There would be fewer cats than mice because a cat would eat more than one mouse. Therefore, it would make sense if there were more mice than cats or there wouldn't be enough mice to feed all the cats.
There would be fewer Cerecropia trees.
Fewer Predators
Because slugs spread faster
why are there relatively few third-level consumers in an ecosystem?why are there fewer 3rd level consumers in an ecosystem?
In a stable ecosystem (like a rain forest), there will usually be fewer predators/meat eaters than prey/plant eaters, because the higher up you are on the food chain, the fewer of you there will be; If there were fewer prey animals than predators, they would all be eaten quickly, and the predators would starve and the ecosystem would break down. But if there are more prey animals than predators, the prey animals will live long enough to reproduce and keep the population stable, the predators will still have food and the ecosystem will stabilize.
you`d expect more caterpillars than foxes because caterpillars are pregnant less and give birth earlier than foxes
they would be underweight because they would have fewer villi and it is FEWER than normal
If species disappeared from an ecosystem the balance in the ecosystem will be altered.
Yes. We are part of an ecosystem. Without an ecosystem we would, nothing would, be able to survive. Hope that answered your question for ya!!
Well, frogs are scientifically nocturnal, therefore leading them to eat the worms, and worms don't eat frogs, so realistically frogs should have more population than worms because they don't get eaten by as many predators no matter what ecosystem they or you or them or him or she or it or anything!
What would happen to the creatures in the food chain if there were fewer penguins in Antarctica
if you were to create acomponents ecosystem what components would you include in it??/