Home
/
Biology
/
A community is concerned about the effect of a proposed housing development on the biodiversity of a local pond. To mitigate the effect of the houses, the community is consi on lawn fertilizer. A computer simulation was used to predict the outcome of the ban. The results are shown in the table. multirow(2)(*)( Year ) & multicolumn(3)(|c|)( Number of Species ) cline ( 2 - 4 ) & No housing development & Housing development, unregulated & Housing development, with a ban on lawn fertilizer 0 & 100 & 100 & 100 5 & 95 & 90 & 93 10 & 102 & 77 & 83 15 & 98 & 60 & 78 20 & 103 & 51 & 74 25 & 90 & 50 & 75 If the community decides to allow the housing development, what is the strongest argument for banning the use of fertilizer that is supported by the results of the simulation? A. Compared to no regulations, banning lawn fertilizer increases species diversity by 50 percent after 25 years. B. Compared to initial conditions, banning lawn fertilizer decreases species diversity by 25 percent after 25 years. C. Compared to no housing development, banning lawn fertilizer decreases species diversity by 25 percent after 25 years. D. Without the housing development, species diversity remains about the same from year to year.

Question

A community is concerned about the effect of a proposed housing development on the biodiversity of a local pond. To mitigate the effect of the houses, the community is consi on lawn fertilizer. A computer simulation was used to predict the outcome of the ban. The results are shown in the table.

 multirow(2)(*)( Year ) & multicolumn(3)(|c|)( Number of Species ) 
cline ( 2 - 4 ) & 
No housing 
development
 & 
Housing 
development, 
unregulated
 & 
Housing development, 
with a ban on lawn 
fertilizer
 
 0 & 100 & 100 & 100 
 5 & 95 & 90 & 93 
 10 & 102 & 77 & 83 
 15 & 98 & 60 & 78 
 20 & 103 & 51 & 74 
 25 & 90 & 50 & 75 


If the community decides to allow the housing development, what is the strongest argument for banning the use of fertilizer that is supported by the results of the simulation?
A. Compared to no regulations, banning lawn fertilizer increases species diversity by 50 percent after 25 years.
B. Compared to initial conditions, banning lawn fertilizer decreases species diversity by 25 percent after 25 years.
C. Compared to no housing development, banning lawn fertilizer decreases species diversity by 25 percent after 25 years.
D. Without the housing development, species diversity remains about the same from year to year.

A community is concerned about the effect of a proposed housing development on the biodiversity of a local pond. To mitigate the effect of the houses, the community is consi on lawn fertilizer. A computer simulation was used to predict the outcome of the ban. The results are shown in the table. multirow(2)(*)( Year ) & multicolumn(3)(|c|)( Number of Species ) cline ( 2 - 4 ) & No housing development & Housing development, unregulated & Housing development, with a ban on lawn fertilizer 0 & 100 & 100 & 100 5 & 95 & 90 & 93 10 & 102 & 77 & 83 15 & 98 & 60 & 78 20 & 103 & 51 & 74 25 & 90 & 50 & 75 If the community decides to allow the housing development, what is the strongest argument for banning the use of fertilizer that is supported by the results of the simulation? A. Compared to no regulations, banning lawn fertilizer increases species diversity by 50 percent after 25 years. B. Compared to initial conditions, banning lawn fertilizer decreases species diversity by 25 percent after 25 years. C. Compared to no housing development, banning lawn fertilizer decreases species diversity by 25 percent after 25 years. D. Without the housing development, species diversity remains about the same from year to year.

expert verifiedVerification of experts

Answer

4.5269 Voting
avatar
AliciaMaster · Tutor for 5 years

Answer

#Explanation<br />The table provided shows the predicted number of species in the pond under three different scenarios: no housing development, a housing development without regulation, and a housing development with a ban on lawn fertilizer. <br /><br />Let's analyze each option:<br /><br />A. The table does not support the claim that banning lawn fertilizer increases species diversity by 50 percent after 25 years. In fact, the number of species decreases from 100 to 75, a decrease of 25 percent.<br /><br />B. This option is correct in stating that banning lawn fertilizer decreases species diversity by 25 percent after 25 years, but this is not an argument for banning fertilizer.<br /><br />C. This option is incorrect. Compared to no housing development, banning lawn fertilizer actually decreases species diversity by 15 percent after 25 years (from 90 to 75).<br /><br />D. This option is irrelevant to the question as it does not provide an argument for banning fertilizer.<br /><br />The strongest argument for banning the use of fertilizer, supported by the results of the simulation, is that it mitigates the negative impact of the housing development on species diversity. Without the ban, the housing development reduces the number of species from 100 to 50 (a 50 percent decrease). With the ban, the decrease is less severe, from 100 to 75 (a 25 percent decrease).<br /><br />#Answer<br />The strongest argument for banning the use of fertilizer that is supported by the results of the simulation is not explicitly stated in the options provided. However, based on the data, we can infer that the ban on lawn fertilizer reduces the negative impact of the housing development on species diversity.
Click to rate:

Hot Questions

More x