[Q]: I have a new situation: Karen studied animals in school. She started studying predators for a school presentation. She liked it. Her friend Molly liked cows, sheep and other herbivores, so she decided to do a presentation about grazers, and their role in nature. But I can use this background: Predators play an important role in an ecosystem. For example, if they did not exist, then a single species could become dominant over others. Grazers on a grassland keep grass from growing out of control. Predators can be keystone species . These are species that can have a large effect on the balance of organisms in an ecosystem. For example, if all of the wolves are removed from a population, then the population of deer or rabbits may increase. If there are too many deer, then they may decrease the amount of plants or grasses in the ecosystem. Decreased levels of producers may then have a detrimental effect on the whole ecosystem. In this example, the wolves would be a keystone species. What is an answer for this question: Which girl learned less about wolves?
****
[A]: Molly

[Q]: I have a new situation: Keith was playing a simulation game. In the game he could travel around the Sun in the future. He started the game in present time, which was denoted as time A. Then he traveled 5.4 billion years into the future, which was denoted as time B. Finally, he reached 7.5 billion years into the future, which was denoted as time C. He was amazed to find how the Sun would change over time. But I can use this background: Around 5.4 billion years from now, the core of the Sun will become hot enough to trigger hydrogen fusion in its surrounding shell. This will cause the outer layers of the star to expand greatly, and the star will enter a phase of its life in which it is called a red giant. Within 7.5 billion years, the Sun will have expanded to a radius of 1.2 AU256 times its current size. At the tip of the red giant branch, as a result of the vastly increased surface area, the Sun's surface will be much cooler (about 2600 K) than now and its luminosity much higherup to 2,700 current solar luminosities. For part of its red giant life, the Sun will have a strong stellar wind that will carry away around 33% of its mass. During these times, it is possible that Saturn's moon Titan could achieve surface temperatures necessary to support life.As the Sun expands, it will swallow the planets Mercury and Venus. Earth's fate is less clear; although the Sun will envelop Earth's current orbit, the star's loss of mass (and thus weaker gravity) will cause the planets' orbits to move farther out. If it were only for this, Venus and Earth would probably escape incineration, but a 2008 study suggests that Earth will likely be swallowed up as a result of tidal interactions with the Sun's weakly bound outer envelope.Gradually, the hydrogen burning in the shell around the solar core will increase the mass of the core until it reaches about 45% of the present solar mass. At this point the density and temperature will become so high that the fusion of helium into carbon will begin, leading to a helium flash; the Sun will shrink from around 250 to 11 times its present (main-sequence) radius. Consequently, its luminosity will decrease from around 3,000 to 54 times its current level, and its surface temperature will increase to about 4770 K. The Sun will become a horizontal giant, burning helium in its core in a stable fashion much like it burns hydrogen today. The helium-fusing stage will last only 100 million years. Eventually, it will have to... What is an answer for this question: When would the size of the Sun be bigger, time A or time C?
****
[A]: time C

[Q]: I have a new situation: Two climate experts studied different continent to observe climate changes. Jordan studied Australia, while Jeb studied Antarctica. But I can use this background: Some of Antarctica has been warming up; particularly strong warming has been noted on the Antarctic Peninsula. A study by Eric Steig published in 2009 noted for the first time that the continent-wide average surface temperature trend of Antarctica is slightly positive at >0.05 C (0.09 F) per decade from 1957 to 2006. This study also noted that West Antarctica has warmed by more than 0.1 C (0.2 F) per decade in the last 50 years, and this warming is strongest in winter and spring. This is partly offset by autumn cooling in East Antarctica. There is evidence from one study that Antarctica is warming as a result of human carbon dioxide emissions, but this remains ambiguous. The amount of surface warming in West Antarctica, while large, has not led to appreciable melting at the surface, and is not directly affecting the West Antarctic Ice Sheet's contribution to sea level. Instead the recent increases in glacier outflow are believed to be due to an inflow of warm water from the deep ocean, just off the continental shelf. The net contribution to sea level from the Antarctic Peninsula is more likely to be a direct result of the much greater atmospheric warming there.In 2002 the Antarctic Peninsula's Larsen-B ice shelf collapsed. Between 28 February and 8 March 2008, about 570 km2 (220 sq mi) of ice from the Wilkins Ice Shelf on the southwest part of the peninsula collapsed, putting the remaining 15,000 km2 (5,800 sq mi) of the ice shelf at risk. The ice was being held back by a "thread" of ice about 6 km (4 mi) wide, prior to its collapse on 5 April 2009. According to NASA, the most widespread Antarctic surface melting of the past 30 years occurred in 2005, when an area of ice comparable in size to California briefly melted and refroze; this may have resulted from temperatures rising to as high as 5 C (41 F).A study published in Nature Geoscience in 2013 (online in December 2012) identified central West Antarctica as one of the fastest-warming regions on Earth. The researchers present a complete temperature... What is an answer for this question: Which person didn't observe warming in spring?
****
[A]: Jordan

[Q]: I have a new situation: The Madrigal Ocean and the Listy Ocean are two bodies of water currently under observation by scientists on a planet nearly identical to Earth. Although the studies have just started, the scientists have already discovered that the salinity of the Madrigal Ocean is much lower than that of the Listy Ocean. This isn't much information, but it's progress and the scientists are not going to stop their studies until they learn all that they can about these waters. But I can use this background: Located mostly in the Arctic north polar region in the middle of the Northern Hemisphere, the Arctic Ocean is almost completely surrounded by Eurasia and North America. It is partly covered by sea ice throughout the year and almost completely in winter. The Arctic Ocean's surface temperature and salinity vary seasonally as the ice cover melts and freezes; its salinity is the lowest on average of the five major oceans, due to low evaporation, heavy fresh water inflow from rivers and streams, and limited connection and outflow to surrounding oceanic waters with higher salinities. The summer shrinking of the ice has been quoted at 50%. The US National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) uses satellite data to provide a daily record of Arctic sea ice cover and the rate of melting compared to an average period and specific past years. What is an answer for this question: Is the Madrigal Ocean probably connected to more or less rivers than the Listy Ocean?
****
[A]:
more