True is the correct answer.
Give me the choices and I’ll answer
Answer:
B
Explanation:
The most likely explanation for why the size of the coyote population remained unchanged between 2006 and 2008 would be that <u>the population reached its carrying capacity of the environment.</u>
<em>The carrying capacity of a population of an organism is the maximum number of the organism the environment can support based on the resources the environment has. Below this number, the population of the organism has the potential to increase while above the carrying capacity, the population has the tendency to decrease. The population of an organism fluctuates around the carrying capacity without any major decrease or increase.</em>
The correct option is B.
On the off chance that a change happens, if beneficial in the scarcest, normal choice picks it to wind up noticeably the more typical quality, and consequently development happens. For instance the dark demise wiped out one in three Europeans, now researchers are finding that some of the individuals who survived had transformations on their resistant framework cells; they needed regular receptors, or generally had few. (DNA resembles history, obviously, they aren't meeting with dark torment patients, the DNA in Caucasian Europeans goes about as an authentic guide of past bottlenecks.) Because Europeans with this transformation were to the least extent liable to bite the dust of the dark passing they were the well on the way to survive, which is the reason the calamity of the bubonic torment brought about somewhere in the range of 20% of Caucasian European relatives to do not have these receptors on their invulnerable framework cells which thusly diminishes the danger of resistance illnesses, for example, assistants.
