It is definitely not a primary source: this would be a book itself.
Now, is it a tertiary source? I don't think so: the author of the review should have read the book and should only be referring to this book in the review.
I think it's a secondary source.
1.) eating an apple because it is gaining energy from eating the apple
2.) communicate verbally. That doesn’t help them survive when it comes to the organism itself
3.) True, to maintain structure you must stay healthy
4.) A, because they are healing the part where the structure was damaged.
5.) B, because cells have distinct structures and set of functions.
There are no various sorts of bacterial provinces in Anna's example. Just Serratia marcescens was discovered in light of the fact that the microorganisms in the specimen all had a similar shape and size. Microbiologists need to detach bacterial provinces from an example to have the capacity to take a gander at what sorts of microscopic organisms are in the example.
