Which of the following does not contribute to the fact that tertiary consumers are rare in ecosystems compared to members of lower trophic levels? a) less food energy is available to the top trophic level than is available to preceding levels b) tertiary consumers need larger home ranges to satisfy their dietary needs c) tertiary consumers always have greater body mass than primary and secondary consumers in a given system d) entropy tends to increase in all natural systems

c) Tertiary consumers always have greater body mass than primary and secondary consumers in a given system

Explanation:

This statement has two flaws. One of them is that the tertiary consumers usually tend to have smaller body mass than the primary and secondary consumers, so it is a false statement. The other one is that it doesn't have any connection with the numbers of the tertiary consumers compared to the primary and secondary consumers. There are several reasons as to why the tertiary consumers tend to be much more rare than the primary and secondary consumers. The lesser amount of food energy available to them and the need of very large ranges to satisfy the food energy demand of their bodies being the two crucial ones. Through the trophic levels, the energy transferred fro one to another trophic level is around 10%, so the tertiary consumers get very little from the initial energy. Also, because they need much more food in order to satisfy their energy demands, they have to have large ranges, with abundance of prey animals, so that they can survive, which is another reason as to why they are much fewer in number than the primary and secondary consumers.

it is very hard for the climatologists to precisely predict how will the global temperatures be changing so there's lots of models, some of which differ significantly, this is due to multiple factors, and probably the most important is the human activity.

humans have been a key factor in climate change around the globe since the start of the industrial revolution, and in the past few decades the consequences are becoming more obvious. there's lots of emission of pollutants in the atmosphere as well as changing the environment on the surface itself, so it's really hard to predict how will that go in the future because there's some countries that are reducing the damage and are going towards green energy, while others are stubbornly continuing with pollution and damages to the environment.