At vero eos et accusamus et iusto odio dignissimos ducimus qui blanditiis praesentium voluptatum deleniti atque corrupti quos dolores et quas molestias excepturi sint occaecati cupiditate non provident, similique sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollitia animi, id est laborum et dolorum fuga. Et harum quidem rerum facilis est et expedita distinctio. Nam libero tempore, cum soluta nobis est eligendi optio cumque nihil impedit quo minus id quod maxime placeat facere possimus, omnis voluptas assumenda est, omnis dolor repellendus. Itaque earum rerum hic tenetur a sapiente delectus, ut aut reiciendis voluptatibus maiores alias consequatur aut perferendis doloribus asperiores repellat.
"What is one difference scientists noticed in parts of Zion National Park that had higher species diversity compared with regions with lower species diversity?"
Areas with lower diversity had higher rates of erosion. Areas with higher diversity had less rainfall. Areas with lower diversity had less rainfall. Well, it's probably not 2, I know.
RIght? Deserts have little biodiversity, and rainforests have hte most. THus, it should be 3.
Look, I'm just going to turn in this test, and then ask why if i get it wrong.
I'm confused... what are the numbers?
I mean, "I think it is Areas with lower diversity had less rainfall."
And, I was wrong. It was "Areas with lower diversity had higher rates of erosion.". Now tell me why.
Umm I really have to go :/ Sorry! Twas bad timing, but will talk to you when I get back
Ok, no problem. I submitted the test anyways, so I just need to see why I'm wrong.
Okey doke! -Would they have assumed you have knowledge of Zion? I can see why you wanted to ask, this is a real confusing question. I agree, it wouldn't be two, but that leaves us stuck between 1 and 3. I think the reason that it turned out to be "Areas with lower diversity had higher rates of erosion" is that rainfall on its own doesn't necessarily dictate the biodiversity. For example a really wet area may have really cold temperatures. But in saying that this question is rather ambiguous.. Perhaps what they are trying to say is those areas with low levels of plants would have high erosion and so would have lowest biodiversity. Anyway you are probably best to ask your teacher this one (and tell me what they say - I'm curious too) because its so ambiguous.
ACtually, my lesson most likely flat out gives the answer. However, I chose to ask the question because (besides being lazy) I wanted to see how much of "biology" i'm actually taking. Thanks for the reply!
lol what do you mean how much "biology"? No worries, sooo what does your lesson say? ;P
Let me check xD (it turns out it wasn't even this week's homework. It was tomorows' work, and I rushed it -.-)
ugh, time for me to go lol. I will get back to this later, and tag you.
Okay, cheers :)
You would have to be American to answer this one and probably a rock climber as well. Zion is a warren of long, tall, incredibly narrow canyons with a mesh of usually silt dry rivers running through the bottom. Being crazy, etc., every so often I go out West and spend a few weeks climbing said canyons. The only two very scary things about the place are lightening strikes (2500 feet up on exposed wall, anchored to it by metal cam, with climbing harness covered in more cams, belays, carabiners, etc - those desert lightening storms are not good news) and flash floods down in the canyons. These floods carry lorry size rocks like they are balsa wood and toss them against the canyon walls so hard they dislodge climbing gear thousands of feet up. It is one of life's intense experiences. When they say "erosion" in Zion, they are talking about floods which bring entire river beds up and down a few dozen feet in a gulp and push along these rocks which grind each other into pebbles before they are through. Spectacularly beautiful though. Go if life hands you the chance. The photo was not taken by me, but it gives the idea.