the right word is HABITAT……. the thing is each and every habitat has been formed to keep a balance in nature………. so its not necessary that there have to be large or small amount of carnivorous animals in a habitat…….. if in a forest there are no tigers left then deers population would grow …….. then may be wolves will hunt them or because of large deer population water and food scarcity will grow……. resulting in death of those deers……..
my point is though tigers are not left in the forest still the deers are dying…..
There is a limit to the number of species. There is a limit to the number of individuals. Generally it is healthful to have a large number of species. There are certain limits to how many individuals of each carnivorous species can be maintained in each niche. It is dependent on a number of things such as the number of prey, availability of food throughout the year, competition with other carnivores (that might kill or eat them), etc.
i don’t’ think it is a limit to the number of species.. but rather each habitat can only provide a certain amount of biomass for carnivores….
so once you reach the limit.. new carnivores must either displace old ones by killing them… or they must become more efficient so they need less biomass each
Sure- the food web is complex, but on an intuitive level, it’s easy to grasp the basics- the ‘higher up’ a predator is (Think of the bottom as plants, then you begin working ‘up’ to bugs, then animals that eat plants, eat bugs, eat bugs and plants, and then the carnivores- small, medium, large, until you get to apex predators, the ones at the top of the food chain. Generally, the higher up a predator is, the lower the number of individuals- apex predators, especially megafauna like bears, for instance, require an enormous energy footprint, so the environment doesn’t support a lot of them when everything is in balance- when apex predator populations get too unwieldy, they crash through overgrazing on the food supply and populations then starve or disease strikes… thus, the balance is restored.
That is dependent upon many variables. If each species procreated at a faster pace than the species above them on the food chain could kill and consume them (all other variables aside), then an infinite number of such species could coexist.
This question can be answered by the first law of thermodynamics, as long as each carnivore produces 0 joules of energy (so no heat, and no movement) then there theoretically could be an infinite amount of carnivorous species in a system.
This is a term called Cryptobiosis, which Tarigrades are capable of
Tardigrades are one of the few groups of species that are capable of reversibly suspending their metabolism and going into a state of cryptobiosis. Several species regularly survive in a dehydrated state for nearly ten years. Depending on the environment they may enter this state via anhydrobiosis, cryobiosis, osmobiosis or anoxybiosis. While in this state their metabolism lowers to less than 0.01% of normal and their water content can drop to 1% of normal
the ratio that is usually given for African mammals such as lions etc.is 2 predators for each 98 prey animals.
for reptiles such as crocodiles its 20% predators.
reptiles can go a lot longer between meals than mammals so they don’t have to kill as often.
sorry I cant find the reference. but I came across it in a book & on the discovery channel around 8 or10 years ago & for some reason it stuck with me.
please research this before you quote these numbers as fact.
the right word is HABITAT……. the thing is each and every habitat has been formed to keep a balance in nature………. so its not necessary that there have to be large or small amount of carnivorous animals in a habitat…….. if in a forest there are no tigers left then deers population would grow …….. then may be wolves will hunt them or because of large deer population water and food scarcity will grow……. resulting in death of those deers……..
my point is though tigers are not left in the forest still the deers are dying…..
so still there is a balance in the environment….
Sure. There is a limted amount of prey, so there must be a limited number of species and indiviudals which can feed on them.
There is a limit to the number of species. There is a limit to the number of individuals. Generally it is healthful to have a large number of species. There are certain limits to how many individuals of each carnivorous species can be maintained in each niche. It is dependent on a number of things such as the number of prey, availability of food throughout the year, competition with other carnivores (that might kill or eat them), etc.
sort of…
i don’t’ think it is a limit to the number of species.. but rather each habitat can only provide a certain amount of biomass for carnivores….
so once you reach the limit.. new carnivores must either displace old ones by killing them… or they must become more efficient so they need less biomass each
Sure- the food web is complex, but on an intuitive level, it’s easy to grasp the basics- the ‘higher up’ a predator is (Think of the bottom as plants, then you begin working ‘up’ to bugs, then animals that eat plants, eat bugs, eat bugs and plants, and then the carnivores- small, medium, large, until you get to apex predators, the ones at the top of the food chain. Generally, the higher up a predator is, the lower the number of individuals- apex predators, especially megafauna like bears, for instance, require an enormous energy footprint, so the environment doesn’t support a lot of them when everything is in balance- when apex predator populations get too unwieldy, they crash through overgrazing on the food supply and populations then starve or disease strikes… thus, the balance is restored.
That is dependent upon many variables. If each species procreated at a faster pace than the species above them on the food chain could kill and consume them (all other variables aside), then an infinite number of such species could coexist.
Why can’t environmentalists grasp simple mathematical concepts?
(..or ask a properly worded question?)
This question can be answered by the first law of thermodynamics, as long as each carnivore produces 0 joules of energy (so no heat, and no movement) then there theoretically could be an infinite amount of carnivorous species in a system.
This is a term called Cryptobiosis, which Tarigrades are capable of
Tardigrades are one of the few groups of species that are capable of reversibly suspending their metabolism and going into a state of cryptobiosis. Several species regularly survive in a dehydrated state for nearly ten years. Depending on the environment they may enter this state via anhydrobiosis, cryobiosis, osmobiosis or anoxybiosis. While in this state their metabolism lowers to less than 0.01% of normal and their water content can drop to 1% of normal
the ratio that is usually given for African mammals such as lions etc.is 2 predators for each 98 prey animals.
for reptiles such as crocodiles its 20% predators.
reptiles can go a lot longer between meals than mammals so they don’t have to kill as often.
sorry I cant find the reference. but I came across it in a book & on the discovery channel around 8 or10 years ago & for some reason it stuck with me.
please research this before you quote these numbers as fact.