The population size of a predator species is directly controlled by the population size of it's prey. If the predator has no prey the population size will go down because they have no food.
Answer:
Why has this work been written?
Who is the audience and what is the message?
Is it sponsored? Has a group or company paid the author to make these claims? Consider, for instance, lobby groups, special interest groups, corporate entities etc.
Is it biased? Is the author affected by political, social, economic, environmental, religious, cultural, personal or any other bias?
Explanation:
Answer:
Q.1: I can't help you with this, sorry :(
Q.2: Seaweed is the producer because it takes energy from the water and sun in thermal reactions.
Q.3: Phytoplankton is the second-order consumer because they eat first-order consumers.
Q.4: Whelks and crabs because they eat limpets, which eat producers, and they also eat seaweed.
Q.5: Gulls are carnivores because they eat the crabs, and so are crabs because they eat mullets
Q.6: Limpets and lobster would become less populated, but not yet endangered. Gulls would starve and probably disappear from this ecosystem.
Q.7: Whelks' numbers would decrease because of the number of lobsters consuming them, but then lobsters would starve because of the decline in their food. Then this would repeat, shaking the whole ecosystem.
Water is a key element and necessary thing life needs in order to live and thrive without water everything would die.
