Question: I read this background article the other day: The Mercator projection is best within 15 degrees north or south of the equator. Landmasses or countries outside that zone get stretched out of shape. The further the feature is from the equator, the more out of shape it is stretched. For example, if you look at Greenland on a globe, you see it is a relatively small country near the North Pole. Yet, on a Mercator projection, Greenland looks almost as big the United States. Because Greenland is closer to the pole, the continent's shape and size are greatly increased. The United States is closer to its true dimensions. I am facing a new situation today: Stef is a young girl interested in the geography of the world. For her birthday, she got two different representations of the Earth. Her grandparents gave her a map that uses the Mercator projection and her uncle gave her a globe. She is comparing how certain countries look differently on the two gifts and trying to figure out why that is. She is specifically looking at Norway, a country near the North Pole, and Mexico, a country close to the equator. Using the knowledge I acquired from the background article, how should I answer correctly the following question regarding my new situation: Will Norway be more accurately represented on the globe or the map?
Answer: globe
[Q]: I read this background article the other day: Besides anthropogenic productivity of the land, the biodiversity of degraded land also declines, as previously mentioned.[12] With less biodiversity, this ecosystem is less adaptable to when disasters strike it[11][8] It has a smaller available food supply, in terms of plants, for animals, who then may die out or more likely may relocate. Proof of this decline is that presently 15-20% of Tibetan Plateau species are now considered endangered; and now because of this animal and plant absence, the soil quality of these degraded lands is very poor.[1] It does not hold the necessary nutrients, such as water, nitrogen, and carbon, essential to either supporting life or inviting life back to that land.[6] As a result of such carbon and nitrogen loss in the Tibetan Plateau, $8,033/ha and $13,315/ha were respectively lost in economic terms. Soils are further weakened by dust storms whose frequency increases because of degradation.[11][4] Erosion of soil becomes a bigger problem, since no longer are there as many plants to anchor in the soil. In the northern Chinese province alone, 400 million are affected every year with an associated 54 billion yuan of annual economic loss due to grassland degradation. I am facing a new situation today: Xi province started sustainable agriculture and permaculture 40 years ago, while Huan province still uses conventional methods of cultivation. Animals grazing the fields extensively lead to desertification, the loss of carbon and nitrogen in the soil, and other problems. Permaculture was beneficial in Xi province, they re-built 10 inches of top soil in 10 years which is 6 times faster than the natural rate, which lead to a more diverse ecosystem and more biodiversity. Using the knowledge I acquired from the background article, how should I answer correctly the following question regarding my new situation: Which province contributed to soil degradation less?
****
[A]: Xi province
input: Please answer the following: I read this background article the other day: The lungs of mammals are unique in having alveoli . These are tiny, sac-like structures. Each alveolus is surrounded by a network of very small blood vessels (see Figure below ). Because there are millions of alveoli in each lung, they greatly increase the surface area for gas exchange between the lungs and bloodstream. Human lungs, for example, contain about 300 million alveoli. They give the lungs a total surface area for gas exchange of up to 90 square meters (968 square feet). That's about as much surface area as one side of a volleyball court! I am facing a new situation today: David is investigating the breathing process of different organisms. He found that humans have alveoli to help them with gas exchange. He got curious about other organisms that do not have alveoli. To compare these two groups he labeled organisms with alveoli as group A and organisms without alveoli as group B. Using the knowledge I acquired from the background article, how should I answer correctly the following question regarding my new situation: Which group most likely have smaller gas exchange, group A or group B?
++++++++++
output: group B
Please answer this: I read this background article the other day: New species develop naturally through the process of natural selection . Due to natural selection, organisms with traits that better enable them to adapt to their environment will tend to survive and reproduce in greater numbers. Natural selection causes beneficial heritable traits to become more common in a population and unfavorable heritable traits to become less common. For example, a giraffe's neck is beneficial because it allows the giraffe to reach leaves high in trees. Natural selection caused this beneficial trait to become more common than short necks. I am facing a new situation today: Dan studied two islands. Loon island had a very stable environment, and there weren't many diverse species of plants and animals. Wolf island displayed lots of evidence for natural selection, and had a large variety of species inhabiting it. Using the knowledge I acquired from the background article, how should I answer correctly the following question regarding my new situation: Which island had animals that reproduced in smaller numbers?
++++++++
Answer: Loon
Problem: I read this background article the other day: A mycorrhiza (Greek for "fungus roots") is a symbiotic association between a fungus and the roots of a plant. In a mycorrhizal association, the fungus may colonize the roots of a host plant by either growing directly into the root cells, or by growing around the root cells. This association provides the fungus with relatively constant and direct access to glucose, which the plant produces by photosynthesis. The mycelia of the fungi increase the surface area of the plant's root system. The larger surface area improves water and mineral nutrient absorption from the soil. I am facing a new situation today: Two gardeners started their planting season at the same time. Bill used mycorrizal fungi compost for the garden, while Hank used regular top soil. Bill was very happy with the harvest. Using the knowledge I acquired from the background article, how should I answer correctly the following question regarding my new situation: Which gardener had more fungus with constant and direct access to glucose?

A: Bill
input: Please answer the following: I read this background article the other day: The dangers of global warming are being increasingly studied by a wide global consortium of scientists. These scientists are increasingly concerned about the potential long-term effects of global warming on our natural environment and on the planet. Of particular concern is how climate change and global warming caused by anthropogenic, or human-made releases of greenhouse gases, most notably carbon dioxide, can act interactively, and have adverse effects upon the planet, its natural environment and humans' existence. It is clear the planet is warming, and warming rapidly. This is due to the greenhouse effect, which is caused by greenhouse gases, which trap heat inside the Earth's atmosphere because of their more complex molecular structure which allows them to vibrate and in turn trap heat and release it back towards the Earth. This warming is also responsible for the extinction of natural habitats, which in turn leads to a reduction in wildlife population.The most recent report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (the group of the leading climate scientists in the world) concluded that the earth will warm anywhere from 2.7 to almost 11 degrees Fahrenheit (1.5 to 6 degrees Celsius) between 1990 and 2100. I am facing a new situation today: Pam is an astronaut who has been given a mission to find a new planet for humans to live on. She is exploring the outer rims of the galaxy when she discovers two new planets that may be suitable. The atmospheric makeup of these planets is very similar to Pam's current home. After running a quick diagnostic, the only difference that Pam sees is that planet B has more carbon dioxide in its atmosphere than planet A. Using the knowledge I acquired from the background article, how should I answer correctly the following question regarding my new situation: Natural habitats are in more or less danger on planet B?
++++++++++
output:
more