Why The Beaver Should Thank The Wolf By Mary Hannibal

If a predator organism was removed from an ecosystem, it would allow the prey population to increase which could lead to not having enough food for these organisms to eat. For example, if wolves were eliminated from the taiga biome than there would be a dramatic increase in the population of moose. This would result in the moose not having enough jack pine and could lead to starvation. The wolves would then have to eat more rabbits, elk, and voles which would decrease their population and starve the organisms that rely on these animals.

-Reintroduction of a top predator lowered the number of over grazing herbivores, leaving a more stable amount of food for many species of herbivores.

 Organisms in nature rely on one another for their well being.  However, sometimes those organisms become greedy and decide to take in the relationship, instead of sharing with their symbiotic partner.  Through this action, it takes on parasitic characteristics.  In Toni Morrison's work, Sula, Sula Peace and Nel Wright demonstrate how a symbiotic relationship goes awry.  When one partner betrays the other, by taking instead of giving, the other partner suffers.  Nel and Sula's relationship suffers because Sula unfortunately takes actions that lead to partaking in a parasitic relationship where she begins to wither away.  Nel refuses the parasitic lifestyle and

these crimes of cannibalism as a way to to satisfy their needs for survival; however,

Both the passage and the lecture discuss the decline of some sea otters’ population in Alaska coast. On the one hand, the passage argues that this decline is due to environmental pollution. On the other hand, the lecture opposes by stating that predation is most likely the reason for the phenomena.

In 1924 because of a “government policy the federal government deliberately killed all the wolf packs” in Yellowstone National Park in Wyoming. This policy was passed because of the lack of knowledge and fear. These animals have been a scapegoat throughout human history. But what happens when we take a large predatory animal out of the ecosystem; when we keep the big bad wolf from doing its part in the environment.

However, there does exist some benefits through reducing the excessive increase of one native creature from a lack of native predators in their natural environment helping out other animals with a diminished population to multiply out of the point of

It is commonly acknowledged that, in a biological ecosystem all species are closely affected each other through a food chain. However, what people don’t really recognize is how hugely one species can affect the entire ecosystem. The reintroduction of wolves in Yellowstone National Park depicts a vivid example how one predator can contribute to the recovery of biodiversity and its astonishing impact on physical geography.

Since the reintroduction of wolves into Yellowstone they have created an astounding and advantageous trophic cascade. A trophic cascade is an ecological phenomenon triggered by the addition or removal of top predators and involving reciprocal changes in the relative populations of predator and prey through a food chain. These often result in dramatic changes in ecosystem structure and nutrient cycling. In a three-level food chain, an increase (or decrease) in carnivores causes a decrease (or increase) in herbivores and an increase (or decrease) in primary producers such as plants and phytoplankton according to briticanna (how to make better). The entire ecosystem was able to become whole again because the wolves, a key species, were reintroduced. Now this may seem weird, a predator comes into the area a begins to kill animals, how can this be beneficial in any way? Well the fact of the matter is that it is extremely beneficial. The reason being the problem in Yellowstone was the overpopulation of the elk. These elk had no predators, they were free to roam and reproduce, and they did this very well. Now elk are also a

This increase their chances of catching more prey. According to “Ecology Letter”, the term cheater refers to an organism that obtains a benefit at the cost of another organism, a cheater also associated with mutualism. Natural selection does favor cheaters because a cheater that cooperate with another organism can, will expand its chances of survival. For this assignment, I choose to write about the relationship between the badgers and coyotes. Although both only hunt together in a certain region they both work together so well that they catch more prey when they are together than when they are hunting by themselves or with their own species. According to "Coyotes and Badgers, Incorporated", coyotes hunting with badgers, succeed 30 percent more on catching prey and have to work less than unaccompanied coyotes in the same area. The coyote does not eat the badger, the behavior each other are more like a business they both understand the mutual relationship between them. Their relationship facilitates for both to capture more prey. The coyote doesn't have to work as hard as it needs to work when it's alone hunting or when it's hunting with other coyotes, the badger does all the digging. This makes the coyote a cheater because it benefits

In order for an ecosystem to stay an ecosystem there are three aspects that interact with each other:

The carnivorous predators are then also influenced because they eat the herbivores, and so

The speaker cast doubts on the idea that pollution is the my cause for otter popullation decline. According to the Speaker, instead of pollutions but over hunting of whales could be the main cause for the otters incidence decline would predatation. Therefore the speaker asserts that decrease in the otter population could be linked to new a new predator in its habitat: orcas in search for new preys to replace the shrinking population of their natural preys, the whales.

Moreover, the professor indicates that the ecosystems may also caused other mammal animals decline. But the other mammal, like whales, didn't decrease. As a result, the ecosystem should not cause the sea cow need to face the food shortage. However, the author

The exact scenario changes in each example, but the central idea remains that through a chain of interactions, a non-abundant species has an outsized impact on ecosystem functions.