Then all the animals that are connected somehow to the grass will be extinct.
Example: Grass--deer--lion
If there is no grass then the deer won't have things to eat and it will be extinct and the lion won't have anything to eat so it will also be extinct.
some of the organisms won't change because they eat something else like berries and fruits instead of grass won't really be affected. But if something that eats that organism also eats grass then that organism might increase because there would only be half of their predators left anyways it's complicated.
Without first-level consumers, there would be an imbalance in the ecosystem. This would lead to overpopulation of primary producers, resulting in competition for resources and potential ecosystem collapse. Higher-level consumers would also be affected due to lack of food sources.
If decomposers were removed from a habitat, dead organic matter would not be broken down and recycled back into the ecosystem. This would lead to a buildup of dead material, decreased nutrient availability for plants, and disruption of energy flow within the ecosystem. Overall, it would have a negative impact on the health and balance of the ecosystem.
Lizards are essential because they eat nasty insects like mosquitoes, grasshoppers, cockroaches, etc. Without lizards, the whole world would be filled with so many nasty insects which could sound pretty scary. Also, the snakes eat the lizards, so the snake will be affected and the animals higher on the food chain would also be affected and so on and fourth.
If the ochre sea star were removed from the ecosystem, shellfish populations could increase significantly. Ochre sea stars are predators of shellfish, and without them, shellfish could thrive unchecked, leading to potential overgrazing of algae and other organisms in the ecosystem. This could disrupt the balance of the ecosystem and impact other species dependent on these resources.
Removing grasses and shrubs from a rural New Jersey ecosystem will likely disrupt the habitat for many species that depend on them for food and shelter, leading to a decrease in biodiversity. It may also result in increased soil erosion and reduced water infiltration, impacting the overall ecosystem health.
bird
if grasshoppers were removed which would suffer the most a bird or a baboon
nothing it depends on what factor was removed
If snakes were removed from the food web, the grasshopper population would likely increase significantly. Snakes are natural predators of grasshoppers, and without their presence, the grasshoppers would face less predation pressure. This population boom could lead to overgrazing of vegetation, potentially disrupting the ecosystem balance and affecting other plant and animal species. Additionally, increased grasshopper populations might lead to more competition for resources among herbivores.
If all the decomposers were removed from a temperate forest ecosystem, the accumulation of organic matter, such as fallen leaves, dead plants, and animal remains, would likely occur. This buildup would hinder nutrient recycling, leading to nutrient depletion in the soil over time. Consequently, plant growth would be severely affected, disrupting the entire food web and potentially leading to the collapse of the ecosystem.
the fishes and seals will increased
Without first-level consumers, there would be an imbalance in the ecosystem. This would lead to overpopulation of primary producers, resulting in competition for resources and potential ecosystem collapse. Higher-level consumers would also be affected due to lack of food sources.
The ecosystem will be unbalance.
The entire ecosystem would fail
The endocrine system would be affected which, in turn, affects just about every other body system.
ello im sara
the fish will die . because the fish needed by theplants which qive oxygen .. !