It would have minimal effect as frogs are only a small part of a raccoon's diet.
It would be unable to call and there would be a decrease in population the next year. as for the toad it would heal. Why would you even want to do that in the first place?
Yes, fish are often found in the diet of a raccoon, including catfish.
Milkweed is toxic to most animals so it is unlikely that a raccoon would eat it.
If the moose were to be excint, the population of wolves would be excint, then what ever eats the wolves would start to lose its population. All of the high level consumers would decrease as the level below them became extinct.
Can they? - yes. Would they? - probably not.
If all frogs died, the raccoon population would likely decrease due to a loss of a food source. Frogs are an important part of the raccoon's diet, and the lack of this prey could lead to starvation or population decline for raccoons.
It would have minimal effect as frogs are only a small part of a raccoon's diet.
there would be no snakes to eat the frogs and with more frogs their would be less grasshoppers
It would be unable to call and there would be a decrease in population the next year. as for the toad it would heal. Why would you even want to do that in the first place?
If you replace their breeding areas, you can reduce the numbers. You can drain wetlands, ponds and other places like them.
The population of zoo plankton would decrease.
i think that there population would degress because they would need tons of frogs to keep on there population. kk bye?
A decrease in the birth rate will cause a decrease in population over time.
You would have a skyrocket in the insects they eat and a decrease of animals that prey upon them.
it would decrease population
A population of an animal would decrease because of animal testing. 3/5 people agree.
Which would most likely decrease the genetic variation in the human population?