Nt1310 Unit 5 Research Paper

As time wears on, everyday lifestyles of peoples around the world evolve and adapt. Mankind has encountered countless changes, one of the biggest being the switch from hunting and gathering to domestication and agriculture as methods of survival. This period of history is referred to as the agricultural revolution. One lifestyle overall surpassing the other is a highly argued upon topic. However, due to a greater diversity of foods available for consumption, a mobile lifestyle, and relative freedom from epidemic diseases that come from larger populations, hunting and gathering bands comparatively enjoyed a standard of living far superior to that of a Neolithic village dweller.

According to Charles Peterson, a marine sciences biology and ecology professor at the University of North Carolina, between 1970 to 2005; there was a 97 percent decrease in the scalloped hammerhead and tiger sharks along the east coast. During that time, 14 different prey species’ populations increased. Moreover, overfishing is a contribution in the declining numbers of sharks. People are more open to trying different foods

6).Next, these invasive species survive by reproducing in abundant amounts. For example, Asian Carp have grown up to 1800 carp per river mile. Additionally, these exotic species can adapt rapidly to their new environment. Also, they are not picky eaters, and their ravenous appetites can consume almost any other species in their habitat. In conclusion, Australian Camels, Burmese Pythons, and Asian carp have many similarities in their notorious ways of taking over their

They play an important role as a ecosystem primary producer. Unfortunately the species is considered Vulnerable on the Red List of Threatened species of the International Union for Conservation of Nature due to human interaction. It is difficult to detect them in the wild, so proper observation needs to be conducted in captivity. The purpose of the paper is to better understand and describe the behavior and social standing

Therefore, the different microclimates created by the different canopies may not be enough to create a different population in each area. Another factor would be human impacts; this can be shown with the Polystichum munitum. The plants have the tendency to grow in areas that are logged more, this could be displayed as the trails in the north were much wider than the south, therefore implying that the north site had more logging done to create the bigger paths. The numbers we saw would support this theory as the north had 154 compared to 39 in the south. This example could show how the human activities in the area have a direct effect on species distribution, in this case causing more of these plants to be in the

Part IV: Question) The primary factor controlling rodent population growth may be the fact that there is longer a large number of predators for them

Population Speciation – Within a population, change in a species occurs as the balance of hereditary characteristics shifts across that

To prepare the small population, ten to twenty randomly chosen wild type (tan)

Population will continue to decrease in size so long as the largest fish are harvested.” On the other hand, in natural selection, natural changes in the environment play an active role in the process. This takes a lot of time and produces a great biological

3 species; Philodryas nattereri, Oxyrhopus trigeminus, and Philodryas olfersii all prey upon the same species of mouse, Bolomys lasiurus. While all 3 snakes prey upon this species, each one has other species on which to prey which the others do not, for instance P. natterei and P. olfersii feed on various birds, lizards and anurans, while O. trigeminus also feeds on lizards, including species the other two do not feed on such as Trophiduras torquatus. Another species Collubridae occipitolutea, while sharing food sources with other snakes can also predate 2 other species of snake, Epicrates cenchria and Waglerophis merremii, which are not eaten by any other snake species in the area, avoiding competition for that particular food source (Vitt and Vangilder, 1983). This shows how even in the same taxonomic group ecological niches can develop and overlap, even creating predator and prey

Technology is forever changing, each year brings new advancements. In the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, technology was just beginning to improve the quality of life, limit disease, and increase food supply and transportation. In 1830, agricultural advancements were made, and the productivity was higher than before. However, not all technological advancements were good for the farmers. As productivity went up there was suddenly too much food.

According to recent studies, big cats had a crucial role in the ecosystem. Because of their significant impacts they make on the ecosystem, they could be considered as a meso-predator species. As meso-predators in the ecosystem, big cats play a pivotal role in maintaining the ecological integrity by preserving the biodiversity of the prey species (Roemer et al. 2009). Because big cats are umbrella species that require a large wild area to thrive, human-induced habitat fragmentation of their habitat area is fatal to their survival (Maehr et al. 2002). Furthermore, with less habitat area available, the prey population will also decline, in which result in a more limited diet for the big cats (Núñez et al. 2000).

The cause for the bottleneck in the orca population was too old and widespread to be credited to human disturbance so it must have been caused by the last glacial maximum. The populations of orcas that recovered after the glacial period evolved to change. Some remained predators to fish and birds, others evolved to a different niche of marine mammals and sharks. These populations diverged due to geographic differentiation and this also could have affected the intraspecific evolution of these orcas. However even though the killer whales at different locations have similar genetic variation this variation is enough to separate them, partially because the kinship genetic variation within a specific population is even smaller.

As perceived in the graphs above there are indeed four different theoretical predator-prey relationships, where they could be differentiated by the difference in conditions of the predator and prey populations. In addition, one assumption that applies to the hypothetical predator-prey system is that the reproductive rate of the predators depends on the number of prey and predators available. Another significant assumption that could be taken into account is that the mortality of the prey specie depends on the population sizes of both the predator and prey species (functional response). According to the data used in lab, the stable oscillations (Figure 1) was crafted by imputing a median value of 0.04488 as the per capita predator mortality

Well-documented records of introduction for non-native species provide a remarkable opportunity to understand how populations evolve in a new environment. Commonly, species introduced into a new environment came from a few individuals, which is translated mostly in a low genetic diversity due to that they have just part of the genetic diversity of the original population (Frankham 2005; Roman and Darling 2007). Additionally, the process of random genetic drift as it is predicted by the genetic theory is stronger in small populations (Frankham 1996; Roman and Darling 2007). Like further consequence related to genetic drift during the process of introduction, frequently is followed by a strong selection by the new environment what can drive an