Talk:Antlion

[[Category: good articles|Antlion]]

How named?

How did they get their name? They don't look like lions... --Abdull 21:56, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

They eat ants ~Veledan • Talk ^{+ new} 01:14, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

I'm sure they're named after the mythological ant-lion, which has a lion's head. I'm trying to find the article about said creature... let's see..

That story's actually so complicated that I did not put it in here yet. The German de:Ameisenlöwe has a detailed explanation on this... there is a connection, but it's not straightforward. Itseems that the chimerical "ant-lion" was invented after Ancient Greek reports of "gold-digger ants" in "India" (which meant southern Asia in general then), which in turn seem to be based on the living antlion. Dysmorodrepanis (talk) 11:31, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

-> I just came across this and I have as a child always known these to be called "Devil-Devil". It may be an Australian slang for the name, just thought I'd add it in here maybe it could be implemented into the text somehow. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.219.152.102 (talk) 18:38, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

I live in Australia and I've never heard them called either "ant-devil" as per text, or "devil-devil" (see above). Ant lion and doodlebug are the only names I've ever heard used. Ptilinopus (talk) 13:55, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Star Wars

I can't help but wonder if the Ant Lion was the inspiration for the Sarlaac pits in Star Wars? Stovetopcookies 06:00, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

They definitely are, but I can't find a source that says that has of now KjtheDj 23:22, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

• Here, it says on wikipedia, if you look up Sarlaac. "Astrophysicist and science-fiction author Jeanne Cavelos compares the Sarlacc to the antlion" KjtheDj 23:33, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

The way it feeds would be like the Sarlacc, pit with steep sides. But for a movie reference it kinda blows, of course the Antlion larvea form is used in Star Trek II The Wrath of Khan. The mind control momma bug. http://www.antlionpit.com/popculture.html 68.226.20.93 (talk) 08:09, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Half-Life

Should'nt there be a mention of the Half-Life creatures? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.112.146.121 (talk) 20:05, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

These have been the inspiration for enemies in games long before the Half-Life series. Examples off the top of my head include the Pokemon Trapinch and that many Final Fantasy games have had a boss based off of antlions. Wikipedia tends to avoid trivia sections but will typically include any and all possible references if something like an "In Popular Culture" section is made. There really shouldn't be a sole reference to Half-Life, even as a redirect at the top of the page; that would be better handled by a disambiguation, but even that is unnecessary: if I go to the Medusa article, I'd be willing to bet there wouldn't be a redirect link to a list of bosses in Final Fantasy III or of enemies in God of War. --71.74.228.230 (talk) 07:00, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Because the author is English?

"The best-known European species, Myrmeleon formicarius, adults of which may be found in the late summer, occurs in many countries on the European continent, though like the rest of this group it is not indigenous in England. Strictly speaking, however, the term antlion applies to the larval form, which has been known scientifically for over two hundred years, on account of its peculiar and forbidding appearance and its skilful and unusual (though not unique) manner of entrapping prey by means of a pitfall."

Sorry, why is it significant that they are not indigenous in England? Fearwig 05:58, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Okay, there's a link at the bottom indicating that there is some variety of ant lion in Britain--however, this does not come forth in the beginning of the article. It seems to me as though some editing has taken that bit out, leaving us with a paragraph more confusing and less informative. Fearwig 06:03, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

The para definetly seemed to be the product of an edit conflict. Didnt make sense to the flow. I've moved it up a bit. Kept the important comment about the larve refered to as antlion, but left out the english species. Couldnt find a place in the article for it. It seemed like a hanging piece of information. Maybe someone can add a section called "common species" or something --Viren 11:42, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Unusual anatomical features

According to  :

Unusually the ant lion digests it food so well that almost no solid waste is generated, so there is no need for an anus.

Should this be mentioned here? Or is this not specific to this one family? Uncle G 14:25, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Size of pit traps

"An average-sized larva digs a pit about 2 inches deep and 3 inches wide at the edge."

As someone whos been a regular visitor to a game reserve, ive seen these pits many,many times. No ways have i ever seen pits this big!! (then again, as a non american, i dont use the imperial system.) Maybe american antlions dig that deep, but ive rarely seen traps approach that size. Can someone clarify this with regard to antlions from the rest of the world?

Isn't it also better to give both imperial & metric measurements, to leave no room for confusion? (I noticed the first para gives wingspan lengths in cm. Not very encyclopedic, IMHO.)

oops,forgot to sign!:--Shado.za 10:45, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

In the sandy soil of the U.S. Deep South, I have seen pits about 2 1/2 inches across, and maybe 1 3/4 in. in depth.

They appear in quantity wherever conditions are right around here, and I've also never seen them this size. Maybe it's because they're usually closer together than that, so they couldn't make them that big if they tried. (I'm in North Carolina.)

The size of the pit has less to do with the antlion, and more to do with the soil it is found in. The depth and diameter of the crater are dependent on each other and the angle of repose of the soil. A hole 2" deep and 3" wide would give you an angle of repose around 33 degrees, typical for fine grained aggregrate. However, those dimensions seem scaled up to me as well. I've never seen a hole that was more than an inch deep, if that. The ratio makes sense, but it seems like it would be more realisitic if it was 2 cm by 3 cm. 17:32, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Personally I have never seen ant-lions digging in the way described in the article. Making a circular groove? Spinning round like a top? Never. How would that even establish a decent size for the pit? What purpose does the groove serve? Always, in Europe and the US, I have seen them digging backwards into the sand or dust, then flicking sand up and out from hiding, just the same way they do to catch something, in order to clear out the dent: dig down, flick up to clear the funnel, and repeat. This way they need only a few very simply instincts to build the perfect pit: find sand or dust, then borrow backwards if uncovered; flick upwards if face gets covered; rest once flicking seems to return the same amount of sand that you flicked up. Ant-lions in Texas that I have seen seem to be smaller than in Greece, and dig proportionally smaller pits, since the limit to the pit depth is how far they can flick the sand upwards. In Greece, this is up to about 2cm in diameter; in Texas, perhaps half that. But, all this is OR. The article seems wrong, but I can't correct it from OR :( 72.182.0.229 (talk) 02:13, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

I have observed antlions digging and maintaining pits as large as 2 inches deep and 3 inches across in Australia, Papua New Guinea and Africa. Of course these are approaching the larger limit - most are smaller. Ptilinopus (talk) 13:50, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Video

I have a video of an antlion digging a pit. It's not great quality, but it's good enough. Is there any interest in it? I can't upload mpgs, so it would need to be linked somehow. Any recommendations on how to do this? Email me at meqme@daughqtersoftireqsias.org (remove qs to despammify). -- Rei 04:21, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Wrong title

"Antlion" is not the standard spelling. It is "ant lion". Onelook dictionary search shows few hits for "antlion", but many for "ant lion". The OED has "ant-lion", in keeping with British hyphenated style, but not "antlion". --Milkbreath 14:43, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

"Only in America". Google hits for "antlion" are about 3 times as many as for "ant lion". Two-words is American English, one-word or hyphenated is Commonwealth English (this is a general rule-of-thumb for animal names). Dysmorodrepanis (talk) 11:26, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Adding the alternative spellings ant-lion and ant lion up top, for obvious reasons.70.36.137.220 (talk) 16:32, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Photos

The image currently up top in the infobox (Image:Antlion.jpg) is a beautiful photo, and wonderfully illustrates the adult ant lion's ability to blend in with its surroundings. Unfortunately, at reduced size, it's really hard to tell what I'm looking at. I suggest this one (Image:Ameisenjungfer.jpg) instead, with more contrast. --Reuben 19:07, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Dangerous?

I don't think I'm alone when I look at the antlion and wonder how bad it could hurt me. Let's face it, it's something of an evil looking insect with very large jaws (the larval form, anyway). do they bite humans? do they defend their holes or themselves from humans? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.215.112.58 (talk) 13:32, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

I used to play with them when I was a little kid. I would throw small insects into the pit and watch the antlion gobble them up. I never got hurt. - Buddy.

I scooped them (and sand) into my palm scores of times as a child, then watched them reverse, trying to burrow. Doodlebugs may look fierce, but their jaws are designed for trapping, not biting, and the pincers are extremely weak; even with a kid's skin, I could barely feel the 'bite.'

once I tried to see what an ant lion looked like i dug up one of their pits. i found the same creature as the one it the foto. wile geting al of the dirt out of the shovel i had to push it around so not to acedintaly throw it out and it didn't bite me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.155.113.22 (talk) 22:46, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

distribution of antlion

where is antlion is from ? we can find antlion in the dry places and under the shelterand from wind and rain and also in america and africa. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.148.15.78 (talk) 12:30, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Link to look up cultural references

See here. Note that references at the bottom might be better to check and use....Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:38, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Mikkos Phylogeny archive.

Given that the archive is simply a single persons personal attempt to create phylogeny's, I dont think it qualifies as a reliable source, especially given the the note for it is to "see references there". If there is non-outdated information there, the sources should be used to update the page here, and the Mikkos link be removed fully.--Kevmin § 15:32, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Love the full stop in the header. Yes, 8 years was a long time for a personal website ref to languish in the article; I've replaced it now with the Crato Formation book. Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:48, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Antlion. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160305041826/http://www.calodema.com/freefiles/307.pdf to http://www.calodema.com/freefiles/307.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:53, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

Antlions is Alternative Treatment for Diabetics

The cure for Diabetic from Nature

The results of the research students of the Faculty of Biology, University of Gadjah Mada University, Yogyakarta, namely Dindin Hidayatul Mursyidin, Salahuddin Muhammad, Dian Personal Mighty, Sekendriana, and Prabowo, showed that total fat Antlion between 17.22 % - 21.56%. The fatty acid content of total omega-3 (EPA and DHA) are also quite high, ranging between 7.75 % - 14.48 % higher compared to other types of crustaceans such as shrimp, lobster, and some types of crab.

The content of EPA (6.41 % - 8.43 %) higher than DHA (1.34 % - 6.57 %). Based on these results, Antlion can be consumed directly. However, more research is needed on other nutrients such as minerals or protein. Also on compounds such as heavy metals and harmful toxins.

Another study states, it serves as anti-diabetic animals because it contains a sulfonylurea. This substance is launching the pancreas to produce insulin. When the insulin in the body decreases, while blood glucose levels rise, there will be an imbalance. Insulin as a producer of energy-reduced, making the body susceptible to disease.

Agus Widanarko, SP Sr.AM Bogor Agricultural Institut AW001 (talk) 01:10, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

Split paragraph

I split the following paragraph from (footnotes removed):

"In trap-building species, an average-sized larva digs a pit about 2 in (5 cm) deep and 3 in (7.5 cm) wide at the edge. This behavior has also been observed in the Vermileonidae (Diptera), whose larvae dig the same sort of pit to feed on ants. Having marked out the chosen site by a circular groove, the antlion larva starts to crawl backwards, using its abdomen as a plough to shovel up the soil. By the aid of one front leg, it places consecutive heaps of loosened particles upon its head, then with a smart jerk throws each little pile clear of the scene of operations. Proceeding thus, it gradually works its way from the circumference towards the center. As it slowly moves round and round, the pit gradually gets deeper and deeper, until the slope angle reaches the critical angle of repose (that is, the steepest angle the sand can maintain, where it is on the verge of collapse from slight disturbance), and the pit is solely lined by fine grains. By digging in a spiral when constructing its pit, the antlion minimises the time needed to complete the pit. When the pit is completed, the larva settles down at the bottom, buried in the soil with only the jaws projecting above the surface, often in a wide-opened position on either side of the very tip of the cone. The steep-sloped trap that guides prey into the larva's mouth while avoiding crater avalanches is one of the simplest and most efficient traps in the animal kingdom. The fine grain lining ensures that the avalanches which carry prey are as large as possible. Since the sides of the pit consist of loose sand at its angle of repose, they afford an insecure foothold to any small insects that inadvertently venture over the edge, such as ants. Slipping to the bottom, the prey is immediately seized by the lurking antlion; if it attempts to scramble up the treacherous walls of the pit, it is speedily checked in its efforts and brought down by showers of loose sand which are thrown at it from below by the larva. By throwing up loose sand from the bottom of the pit, the larva also undermines the sides of the pit, causing them to collapse and bring the prey with them. Thus, it does not matter whether the larva actually strikes the prey with the sand showers."

To:

"In trap-building species, an average-sized larva digs a pit about 2 in (5 cm) deep and 3 in (7.5 cm) wide at the edge. This behavior has also been observed in the Vermileonidae (Diptera), whose larvae dig the same sort of pit to feed on ants. Having marked out the chosen site by a circular groove, the antlion larva starts to crawl backwards, using its abdomen as a plough to shovel up the soil. By the aid of one front leg, it places consecutive heaps of loosened particles upon its head, then with a smart jerk throws each little pile clear of the scene of operations. Proceeding thus, it gradually works its way from the circumference towards the center. As it slowly moves round and round, the pit gradually gets deeper and deeper, until the slope angle reaches the critical angle of repose (that is, the steepest angle the sand can maintain, where it is on the verge of collapse from slight disturbance), and the pit is solely lined by fine grains. By digging in a spiral when constructing its pit, the antlion minimises the time needed to complete the pit.

When the pit is completed, the larva settles down at the bottom, buried in the soil with only the jaws projecting above the surface, often in a wide-opened position on either side of the very tip of the cone. The steep-sloped trap that guides prey into the larva's mouth while avoiding crater avalanches is one of the simplest and most efficient traps in the animal kingdom. The fine grain lining ensures that the avalanches which carry prey are as large as possible. Since the sides of the pit consist of loose sand at its angle of repose, they afford an insecure foothold to any small insects that inadvertently venture over the edge, such as ants. Slipping to the bottom, the prey is immediately seized by the lurking antlion; if it attempts to scramble up the treacherous walls of the pit, it is speedily checked in its efforts and brought down by showers of loose sand which are thrown at it from below by the larva. By throwing up loose sand from the bottom of the pit, the larva also undermines the sides of the pit, causing them to collapse and bring the prey with them. Thus, it does not matter whether the larva actually strikes the prey with the sand showers." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thylacine24 (talk • contribs) 13:54, 7 July 2019 (UTC)

Sand trails photo flipped?

Is it just me or is the photo of "Antlion doodles" flipped upside down? The shadows of the grass certainly start at the upper ends of the stalks, which is suspicious. Also, the "trails" look more like "ridges" this way. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Exaexa (talk • contribs) 19:25, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Yup. Trapinch!

Some Pokémon are easy to identify what they're supposed to be, especially with their categories. I dunno if Nintendo ever stated that this is what the Trapinch line is based on, but it is the closest thing. Trapinch resembles the larva and Vibrava resembles the adult. Kinda. Trapinch's Japanese category is the "Arijigoku Pokémon" like how the insect and its traps are referred to as arijigoku in Japan. Though here in 'Merica, we call Trapinch the "Ant Pit Pokémon", which doesn't state it being an ant, it just references the pits they make. None of the members of the Trapinch line are bug types, but then they resemble bugs greatly…save for Flygon. Flygon's like a bug-dragon. If they didn't live in the desert, then I bet they'd be bug types, but there's like no bug-dragon types, and Nintendo probably thought of that as a weird combination, but Trapinch could've been a ground-bug type and then swap it out for dragon as it evolves into the still-looks-like-a-bug Vibrava. It all makes sense because this was Generation 3, which came out…a year after Embodiment of Scarlet Devil did. Surprisingly. Shocked to hear Flandre Scarlet is older than Flygon? Flygon Scarlet? …Forget what I said. Trapinch line is one confusing line, dare I say, because Trapinch also doesn't resemble its evolutions. Yeah, there's a resemblance between Vibrava and Flygon, but if you put all 3 of them next to each other then you can totally see what I mean. I guess. But it makes sense, right? Trapinch is the larva, Vibrava is the "adult", and Flygon is the…mystical dragon stage. And also, their traits are bug-like, at least for Trapinch and Vibrava. Trapinch makes ant pits, of course, and Vibrava creates vibrations to cause headaches, right? Flygon just…creates sandstorms. I'd like to see how Nintendo incorporates this if they do Mega Flygon for Z-A, as during G6 they planned it but couldn't come up with a design. I have created a design for a Mega Flygon which I think looks cool…but it's not really bug-like. But hey, the Trapinch line are bugs while not being bugs. Back to something I said earlier about being bug-like, Pokémon GO steps it up a notch. There's a select few Pokémon, mainly bug types, who lose CP upon evolving into their middle stage. Trapinch is one of them. That's because it is the larva, but there isn't a cocoon stage, because they aren't bug types! But maybe Vibrava IS the cocoon. I imagined once that the line on Trapinch's back are something like wings that do not work at all, and when it evolves into Vibrava the wings start working, although I think that Vibrava's wings aren't the best for flying with…source, the Pokédex. Flygon, however, is the master of flying, so much it's even in the name. But also what I mean by Vibrava being the cocoon can be supported by it not resembling Trapinch, because it's the "shell" (wait, the TM material in S/V for Trapinch is the Trapinch Shell…) and it's undergoing metamorphosis, and instead of turning into a greater dragonfly, it becomes a dragon that flies. But also, Flygon's name literally comes from dragonfly, which the insect itself probably got its name as it's a fly that is dragon-esque. If you reverse the syllables in dragonfly you get "flygondra", that's one way to put it, the other could just be taking dragon and replacing dra with fly…it isn't a flying type, but most dragons fly either way, so it got to keep the ground type as it still lives in the desert…and is also called the Desert Spirit!

From the weirdo who likes Flygon a lot, Lucy LostWord (ILike Leavanny) 22:29, 30 November 2024 (UTC)