<span>Higher amounts of nitrogenous compounds will increase algal blooms, leading to less available oxygen in the water, and decrease biodiversity.
--------
Let's take a look at each option and consider them in light of our knowledge.
1. These compounds will combine into larger molecules as they interact in the nitrogen cycle and become food for fish and other animals, increasing biodiversity.
* This has some problems. Yes, the fertilizers will cause an increase in the food supply, but that doesn't spontaneously cause an increase in biodiversity. The only way to increase the biodiversity is to introduce new organisms. And this isn't such a mechanism. I won't pick this choice.
2. The water cycle will remove excess fertilizer naturally through evaporation, with no impact on biodiversity.
* There's some issues here as well. Think about how much fertilizer runoff is considered a pollution issue. If this option were true, then we wouldn't be seeing so many news articles complaining about fertilizer running causing pollution problems. So this answer isn't any good either.
3. Nitrogenous compounds will be recycled into carbon compounds to create new organisms and increase biodiversity.
* Still running into the "spontaneous increase in biodiversity" issue here. How would more carbon compounds suddenly increase the biodiversity? This answer isn't any good either.
4. Higher amounts of nitrogenous compounds will increase algal blooms, leading to less available oxygen in the water, and decrease biodiversity.
* This is a real problem. Some might think that "Algae is a plant. Plants produce oxygen. Why would more algae cause the oxygen supply to decrease?" Well, the answer is pretty simple. Individual algae cells don't live very long. So you have a log of algae being produced. Releasing oxygen to the air, and then dying. And the dead algae then proceeds to decay, which does consume dissolved oxygen in the water. Which does cause the death of fish and other animals that are dependent upon that dissolved oxygen. And that does reduce the biodiversity in the area. So this is a reasonable and correct answer.</span>
Well, to determine the type of sugar that is present and serves to play an important role in the overall structure and function of this particular nucleic acid is by the fact that the strand is single stranded, and not double stranded as in DNA. The only other commonly known Nucleic acid that is single stranded is RNA. Another clue or hint that points us in the direction to state that this a polynucleotide stranded molecule of RNA, is by the presence of the nitrogenous base, Uracil. DNA in place has thymine, uracil is only found on RNA, and is complementary to thymine, if used in transcription. Basically all of this information simply points to RNA, and the sugar contained in RNA would be ribose.
Answer:
The correct answer is - D. Meerkats are at a lower trophic level in the ecosystem than eagles, and the amount of energy stored in the meerkat population is less than that in the eagle population.
Explanation:
The sun's energy is stored in plants by photosynthesis. The insects are next in the food chain of life where their energy is then given to the meerkats or other small animals once eaten. The snakes and eagle-like birds are getting their energy and food from the meerkats.
The producers (plants) produce the energy so they are the first on the pyramid of the trophic level or lowest trophic level. Next are the primary consumers which get their energy and food from the producers. The meerkats would fit into this primary consumer or secondary consumer class. At that point, the tertiary consumers or predators come in, this would be the creatures that eat the primary consumers.
Answer:
D
Explanation:
Because how else do we use GPS, or WAZE to get to places