science help,please?

Question

how are producers and consumers in ecosystems related and different?

Answer 1

1

Answer 2

Without the producers, there would be nothing for the consumers... And the producers are basically the food for the consumers... So lets see if you can guess at least one way they are different...

Answer 3

Producers are things that make their own food for Ex: Humans. A consumer is a animal or person who does not make thier own food they just for saying bum off someone or something else and they are really not related much well i hope this helps you.

Answer 4

producers make the food, consumers eat it (example: berries- producer, dear- consumer) those were the only 2 things i could think of :-)

Answer 5

What an beginning up! heavily, the decision would nicely be rhythmic and replicate what you want declare about your self and your paintings. photo proper, Hair Care Affair, tremendous Clips--i imagine of that one's taken. quite Is.

Answer 6

In general terms an ecological system can be thought of as an assemblage of organisms (plant, animal and other living organisms—also referred to as a biotic community or biocoenosis) living together with their environment (or biotope), functioning as a loose unit. That is, a dynamic and complex whole, interacting as an "ecological unit."

Ecosystems have become particularly important politically, since the Convention on Biological Diversity - ratified by more than 175 countries - defines "the protection of ecosystems, natural habitats and the maintenance of viable populations of species in natural surroundings" as one of the binding commitments of the ratifying countries. This has created the political necessity to spatially identify ecosystems and somehow distinguish among them. The CBD defines an "ecosystem" as a "dynamic complex of plant, animal and micro-organism communities and their non-living environment interacting as a functional unit".

For this purpose, ecosystems can be characterized and mapped as physiognomic ecological units, originally developed for vegetation classification (Vreugdenhil et al 2003). Each vegetation structure reflects ecological conditions. Each ecosystem thus defined, hosts assemblages of species with survival strategies that can survive under its conditions. This is not only true for plant species, but for all species, flora, fauna and fungi alike, as each species responds to the characteristic ecological conditions of each location. This principle allows us to map ecosystems using the UNESCO physiognomic ecological classification system, the Land Cover Classification Systems (LCCS) developed by the FAO and the United States National Vegetation Classification system (USNVC). The size and scale of an ecosystem can vary widely. It may be a whole forest, a community of bacteria and algae in a drop of water, or even the geobiosphere itself. As most of these borders are not rigid, ecosystems tend to blend into each other. As a result, the whole earth can be seen as a single ecosystem, while a lake can be divided into several ecosystems, depending on the scale used.

Early conceptions of this unit showed a structured functional unit in equilibrium of energy and matter flows between its constituent elements. Others considered this vision limited, and preferred to understand an ecosystem in terms of cybernetics. From this point of view an ecological system is a functional dynamic organization, or what was also called steady state. Steady state is understood as the phase of an ecological system's evolution when the organisms are "balanced" with each other and their environment. This balance would is achieved or "regulated" through various types of interactions, such as predation, parasitism, mutualism, commensalism, competition, and amensalism. Introduction of new elements, whether abiotic or biotic, into an ecosystem tend to have a disruptive effect. In some cases, this can lead to ecological collapse and the death of many native species. The branch of ecology that gave rise to this view has become known as systems ecology. Under this deterministic vision, the abstract notion of ecological health attempts to measure the robustness and recovery capacity for an ecosystem; that is, how far the ecosystem is away from steady state.

Other population ecologists, stochastists, (den Boer & Reddingius, 1996), view an ecosystem as an expression of stochastic events, and corresponding responses from organisms. Thus, ecosystems result from the sums of infinite individual responses of organisms to stimuli from non-living and living elements in the environment. The presence or absence of populations merely depends on reproductive and dispersal success and population levels fluctuate in response to stochastic (chance) events. As the number of species in an ecosystem is higher, the number of stimuli is also higher. Mathematically it can be demonstrated that greater numbers of different interacting factors, tend to dampen fluctuations in each of the individual factors. In this vision, ecosystems are not regulated and there is no balance of nature. Stochastists do recognise that certain intrinsic regulating mechanisms occur in nature. In their vision they regulate population levels, most notably through territorial behaviour. Andrewatha and Birch (1954), suggest that territorial behaviour tends to keep populations at levels where food supply is not a limiting factor. Hence, stochastists see territorial behaviour as a regulatory mechanism at the species level but not at the ecosystem level.

Answer 7

Well producers make their own food and consumers don't make their own food. Consumers sometimes eat producers. Idk I suck at science lol