replicated when they contribute to genetic fitness. But this is a step-by-step very random, sightless process.

Answer 7

It might have been advantageous for mammals to have the same adaptations as rattlesnakes. Then again it might have been advantageous for rattlesnakes to be warm-blooded and have legs. Each organism is well adapted for its own particular needs. I can't think of any mammalian predator that is going hungry because it doesn't have venomous fangs.

Answer 8

In normal usage, a poisonous organism is one that is harmful to consume, but a venomous organism uses poison to defend itself while still alive. A single organism can be both venomous and poisonous.

So which do you mean???

Answer 9

I suppose if more mammals were poisonous, more goblins would be taught lessons. Nasty creatures. Fairies on the other hand are always nice.

Answer 10

If an animal tasted poisonous and killed the predator, its fellow predators might learn to avoid eating that animal.