FOOD CHAINS AND FOOD WEB
I learned food chains and food webs on my third grade in Davao City Special School. Basically, it is a representation of the relationship between organisms in complying with their need for nourishment. Now it is clearly established that it is a predator-prey relationship where one gets eaten. In high school, first year, I had a wrong answer to my teacher’s question as to which trophic level contains the most energy. I answered the eagle (the one on top) because it was bigger (hahaha!). My misconception was corrected by my Biology teacher, who also influenced me to take up Biology in College.
The idea of food chains and food webs, as well as conditions and resources, biotic and abiotic factors, habitat, and succession points out a clearer picture of ecology – that is INTER RELATIONSHIP. I’ve been saying that the study of ecology brings with it its complex nature. But ecology is unlike a circle, at some point in its complexity, one can begin at a certain point to try and understand it even with only 10% of our brains is utilized.
Early proponents thought that the Earth is the center of the universe. This misconstruction is also similar to man as the supreme creation by which all the rest of organisms should be of service to or should benefit humans. We may have been given higher form of intelligence, but it does not mean we can take away as much as what we can from nature (this includes all other organisms). Similarly, man should not live like how he lived in the stone ages. The point here is more on balance – SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT. Wikipedia defines sustainable development as a pattern of resource use that aims to meet human needs while preserving the environment so that these needs can be met not only in the present, but also for generations to come.
Food chains and food webs can be used as key to sustainable development. These two could serve as a guide as to which resource could we take much from without tilting the balance of nature. Let’s begin at the bottom of the food chain/web/pyramid.
Those organisms at the bottom are called producers. These producers are all AUTOTROPHIC such that they can manufacture organic food from inorganic matter. Most producers are photosynthetic – they harvest energy from the light to be used for food conversion. There are also those that are chemosynthetic – they manage to manufacture food without sunlight. Since we follow organic substances in the form of food, we are likewise following carbon. Organic compounds are composed of carbon (bonded to hydrogen). But not all carbon containing compounds are organic, such as carbon dioxide. The key here is hydrocarbon bond – if there’s a hydrocarbon bond, then it’s organic (except urea).
Producers are fed upon by other organisms. Those who feed on producers are herbivores (or omnivores) and they occupy the second trophic level. After that follows the higher trophic levels with bigger organisms in it.
Given this chain, who gets to control the proliferation of the chain? Should it be the producers who are at the bottom, or should it be the higher consumers who are on top. Ecologists choose one of these two pints: bottom up control or top down control.
In the bottom up control, the organisms on the lower trophic level get to control the productivity of the bigger ones – sounds like David and goliath! Example, if the resources for plants to grow are limited, then the productivity of these producers are controlled. The herbivores feeding on plants has little influence on these producers. If nutrients abound, plant productivity becomes high thereby supporting larger numbers of herbivores.
In the top down control, (this I like!) the organisms on the higher trophic level controls the productivity of those lower to it. This concept is otherwise referred to as trophic cascade. Imagine yourself to be on the fourth energy level. Man eats the bigger fish. Bigger fish eats smaller fish. Smaller fish feeds on planktons. If man exerts more control by eating more bigger fish to the point that the latter’s population significantly decreases, this puts lesser pressure on smaller fish. The smaller fish in turn increases in population. Because of its increase in population, it will consume more of the planktons. An amazing relationship!
Conservation as well as consumption will be maintained at a less harmful level if man is able to identify the intricate relationships of organisms. After all, life is not just about money or comfort as these two things could be washed away by a single tsunami. Relationships are of more vital role to our biodiversity which in turn ensures our very own existence.
I learned food chains and food webs on my third grade in Davao City Special School. Basically, it is a representation of the relationship between organisms in complying with their need for nourishment. Now it is clearly established that it is a predator-prey relationship where one gets eaten. In high school, first year, I had a wrong answer to my teacher’s question as to which trophic level contains the most energy. I answered the eagle (the one on top) because it was bigger (hahaha!). My misconception was corrected by my Biology teacher, who also influenced me to take up Biology in College.
The idea of food chains and food webs, as well as conditions and resources, biotic and abiotic factors, habitat, and succession points out a clearer picture of ecology – that is INTER RELATIONSHIP. I’ve been saying that the study of ecology brings with it its complex nature. But ecology is unlike a circle, at some point in its complexity, one can begin at a certain point to try and understand it even with only 10% of our brains is utilized.
Early proponents thought that the Earth is the center of the universe. This misconstruction is also similar to man as the supreme creation by which all the rest of organisms should be of service to or should benefit humans. We may have been given higher form of intelligence, but it does not mean we can take away as much as what we can from nature (this includes all other organisms). Similarly, man should not live like how he lived in the stone ages. The point here is more on balance – SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT. Wikipedia defines sustainable development as a pattern of resource use that aims to meet human needs while preserving the environment so that these needs can be met not only in the present, but also for generations to come.
Food chains and food webs can be used as key to sustainable development. These two could serve as a guide as to which resource could we take much from without tilting the balance of nature. Let’s begin at the bottom of the food chain/web/pyramid.
Those organisms at the bottom are called producers. These producers are all AUTOTROPHIC such that they can manufacture organic food from inorganic matter. Most producers are photosynthetic – they harvest energy from the light to be used for food conversion. There are also those that are chemosynthetic – they manage to manufacture food without sunlight. Since we follow organic substances in the form of food, we are likewise following carbon. Organic compounds are composed of carbon (bonded to hydrogen). But not all carbon containing compounds are organic, such as carbon dioxide. The key here is hydrocarbon bond – if there’s a hydrocarbon bond, then it’s organic (except urea).
Producers are fed upon by other organisms. Those who feed on producers are herbivores (or omnivores) and they occupy the second trophic level. After that follows the higher trophic levels with bigger organisms in it.
Given this chain, who gets to control the proliferation of the chain? Should it be the producers who are at the bottom, or should it be the higher consumers who are on top. Ecologists choose one of these two pints: bottom up control or top down control.
In the bottom up control, the organisms on the lower trophic level get to control the productivity of the bigger ones – sounds like David and goliath! Example, if the resources for plants to grow are limited, then the productivity of these producers are controlled. The herbivores feeding on plants has little influence on these producers. If nutrients abound, plant productivity becomes high thereby supporting larger numbers of herbivores.
In the top down control, (this I like!) the organisms on the higher trophic level controls the productivity of those lower to it. This concept is otherwise referred to as trophic cascade. Imagine yourself to be on the fourth energy level. Man eats the bigger fish. Bigger fish eats smaller fish. Smaller fish feeds on planktons. If man exerts more control by eating more bigger fish to the point that the latter’s population significantly decreases, this puts lesser pressure on smaller fish. The smaller fish in turn increases in population. Because of its increase in population, it will consume more of the planktons. An amazing relationship!
Conservation as well as consumption will be maintained at a less harmful level if man is able to identify the intricate relationships of organisms. After all, life is not just about money or comfort as these two things could be washed away by a single tsunami. Relationships are of more vital role to our biodiversity which in turn ensures our very own existence.
No comments:
Post a Comment