First blank: their
Second blank: there. Hope this helps. Please rate, leave a thanks, and mark a brainliest answer (Not necessarily mine)
Answer:
True.
Explanation:
Pyramid of energy is also referred to as food pyramid and it's a model used to depict the flow of energy from one trophic level or feeding level to the next in an ecosystem. It's a diagram that compares the energy used by organisms at each trophic level of the food chain. The pyramid of energy must never be inverted or turned upside down.
The units used in the construction of pyramids of energy is kilocalories (kcal) or energy per area per time (Jm-²year-¹).
A list of the types of organisms in an eco pyramid are;
I. Producers: these are autotrophs or self-feeders such as plants.
II. Primary (top) consumers: these are herbivores that typically feed on plants such as a goat or deer.
III. Secondary consumers: these consists of carnivores that typically feed or eat flesh such as lion, tiger, cheetah, etc.
IV. Tertiary consumers: these are higher predators such as humans that aren't normally fed on by other organisms in the ecosystem.
In Biology, producers are the living organisms that are capable of manufacturing their own food and as such can provide energy or food for the other living organisms (consumers) in a food web. Thus, producers are mainly known as the foundation of a food web (chain) and are at the top.
A producer gets energy from the sun and converts it into food. The cells found in producers are capable of converting the energy received directly from the sun into food through a process generally referred to as photosynthesis, converting carbon dioxide from the air, water from the soil, minerals and energy from the sun into organic nutrients.
Answer:
Summary Of Rethinking The Wild By Christopher Solomon Essay
1530 Words7 Pages
Humanity co-exists with nature in a relationship that periodically shifts between symbiotic and parasitic. We maintain this relationship in order to survive. In exchange, we carefully monitor how our behavior alters the natural environment and affects those living within it. This responsibility is the price we pay for our species’ sentience and dominance. To help fulfill our duty, America established the 1954 Wilderness Act in hopes of becoming passive “guardians” of nature instead of encroaching “gardeners.” However, the Wilderness Act has failed. In his article, “Rethinking the Wild”, Christopher Solomon questions the effectiveness of the law and correctly concludes that, after fifty years of dormancy, mankind must take an active role in environmental protection, the role of the gardener. Though critics may argue that the passivity of the “guardian” should be maintained, realistically, little can be done to preserve the environment when we refuse to do anything. Because mankind has a greater stake in the wilderness than we realize, we must assume a proactive role in protecting the wilderness out of respect for nature and our own ethical standards.
Boundaries and Investments
Assume for the sake of our argument that nature holds no intrinsic value. Why, then, is the wilderness worth protecting? Truthfully, the wilderness can be a valuable indicator of the planet’s overall health, which is not easily gauged in industrialized and populated areas due to human influence.
B for the first question and C for the second
