Question: I read this background article the other day: "There is now unequivocal evidence that biodiversity loss reduces the efficiency by which ecological communities capture biologically essential resources, produce biomass, decompose and recycle biologically essential nutrients... There is mounting evidence that biodiversity increases the stability of ecosystem functions through time... Diverse communities are more productive because they contain key species that have a large influence on productivity and differences in functional traits among organisms increase total resource capture... The impacts of diversity loss on ecological processes might be sufficiently large to rival the impacts of many other global drivers of environmental change... Maintaining multiple ecosystem processes at multiple places and times requires higher levels of biodiversity than does a single process at a single place and time." I am facing a new situation today: Nicaragua is one of the most biodiverse countries in the Americas. They boast over five hundred species of birds, and thousands of species of plants. Across the pond in England the situation is completely different. Centuries of extensive farming, industrialization, and urban sprawls have made it one of the least biodiverse place on Earth. Using the knowledge I acquired from the background article, how should I answer correctly the following question regarding my new situation: Which location would see less biomass production, Nicaragua or England?
Answer: England

Question: I read this background article the other day: The benefits provided by no-tillage to predators may lead to larger predator populations, which is a good way to control pests (biological control), but also can facilitate predation of the crop itself. In corn crops, for instance, predation by caterpillars can be higher in no-till than in conventional tillage fields.In places with rigorous winter, untilled soil can take longer to warm and dry in spring, which may delay planting to less ideal dates. Another factor to be considered is that organic residue from the prior year's crops lying on the surface of untilled fields can provide a favorable environment to pathogens, helping to increase the risk of transmitting diseases to the future crop. And because no-till farming provides good environment for pathogens, insects and weeds, it can lead farmers to a more intensive use of chemicals for pest control. Other disadvantages of no-till include underground rot, low soil temperatures and high moisture.Based on the balance of these factors, and because each farm has different problems, agroecologists will not attest that only no-till or complete tillage is the right way of farming. Yet, these are not the only possible choices regarding soil preparation, since there are intermediate practices such as strip-till, mulch-till and ridge-till, all of them just as no-till categorized as conservation tillage. Agroecologists, then, will evaluate the need of different practices for the contexts in which each farm is inserted. I am facing a new situation today: Kat and Joe were into vegetable gardening. Joe started the no-till gardening method, while Kat applied conventional gardening methods. Using the knowledge I acquired from the background article, how should I answer correctly the following question regarding my new situation: Which gardener had a soil that takes longer to dry in spring?
Answer: Joe

Question: I read this background article the other day: When the temperature of reactants is higher, the rate of the reaction is faster. At higher temperatures, particles of reactants have more energy, so they move faster. As a result, they are more likely to bump into one another and to collide with greater force. For example, food spoils because of chemical reactions, and these reactions occur faster at higher temperatures (see the bread on the left in the Figure below ). This is why we store foods in the refrigerator or freezer (like the bread on the right in the Figure below ). The lower temperature slows the rate of spoilage. I am facing a new situation today: Justin and Thomas are two college students conducting an experiment in their chemistry laboratory course. They are mixing together acids and bases to produce sodium based compounds. Justin conducts his reactions at a high temperature, while Thomas conducts his reactions at a lower temperature. Using the knowledge I acquired from the background article, how should I answer correctly the following question regarding my new situation: In which person's reactions will the acid and base particles be less likely to collide with each other?
Answer:
Thomas