Entertainment desk
< May 8	<< Apr \| May \| Jun >>	May 10 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Entertainment Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

May 9

Alien reproduction cycle

Today on mother's day, of course the neo-classic alien cartoons of a chestburster thanking his mother and a facehugger thanking his mother go around the internet again. This makes me think of the Alien reproduction cycle. Is the Alien queen really the mother of either of them? I think there are three possibilities:

Xenomorphs and facehuggers are a species with two alternating, very different generations - vaguely analogous to aphids, switching between sexually & asexually reproducing generations. In this case, the queen is the mother of the facehugger, and thus the grandmother of the chestburster.
Xenomorphs and facehuggers are morphologically different individuals bred by the queen - vaguely analogous to ants with specialized classes (workers, warriors etc.). In this case, the facehugger is specialized to be a transporter of a sibling - and the queen is the mother of both.
Xenomorphs and facehuggers are not actually the same species. They are a symbiosis of two species, taking care of mutual reproduction - vaguely analogous to some orchid and bee species, specialized to keep each other alife. Before an Alien queen lays eggs, she has some 'seeds' for facehuggers in herself - transferred from the facehugger she owns her life to. Those seeds develop in her body and are laid into eggs, together with the base for future chestbursters (whatever its exact nature is). In this case, the queen is the mother of the chestburster, and not directly related to the facehugger.

Is there a canonical interpretation which of those is the case? --KnightMove (talk) 10:49, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Or it could be more like the barnacle Sacculina carcini. This barnacle attaches to a crab and injects itself into the crab taking over the crabs body. The free-floating larva and the network of tissues that control the crab are the same individual at two different points in its life-cycle. --Khajidha (talk) 12:09, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see #3 being a popular "theory". When the story depicts egg-laying, "same species" is pretty much a given. I don't think Alien: Covenant supports it either, but I haven't actually checked. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:47, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps the life cycle of liver flukes would give you a better model. See: https://www.cdc.gov/parasites/fasciola/biology.html Note that the sporocyst, redia, cercaria, metacercaria, and adult are all the same individual, just with different body forms at different life stages. --Khajidha (talk) 16:28, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You even left out the miracidium stage. --Lambiam 11:35, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I humbly request an opportunity for penance.--Khajidha (talk) 15:58, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

So you suggest the option that the facehugger and the chestburster are the same individual? --KnightMove (talk) 11:09, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mother says that does not compute. Fwiw, Facehugger.Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:21, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It is theoretically possible that the "embryo" inserted by the facehugger is the essential, soft part of the facehugging organism, leaving a somewhat empty, non-viable shell behind, just like the kentrogon form of the larvae of parasitic rhizocephalous crustaceans such as Sacculina carcini serves as a syringe through with the vermigon payload (the soft essence of the larva) can be injected into the host, leaving its outer hard shell behind. At our exobiology lab we have tried to obtain an ovomorph and perform experiments to settle the issue, but they can only be found on the black market for prices we cannot hope to match. --Lambiam 21:55, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The fandom article you linked to even says that the facehugger is the "second stage in the Xenomorph's life cycle", implying that facehuggers and chestbursters are mere stages in a single life cycle, different forms of the same individual. --Khajidha (talk) 18:34, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Lambiam: I have thought about this for a while now. We know that the facehuggers don't die instantly after completing their misson but only after a short while. Are there examples known in nature from an individual leaving its hard shell - let's call it an exuvia - with the exuvia living on for a while? --KnightMove (talk) 03:54, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It is not known why facehuggers die after implantation is complete, nor how long they can survive; some facehuggers have been found dead still attached to the host's face, while others have managed to crawl away before dying. Some beheaded Terran animals remain motile for surprisingly long times. Studies by annelidologist Gordon Enoch Gates have reportedly shown the theoretical possibility of growing two whole worms from a bisected specimen in certain earthworm species (see Earthworm § Regeneration). --Lambiam 08:59, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You're talking about fictional characters here, right? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:58, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

... which is why I ask for "canonical interpretations" and not "scientific consensus". --KnightMove (talk) 11:32, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]