Scott G Posted January 11, 2007 Posted January 11, 2007 Hi everyone, Is it correct to add solar energy to the bottom of an energy pyramid describing a food chain? Most I have looked at on the internet don't, but wikipedia says that you can. Does anyone have a definitive answer? Thanks very much, Scott:-)
ecoli Posted January 12, 2007 Posted January 12, 2007 sure... that's where plants get their energy from.
herpguy Posted January 13, 2007 Posted January 13, 2007 We learned that the sun is at the bottom in school last year, and as ecoli said, its where plants get their energy from.
weknowthewor Posted January 16, 2007 Posted January 16, 2007 We know that at the beginning of an aquatic food chain are the primary producers, known as autotrophs. These include single celled phytoplankton, algae and seagrasses and as a whole, constitute the largest percentage of web biomass. Autotrophs convert solar energy into chemical energy and transform simple inorganic molecules to more complex organic molecules. This is accomplished by absorbing energy from the sun and releasing oxygen into the water and atmosphere. Hence, i think solar energy sholud be included in primary producers level.
Sayonara Posted January 17, 2007 Posted January 17, 2007 It's not strictly necessary to add it, as the pyramid begins with the producers in the living system. But it won't hurt to add it. (Unless you are dealing with an autotrophic or chemotrophic system, where the sun plays no role, such as the habitat around a deep sea sulphur vent.)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now