Well, so far its raised the total population from a few million to seven billion.
Selective breeding can increase agricultural productivity by producing more food with desirable traits, potentially supporting a larger human population. However, it can also lead to reduced genetic diversity within populations, making them more susceptible to diseases and environmental changes, which could negatively impact the human population in the long run.
an animal that is present in an environment but not breeding is extinct
population can effect the environment because more people are going to litter so its going to kill more animals
== == yes. trees are animals homes. yes. trees are animals homes.
The effects animals have on others are that if a primary consumer's population runs out then the secondary consumer has no food. Soooo in other words they effect each other by food.
No, it doesn't occur in significant enough numbers in either animals or humans to effect population growth at all.
We have genetically modified foods for centuries by selective cross breeding plants. With out this and other modern methods of farming perhaps a billion people now existing on a substance diet would starve to death.
There may be an over population of the animals that the snake eats.
They can be positive and negative to reduce over population and also create extinction.
Propranolol is the best non selective betablockers. This has less side effects.The best non selective bitablockers which have less side effect than propranolol include Pindolol,Penbutolol, Oxprenolol and Labetalol.
Keeping animals in zoos has a positive and negative effect on the environment. By having endangered species, it allows breeding and a "safe house" for them. Its negative because it lessens the amount of natural animals. Animals in captivity lose the ability to survive in the wild. hope this helps :p
If all the vegetation in a pond were alive there could be many effects that would it have on animals. One effect is population strangulation.