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.
Okay, to answer this question you need to think about this, if a predator eats prey the predator numbers are controlled by prey numbers (so the more prey the more predators). On the other hand prey numbers are kept down by the number of predators. Tell me which one you think it is and I'll tell you if you are right :)
i was thinking it was C
Nope not C, If there are more predators around eating more prey, do you think there would be more prey?
Hmm you're still picking the same type of relationship here, not A, if there are less predators there are not going to be less prey as there is now less of the prey being eaten.
Think about it like this, if there are three lions and one zebra, two lions are going to get hungry and die (so less prey, less predators). If there is one lion and three zebras those zebras are going to be living the high life and will keep breeding and make this huge family (as the lion can only kill one at a time), so low predators = high prey.
Good job. Predators eat prey. So, if the number of prey goes down, the predators won't have enough food. Because of that, the number of predators will ALSO go down.
No problem :)