Carnivores have sharper teeth than herbivores because they need to rip up their meat or try to kill their prey.
Plants produce food Herbivores eat plants Carnivores eat herbivores Thus to keep everyone fed there have to be more plants than there are herbivores to eat them (or the herbivores would starve) and more herbivores than carnivores (or the carnivores would starve).
In general, there tend to be more herbivores than carnivores in an ecosystem. This is because herbivores form the base of the food chain, supporting the larger number of carnivores that rely on them for food.
There are more herbivores than carnivores in the Serengeti. This is because the herbivores form the base of the food chain, supporting a larger number of carnivores that prey on them. The abundance of herbivores also supports a diverse ecosystem with various species of grazers and browsers.
It is the way nature plays out. The carnivores eat the herbivores, so it is impossible to have more carnivores then herbivores. If there are too few herbivores around, the carnivores begin to starve, so for that reason there will always be more herbivores then carnivores. Most carnivores protect there territories from other carnivores, killing them if necessary, because they instinctively know an area can only support so many carnivores based on food supply -- which for them are herbivores. Also many carnivores are capable of practicing birth control to some degree to keep their numbers appropriate for the number of herbivores that can sustain them.
I think there are supposed to be an equal amount as well as plants the herbivores eat. This is to maintain an equilibrium so no side makes the other extinct. I think this holds true to the point of an outside factor. Weather killing a large amount of plants could affect an ecosystem by having a lack of food for the herbivores. They may die off leaving little to no food for the carnivores. I think it's all about equilibrium so there should not be more carnivores than herbivores and vice versa.
Plants produce food Herbivores eat plants Carnivores eat herbivores Thus to keep everyone fed there have to be more plants than there are herbivores to eat them (or the herbivores would starve) and more herbivores than carnivores (or the carnivores would starve).
In general, there tend to be more herbivores than carnivores in an ecosystem. This is because herbivores form the base of the food chain, supporting the larger number of carnivores that rely on them for food.
I think there is a pretty even amount of carnivores and herbivores. There might be a bit more herbivores because they need more of their species to survive, since the carnivores hunt them.
There are more herbivores than carnivores in the Serengeti. This is because the herbivores form the base of the food chain, supporting a larger number of carnivores that prey on them. The abundance of herbivores also supports a diverse ecosystem with various species of grazers and browsers.
An alligator is a CARNIVORE because they eat other animals.
It is the way nature plays out. The carnivores eat the herbivores, so it is impossible to have more carnivores then herbivores. If there are too few herbivores around, the carnivores begin to starve, so for that reason there will always be more herbivores then carnivores. Most carnivores protect there territories from other carnivores, killing them if necessary, because they instinctively know an area can only support so many carnivores based on food supply -- which for them are herbivores. Also many carnivores are capable of practicing birth control to some degree to keep their numbers appropriate for the number of herbivores that can sustain them.
no. There were more herbivores than carnivores and u think all dinosaurs are carnivores! =(
cannibals, carnivores,herbivores,omnivores,Detritivores,and scavengers
I think there are supposed to be an equal amount as well as plants the herbivores eat. This is to maintain an equilibrium so no side makes the other extinct. I think this holds true to the point of an outside factor. Weather killing a large amount of plants could affect an ecosystem by having a lack of food for the herbivores. They may die off leaving little to no food for the carnivores. I think it's all about equilibrium so there should not be more carnivores than herbivores and vice versa.
No. There are many small mammalian carnivores, insectivores, piscivores, and omnivores. In fact, many mammalian carnivores hunt herbivores that are bigger than they are. The biggest land mammals are all herbivores.
In order for a food chain to be stable, there must always be less biomass as you go up in trophic levels (i.e. from plants to herbivores to carnivores). This is basically because energy is always lost as it is transferred to each successive level, since herbivores use some of the energy they get from plants to stay alive (leaving less for carnivores who eat them), and so there will always be fewer carnivores than herbivores.
Herbivores obtain energy from plants, which are producers of energy, and so build up a large supply of it. This is transformed into bodily growth. However, carnivores obtain energy from other animals, which use energy. Because they use so much of it, very little is actually taken by the carnivore, and so they must eat very large amounts to even reach an acceptable minimum. The process of hunting and obtaining prey is also quite energy-intensive. As a result, they cannot turn large amounts of energy into body mass.