0
The answer is quite simple - it is not possible. Life on Earth would cease to exist.
Ultimately, all energy in ecosystems comes from the Sun. The only way that the solar energy from the Sun can be trapped by living organisms is through plants and photosynthetic bacteria. (That's because plants have a green pigment in their leaves called chlorophyll) Producers are always at the bottom of the food chain, because they are autotrophs, that is, they can make their own food (in the form of glucose) using the Sun's energy (water and carbon dioxide are also needed, which Earth has a lot of!).
Plants are very inefficient; only 10% of the sun's energy is trapped by their chlorophyll. Primary consumers are those organisms that get their energy requirements by feeding on, or consuming, these plants.
(Consumers are also known as heterotrophs because they obtain energy from a different source).
Secondary consumers feed on primary consumers and tertiary consumers feed on the secondary consumers and so on. At each trophic (energy) level that means that 90% of the energy has been transformed into heat from metabolic processes. So by the time the energy reaches the tertiary consumer, that organism has only received 0.1% of the original energy from the Sun! That's pretty mind-boggling to think how much life the Sun can support!
So as you can see, if there was a larger amount of primary consumers feeding on plants, plants would become extinct and life could not exist. Life depends on capturing the sun's energy and consumers are not capable of this fundamental physiology.
Wiki User
∙ 13y ago
Wiki User
∙ 12y agoIf there are more consumers than producers, the pressure increases on the earth because day by day all Natural Resources are decreasing. The basic needs of all consumers can not be fulfilled.
Wiki User
∙ 11y agoit would run out of food and all the animals would move into a new ecosystem
Wiki User
∙ 9y agoAll the living organisms in an ecosystem that only have produce consumers will die. This is because there will be imbalance in the given ecosystem.
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
What would happen to an ecosystem if all the carnivores disappeared?
The population of their prey would grow dramatically, resulting in mass extinction due to lack of food, proliferation of disease, and competition, if the predators were permanently removed and no others were introduced.
What would not reduce the carrying capacity of an ecosystem for a particular prey species?
Fewer Predators
Why are predator-prey relationships important in an ecosystem?
Yes. The predator, of course, needs food, but the prey benefits too because if the predator did not eat the prey, the prey population would grow and grow until food ran and and the prey population would die of starvation.
What would you expect to happen first if an amoeba senses prey present in its environment?
it would send out pseudopods to engulf the prey
What conditions are necessary for an ecosystem to be self sustaining?
The ecosystem should have, in general, effective negative feedback relations between it's elements. For instance, a simplest ecosystem "predator-prey-limit" possess 1 negative feedback relation: 1. The more predators are, the less prey is. The less predators are, the more prey is. The other relation in this system is positive feedback: 2. The more prey is, the more predators are. The less prey is, the less predators are. If there would be no negative feedback relation (1), then population of both predators and prey would reach ecosystem limit (alimentary and/or area) and then extinct. rowlat@gmail.com
What if there are to many scavengers in an ecosystem?
I don't believe anything would happen to the ecosystem, as what can scavengers do, but wait for their prey to die? I think the only thing that would happen is for the scavengers to quickly die off, as there would not be enough food for more than the ecosystem can support.
What would happen if prey were added to the food web?
Well it is unique to the food web. In other words, if you add an alligator to a Saharan ecosystem, it would do nothing pretty much, but if you add a colony of Lions to a forest biome, it would drastically decrease the amount of animals that would be the lions' prey, which would in turn decrease the amount of lions and other animals in the ecosystem because of starvation or food competition.
What would happen to an ecosystem if all the carnivores disappeared?
The population of their prey would grow dramatically, resulting in mass extinction due to lack of food, proliferation of disease, and competition, if the predators were permanently removed and no others were introduced.
What would not reduce the carrying capacity of an ecosystem for a particular prey species?
Fewer Predators
Why are predator-prey relationships important in an ecosystem?
Yes. The predator, of course, needs food, but the prey benefits too because if the predator did not eat the prey, the prey population would grow and grow until food ran and and the prey population would die of starvation.
What would happen if the Indus river dolphin were to become extinct?
The prey species of the river dolphin, such as fish and shrimps, would suddenly boom and dominate the ecosystem as there would be no predator keeping their populations in check. Whatever those prey species feed on would suddenly decrease as there would be more organisms feeding of it. When one species becomes extinct, it can cause other species to also become extinct. However hopefully the ecosystem returns to an equilibrium eventually. Hope this helps!
What would you expect to happen first if an amoeba senses prey present in its environment?
it would send out pseudopods to engulf the prey
What would be the predator and prey in the ecosysyste?
It depends on the ecosystem, but generally a prey is a smaller animal and one that is a herbivore (that eats plants) and the prey is a larger animals that is a carnivore (that eats meat) or omnivore (that eats plants and meat).
Is a predator-prey relationship beneficial or detrimental to the ecosystem?
beneficial because it keep the ecosystem in balance
What would happen if tigers die?
The ecosystem would be way out of sync without any predators to keep it under control. Prey animals like deer and buffalo would grow to larger populations to the point that the plant life is no longer able to sustain them, and they would also become more complacent and less alert for predators. Tigers help the ecosystem by keeping the deer alert and on the move and by keeping their populations in check. Same with the buffaloes and other prey animals that live in the region that tigers are naturally found in.
What conditions are necessary for an ecosystem to be self sustaining?
The ecosystem should have, in general, effective negative feedback relations between it's elements. For instance, a simplest ecosystem "predator-prey-limit" possess 1 negative feedback relation: 1. The more predators are, the less prey is. The less predators are, the more prey is. The other relation in this system is positive feedback: 2. The more prey is, the more predators are. The less prey is, the less predators are. If there would be no negative feedback relation (1), then population of both predators and prey would reach ecosystem limit (alimentary and/or area) and then extinct. rowlat@gmail.com
What would most likely occur if a plague killed most of the prey organisms within a once-healthy ecosystem?
CATS (:
