the organisms in the bottom of the food chain are usually producers.
there wouldn't be a food chain without the producer. it has to start somewhere with some thing.
Decomposers must be added to any food chain or food web to form a complete food cycle.
No. A food chain must begin with a producer, which uses photo- or chemosynthesis to produce energy. Animals must consume other organisms to obtain energy and so cannot be producers.
There needs to be more organisms at the bottom of the pyramid of numbers because each trophic level requires energy from the level below it, resulting in a decrease in available energy as you move up the food chain. This means that more organisms are needed at lower levels to support the energy requirements of those at higher levels.
Producers must be at the base of every food chain because they get their energy from the sun, and then they give their energy to the consumers. The reason why it is like this because the producers just produce energy but don't eat other organisms to get their energy. That is why the producers must be at the bottom of every food chain. I hope this helps. .__.
auto must be meaning automatic,they can make there own food and trophic must be ecology of or involving the feeding habits or food relationship of different organisms in a food chain. by sharandeep bose
At the bottom of any food chain are the producers. Generally producers are thought of as being "green plants". A producer need not be green, (diatoms, red algae brown algae, chemosynthetic bacteria as in the ocean deeps by hot-water vents are examples of non-green producers). The foregoing are not even vascular plants. Perhaps the producer organisms responsible for the greatest food production would be the phytoplankton of the oceans. If an organism is being sought as the occupier of the bottom of a food chain or web, I agree. However, at the bottom of any food chain or web I would place an energy source. The food pyramid sits upon one or several energy sources. It is not an organism, but I believe it must precede any organism capable of synthesizing a food. Perhaps the question now may be, "What was the first energy incorporating organism?"
Animals that cannot make their own food and must eat other animals or plants to obtain energy are known as heterotrophs. These organisms are a part of food chains, where each member feeds on the organism below it in the chain to acquire energy.
At the bottom of any food chain are the producers. Generally producers are thought of as being "green plants". A producer need not be green, (diatoms, red algae brown algae, chemosynthetic bacteria as in the ocean deeps by hot-water vents are examples of non-green producers). The foregoing are not even vascular plants. Perhaps the producer organisms responsible for the greatest food production would be the phytoplankton of the oceans. If an organism is being sought as the occupier of the bottom of a food chain or web, I agree. However, at the bottom of any food chain or web I would place an energy source. The food pyramid sits upon one or several energy sources. It is not an organism, but I believe it must precede any organism capable of synthesizing a food. Perhaps the question now may be, "What was the first energy incorporating organism?"
Something can't come from nothing. Energy cannot be created or destroyed. It can only be converted and transferred. Producers are the only living organisms of earth that are able to convert sunlight to energy. If it was not at the bottom of the energy pyramid, the organisms below it would not exist because they were not getting energy from the producers.
In a food chain a consumer, also known as a heterotroph is an organism that must feed on other organisms to obtain energy and nutrients. They include animals, fungi, and many types of bacteria and protists. Consumers can be divided into herbivores, predators, and parasites.
Limiting a food chain to 4-5 organisms helps in maintaining energy efficiency as each organism at a trophic level only receives about 10% of the energy from the organism it consumes. With each transfer of energy, there is a loss of energy, so longer food chains would result in less energy being available to higher trophic levels. Additionally, having fewer organisms in a food chain reduces the risk of instability and collapse due to disruptions at any level.