Question 1
A grassland has a baseline rabbit population that has been slowly increasing during a mild year. Then a drought reduces grass growth for several months. A field survey shows fewer fresh rabbit droppings and more bare ground two months after the drought begins. Which statement best predicts the rabbit population change over time (before vs. after the drought) using evidence about resources? Population changes can be predicted from evidence, but the exact outcome is not certain.
- The rabbit population is likely to stop increasing and may decline over time because the food resource (grass) decreased and signs of rabbit activity dropped.
- The rabbit population will not change because drought only affects plants, not animals.
- The rabbit population will increase without limit because rabbits can always find something else to eat.
- The rabbit population will change randomly, so evidence about grass and droppings cannot support a prediction.
Explanation: The core skill in predicting population changes is evaluating how environmental shifts, like droughts, impact resource availability and thus population sizes. Resource changes, such as reduced grass growth, directly affect rabbit populations by limiting food, which can lead to decreased survival or reproduction rates. Evidence including fewer droppings and more bare ground supports predictions by indicating resource scarcity and reduced rabbit activity over time. A useful checking strategy is to review if the evidence shows consistent signs of resource limitation that could pressure the population. One misconception is that animals are unaffected by plant changes, but herbivores depend heavily on vegetation for sustenance. Predictions are grounded in trends like declining resources and activity levels, providing a basis for likely population declines. In general, these predictions use evidence to forecast changes without guaranteeing exact results.
Question 2
Baseline: A colony of ants in a school garden has been growing slowly through early summer. Change: A pest control treatment removes many aphids from nearby plants, reducing the sugary honeydew the ants collect. Evidence: For the next several weeks, fewer ants are observed on those plants and more ants are seen searching farther away. Which prediction about the ant colony’s population over time is best supported by the evidence about resource availability (before vs. after the treatment)? Population changes can be predicted from evidence, but predictions are not certainties.
- The colony will not change because ants choose to keep the population the same to match the garden.
- The colony will grow without limit because ants can always make more food.
- The colony will definitely shrink immediately to half its size as soon as aphids are removed.
- The colony is likely to grow more slowly or possibly decline over time because a key food resource (honeydew) decreased and ants are spending more effort searching.
Explanation: Predicting population changes entails assessing how reductions in key food sources can slow growth or cause declines in insect colonies. Resource changes, like decreased honeydew from aphid removal, affect ant populations by increasing foraging effort and potentially limiting energy for reproduction. Evidence of fewer ants on plants and more searching afar supports predictions by highlighting resource scarcity impacts. To check, evaluate if behavioral changes correlate with resource decline over weeks. A misconception is that populations shrink immediately upon resource loss, but effects often manifest gradually. Predictions rely on trends in resource availability and activity patterns for likely outcomes. Generally, evidence guides these predictions, acknowledging uncertainties in natural systems.
Question 3
A lake has a baseline population of small fish that has been stable. A new invasive plant spreads along the shoreline, creating more hiding places for young fish. Over the next month, a survey finds that more young fish are surviving to be seen in shallow water. Which prediction about the small fish population is supported by the evidence and the change in resources/conditions (before vs. after the plant spread)? Population changes can be predicted from evidence, but predictions are not certainties.
- The fish population will stay the same because plants and fish are unrelated.
- The fish population is likely to increase over time because increased shelter can improve survival, and surveys show more young fish surviving.
- The fish population will definitely increase the next day because shelter works instantly.
- The fish population will decrease because the plant spread happened at the same time as more young fish were seen, so the plant must be harming them.
Explanation: The core skill is predicting how changes in habitat conditions, like added shelter, can influence population dynamics in aquatic ecosystems. Resource changes, such as increased hiding places from invasive plants, can positively affect fish populations by improving survival rates of young individuals. Evidence of more young fish surviving supports predictions by linking the shelter increase to observable population benefits over time. A checking strategy involves confirming that the evidence shows a causal relationship between the resource change and population indicators. One misconception is that plants and animals are unrelated, but habitat modifications can directly impact animal survival. Predictions are based on trends in conditions and survival data, enabling reasoned forecasts. In essence, such predictions use evidence to project likely population increases without absolute certainty.
Question 4
A forest has a baseline population of deer that has been steady. A new fence blocks deer from reaching part of their usual winter feeding area, reducing available shrubs in the accessible area. Evidence: After the fence is built, more deer are observed eating tree bark and the shrubs in the accessible area show heavier browsing damage. Which statement best predicts the deer population change over time (before vs. after the fence) using evidence about resources? Population changes can be predicted from evidence, but predictions are not certainties.
- The deer population is likely to face increased competition for food and may decline over time because accessible food resources decreased and signs of food shortage increased.
- The deer population will definitely increase because deer can eat bark, so food is unlimited.
- The deer population will stay the same because fences only change where deer walk, not how many survive.
- The deer population will change randomly, so browsing damage does not provide evidence for prediction.
Explanation: The core skill involves forecasting population responses to barriers that restrict access to essential resources like food. Changes in resources, such as reduced shrub availability due to fencing, can lead to increased competition and potential deer population declines. Evidence of more bark eating and browsing damage supports predictions by indicating food shortages and stress. A strategy for checking is to ensure evidence reflects resource limitation effects on behavior and survival. One misconception is that physical barriers only alter movement, not population size, but they can indirectly affect numbers through resource access. Predictions are based on trends in resource use and signs of shortage, informing probable changes. Overall, such predictions use evidence to anticipate outcomes while recognizing variability.
Question 5
A coastal tide pool has a baseline population of mussels that has been stable. A storm deposits a layer of sand that covers many rocks where mussels attach, reducing available attachment sites. Evidence: In the weeks after the storm, more mussels are found detached and washed into deeper water. Which prediction about the mussel population in the tide pool is supported by the evidence about resource/space availability (before vs. after the storm)? Population changes can be predicted from evidence, but predictions are not certainties.
- The mussel population in the tide pool is likely to decrease over time because attachment space decreased and more mussels are being detached.
- The mussel population will definitely stay the same because storms only move sand, not living things.
- The mussel population will increase immediately because sand provides new places to attach.
- The mussel population will change only if mussels evolve new genes for sand attachment first.
Explanation: Predicting population changes includes examining how environmental disturbances alter space and attachment resources for sessile organisms. Resource changes, like reduced rock surfaces from sand deposition, can decrease mussel populations by limiting secure attachment sites. Evidence of more detached mussels supports predictions by showing direct impacts on stability and survival. To verify, check if observations consistently link the resource shift to population indicators post-event. A misconception is that storms only affect non-living elements, but they can displace organisms and alter habitats. Predictions draw from trends in resource availability and detachment rates for expected declines. In summary, evidence-based predictions provide insights into population responses without certainties.
Question 6
A classroom terrarium has a baseline population of crickets that has been stable for several weeks. Change: The class forgets to add fresh food for a while, so less food is available. Evidence: Over the next two weeks, students notice fewer crickets moving around and more time spent hiding, and some dead crickets appear. Which prediction about the cricket population over time is best supported by the evidence about resources (before vs. after the missed feedings)? Population changes can be predicted from evidence, but predictions are not certainties.
- The population is likely to decrease over time because food availability dropped and evidence shows reduced activity and deaths.
- The population will definitely return to normal instantly as soon as food is added again.
- The population will not change because crickets can decide to stop needing food.
- The population will increase because fewer crickets moving means they are saving energy to reproduce more.
Explanation: The core skill is anticipating how lapses in resource provision affect captive populations like crickets in a terrarium. Resource changes, such as missed feedings reducing food, can lead to decreased activity and higher mortality, impacting population size. Evidence of fewer movements, more hiding, and deaths supports predictions by illustrating resource deprivation effects. A checking strategy is to compare baseline stability with post-change observations for consistency. One misconception is that animals can simply stop needing resources, but survival depends on consistent availability. Predictions are grounded in trends of reduced resources and mortality signs, suggesting likely decreases. Generally, these predictions rely on evidence to forecast changes amid uncertainties.
Question 7
A town has a baseline population of pigeons that has remained fairly steady around a busy outdoor market. The market closes for renovations, and food scraps become much less available. Two weeks later, fewer pigeons are seen near the market, and more are seen near a park with trash cans. Which prediction about the pigeon population near the market is supported by the evidence about resources (before vs. after the closure)? Population changes can be predicted from evidence, but predictions are not certainties.
- Pigeons near the market are likely to decrease over time because the food resource there decreased and observations show fewer pigeons at that location.
- Pigeons near the market will definitely stay the same because animals always return to the same place.
- Pigeons near the market will increase immediately because the park has more trash cans.
- Pigeons near the market will not change because population size is controlled only by genetics, not food.
Explanation: Predicting population changes requires understanding how shifts in food availability can cause animals to relocate or adjust numbers in specific areas. When resources like food scraps decrease in one location, pigeon populations may decline there as individuals move to better-resourced areas. Evidence such as fewer pigeons near the market and more near the park supports predictions by demonstrating behavioral responses to resource changes. To verify a prediction, assess whether observations align with resource availability before and after the change. A misconception is that animals always stay in the same place regardless of resources, but they often move to optimize survival. Predictions draw from trends in resource distribution and observed movements, offering probable outcomes. Ultimately, evidence-based predictions help anticipate population shifts in dynamic environments.
Question 8
Starting condition (before): A forest has a stable deer population because there is enough understory plants to eat. Change in resources (after): An invasive plant spreads and crowds out many native understory plants that deer eat. Evidence: Months later, fewer deer tracks are found in the area and more deer are seen closer to roads where other plants grow. Time: before vs after is described. Population changes can be predicted from evidence.
Which prediction about deer population change is supported by the evidence about resources?
- The deer population in that forest area will likely decrease over time or shift location because an important food resource decreased.
- The deer population will stay the same because only predators can change deer populations.
- The deer population will immediately disappear from the entire region as soon as the invasive plant appears.
- The deer population will increase because the invasive plant intends to provide more shelter for deer.
Explanation: Predicting population changes means using evidence about resource availability to forecast how organism numbers will likely change over time. When food plants are replaced by inedible species, herbivore populations like deer typically decrease in that area or move to locations with better food sources. The evidence of fewer deer tracks locally and more deer near roads shows they're responding to the food shortage by changing their distribution. To check predictions, verify that the evidence supports the logical consequence of the resource change. Some students mistakenly think only predators affect prey populations, but resource availability is equally important. Population predictions are based on the principle that organisms must meet their needs or move elsewhere. Evidence of changed movement patterns supports predictions about local population decreases or shifts in distribution.
Question 9
Starting condition (before): A rabbit population in a meadow is steady, with many grasses available. Change in resources (after): A new fence blocks rabbits from reaching half of the meadow, reducing available grass. Evidence/trend: In the months after the fence is built, more rabbits are seen eating bark and fewer young rabbits are observed. Time: before vs after is described. Population changes can be predicted from evidence. Which statement best predicts the rabbit population response to the resource change, using the evidence?
- The rabbit population will likely decrease over time because less grass is available, and fewer young rabbits suggest lower reproduction.
- The rabbit population will increase because rabbits choose to have more babies when food is harder to find.
- The rabbit population will keep growing without limits because rabbits can always find some food somewhere.
- The rabbit population will not change because the fence is not part of the rabbits’ genes.
Explanation: The core skill is predicting how populations respond to changes in their environment, particularly resources like food. Resource changes, such as a fence reducing available grass, impact populations by decreasing food access, which can lead to lower reproduction and survival. Evidence such as fewer young rabbits and alternative feeding behaviors supports predictions by showing direct effects on population dynamics. A checking strategy is to ensure the prediction logically connects the resource change to the observed evidence without exaggeration. One misconception is that populations grow indefinitely regardless of resources, but they are limited by carrying capacity. Predictions are grounded in trends like reduced births, allowing for reasonable forecasts of decline. In general, evidence-based predictions help understand ecosystem balances over time.
Question 10
Starting condition (before): A pond has a stable population of algae-eating snails, and most weeks the algae cover on rocks stays about the same. Change in resources (after): A week of cloudy weather reduces sunlight, and algae growth slows. Evidence/trend: Over the next several weeks, fewer new snail egg clusters are observed. Time: before vs after is described. Population changes can be predicted from evidence, not with certainty. Which prediction about the snail population change is supported by the evidence about resources?
- The snail population will definitely go extinct because any decrease in algae always causes total population collapse.
- The snail population will likely decrease over time because less sunlight reduces algae, and fewer egg clusters suggest fewer snails will be added.
- The snail population will stay the same because populations do not change when resources change for only a week.
- The snail population will increase immediately because snails will quickly adapt their genes to the lower algae level.
Explanation: The core skill in middle school life science is predicting population changes based on resource availability and trends. Resource changes, such as a decrease in sunlight leading to less algae, affect populations by limiting food, which can reduce survival and reproduction rates. Evidence like fewer snail egg clusters supports predictions by indicating lower birth rates following the resource decline. To check a prediction, evaluate if it aligns with the evidence of resource limitation and observed trends without assuming certainty. A common misconception is that populations adapt genetically immediately to changes, but adaptations occur over generations, not instantly. Predictions are based on observed trends, such as reduced reproduction, to forecast likely decreases over time. Ultimately, these predictions rely on scientific evidence rather than absolute certainties or unrelated factors.
Question 11
Starting condition (before): Two similar gardens each have a stable population of aphids on rose bushes. Change in resources (after): In Garden 1, a fertilizer increases new leaf growth (more food for aphids). In Garden 2, a gardener prunes many new shoots (less food for aphids). Evidence/trend: After several weeks, Garden 1 shows more sticky residue on leaves and more aphids are spotted; Garden 2 shows fewer aphids spotted. Time: before vs after is described. Population changes can be predicted from evidence. Which comparison of predicted outcomes is supported by the evidence about resources?
- Aphid populations will likely increase over time in Garden 1 and decrease over time in Garden 2 because food availability increased in one garden and decreased in the other, matching the observed trends.
- Aphid populations will likely increase over time in both gardens because aphids always grow when humans work in a garden.
- Aphid populations will not change in either garden because the roses are the same species, so resource changes do not matter.
- Aphid populations will change randomly in each garden with no connection to resources, so the observations should be ignored.
Explanation: The core skill is comparing population predictions across similar but altered environments. Resource changes, like fertilizing one garden and pruning another, differentially affect populations by altering food availability. Evidence such as more aphids in one and fewer in the other supports contrasting predictions. A checking strategy is to match predictions to specific evidence from each scenario. One misconception is that identical species ignore resource differences, but environments drive changes. Predictions rely on trends in observations like residue and counts. In broader terms, evidence-based predictions highlight how resources shape population dynamics.
Question 12
Starting condition (before): In a school garden, a population of caterpillars feeds on leafy plants and stays about the same from week to week. Change in resources (after): Students plant many new leafy seedlings, increasing available food. Evidence/trend: Over several weeks, more caterpillars are observed and more leaf damage appears on the plants. Time: before vs after is described. Population changes can be predicted from evidence. Which prediction about the caterpillar population change is supported by the evidence about resources?
- The caterpillar population will likely increase over time because more food is available, and observations show more caterpillars appearing after the planting.
- The caterpillar population will stay the same because populations only change due to genetics, not food supply.
- The caterpillar population will increase instantly to its maximum size the very next day because extra food causes immediate population growth.
- The caterpillar population will randomly change with no connection to the new seedlings, so evidence about food does not matter.
Explanation: The core skill involves predicting population growth or decline from resource shifts in ecosystems. Resource changes, like adding more leafy plants, affect populations by increasing food, potentially boosting survival and reproduction. Evidence such as more caterpillars and leaf damage supports predictions by demonstrating a positive response to abundant resources. To verify a prediction, compare it to the evidence and ensure it accounts for gradual changes rather than instant effects. A misconception is that populations only change due to genetics, ignoring environmental factors like food supply. Predictions rely on trends observed over weeks, indicating likely increases. Overall, such predictions use evidence to generalize about resource-driven population dynamics.
Question 13
Starting condition (before): A forest has a stable population of deer, and water is usually available in several small streams. Change in resources (after): A drought dries up most streams, leaving only one small water source. Evidence/trend: In the months after the drought begins, deer tracks become more concentrated near the remaining water, and fewer fawns are observed. Time: before vs after is described. Population changes can be predicted from evidence. Which statement best predicts the deer population response to the resource change, using the evidence?
- The deer population will likely decrease over time because reduced water availability can lower survival and reproduction, and fewer fawns are observed after the drought.
- The deer population will stay the same because deer can control how much water exists by drinking less.
- The deer population will increase immediately because concentrating near water makes the population larger.
- The deer population change cannot be predicted from evidence, so observations about fawns and water are not useful.
Explanation: The core skill is predicting population responses to environmental stressors like droughts. Resource changes, such as diminished water sources, impact populations by concentrating individuals and reducing overall survival and reproduction. Evidence including fewer fawns and concentrated tracks supports predictions of decline over time. A checking strategy involves linking the prediction directly to the resource evidence and observed effects. A misconception is that animals can control resource levels, but they adapt behaviorally within limits. Predictions are informed by trends in reproduction and distribution. Ultimately, these rely on evidence to generalize about resource-limited population changes.
Question 14
Starting condition (before): A field has a stable population of mice that eat seeds on the ground. Change in resources (after): A new invasive plant spreads and produces many more seeds than the previous plants. Evidence/trend: Over several months, more mouse burrows are counted and more mouse droppings are found in the field. Time: before vs after is described. Population changes can be predicted from evidence. Which prediction about the mouse population change is supported by the evidence about resources?
- The mouse population will likely increase over time because more seeds provide more food, and signs of mice (burrows and droppings) increase after the plant spreads.
- The mouse population will stay the same because only shelter affects population size, not food resources.
- The mouse population increase proves the invasive plant intentionally helped the mice, so the mice will keep increasing forever.
- The mouse population will likely decrease because more seeds mean mice will stop searching for food and become weaker.
Explanation: The core skill is anticipating population increases from enhanced resources in fields. Resource changes, such as invasive plants adding seeds, boost populations by providing more food, enhancing survival and reproduction. Evidence like more burrows and droppings supports predictions by indicating growth following the change. A checking strategy is to connect the prediction to evidence without assuming intentional ecosystem help. One misconception is that more food weakens populations, but it usually supports expansion. Predictions stem from trends in signs of activity and abundance. Overall, evidence allows generalization to similar resource-population interactions.
Question 15
Starting condition (before): A backyard bird feeder supports a steady population of finches visiting daily. Change in resources (after): The feeder is removed, reducing a reliable food source. Evidence/trend: Over the next few weeks, fewer finches are seen in the yard, and more are seen at a neighbor’s feeder. Time: before vs after is described. Population changes can be predicted from evidence. Which prediction about the finch population in the yard is supported by the resource change and evidence?
- The finch population in the yard will not change because the total number of finches is fixed and cannot respond to resources.
- The finch population in the yard will increase because finches will reproduce more when food is scarce.
- The finch population in the yard will definitely become zero immediately the day the feeder is removed.
- The finch population in the yard will likely decrease over time because the food resource was removed, and observations show fewer finches after the change.
Explanation: The core skill entails predicting local population changes from specific resource removals. Resource changes, like eliminating a bird feeder, affect populations by cutting off food, prompting relocation or decline. Evidence such as fewer finches in the yard supports predictions by showing immediate behavioral shifts. To verify, assess if the prediction avoids extremes like instant extinction and aligns with trends. A common misconception is that populations increase when resources decrease, but scarcity typically reduces numbers. Predictions are based on observed trends in presence and movement. In general, evidence helps forecast gradual, resource-driven adjustments.
Question 16
Starting condition (before): A backyard bird population is steady because there are several bird feeders with seeds. Change in resources (after): Two feeders are removed, so less seed is available. Evidence: In the following weeks, fewer birds visit the yard and more birds are seen searching on the ground farther away. Time: before vs after is described. Population changes can be predicted from evidence.
Which statement best predicts the outcome for the bird population based on resources and evidence?
- The bird population using that yard will likely decrease over time or shift to other areas because the seed resource decreased, and the visit trend supports that prediction.
- The bird population will stay the same because birds can choose to ignore resource changes.
- The bird population will increase without limits because birds can fly to get unlimited seeds.
- The bird population will definitely disappear forever from the neighborhood because two feeders were removed.
Explanation: Predicting population changes involves analyzing how resource availability affects where and how many organisms can survive in an area. When artificial food sources like bird feeders are reduced, local bird populations typically decrease or redistribute to areas with more resources. The evidence of fewer yard visits and increased ground searching elsewhere shows birds are responding to reduced food availability by changing their foraging patterns. To check predictions, verify that the observed behavior changes match expected responses to resource reduction. A misconception is thinking birds have unlimited food access because they can fly, but all habitats have resource limits. Population predictions are based on understanding that local population density depends on local resource availability. Evidence of behavioral changes often precedes and predicts upcoming population shifts.
Question 17
Starting condition (before): A pond has a stable population of algae-eating snails because there is plenty of algae. Change in resources (after): For several weeks, cloudy weather reduces sunlight, so algae growth decreases. Evidence: Students observe less algae on rocks and fewer snail egg clusters over the next few weeks. Time: before vs after is described. Population changes can be predicted from evidence.
Which prediction about the snail population change is supported by the evidence about resources?
- The snail population will immediately drop to near zero as soon as algae decreases.
- The snail population will keep increasing without limits because snails can always find something else to eat.
- The snail population will likely decrease over time because less algae means less food to support many snails.
- The snail population will stay the same because populations do not change unless their genes change.
Explanation: Predicting population changes means using evidence about resource availability to forecast how organism numbers will likely change over time. When resources like food decrease, populations that depend on those resources typically decline because there isn't enough to support as many individuals. The evidence shows both reduced algae (the food source) and fewer snail egg clusters, which indicates the snails are already responding to the resource limitation. To check predictions, look for whether the evidence about resources matches the predicted population trend. A common misconception is that populations change instantly or completely disappear, but most changes happen gradually. Population predictions are based on the principle that organisms need resources to survive and reproduce, so resource changes lead to predictable population responses.
Question 18
Starting condition (before): A lake has a stable population of aquatic plants because water is clear and sunlight reaches the bottom. Change in resources (after): Construction nearby increases muddy runoff, making the water less clear so less sunlight reaches plants. Evidence: Over the next several weeks, more dead plant material is found along the shoreline. Time: before vs after is described. Population changes can be predicted from evidence.
Which prediction about the aquatic plant population is supported by the evidence about resources?
- The aquatic plant population will increase immediately because muddy water protects plants from being eaten.
- The aquatic plant population will increase without limits because plants can make their own food, so they do not need resources.
- The aquatic plant population will stay the same because mud only changes appearance, not resources.
- The aquatic plant population will likely decrease over time because reduced sunlight limits photosynthesis, a key resource for growth.
Explanation: Predicting population changes requires understanding how resource availability influences organism survival and reproduction over time. Sunlight is a critical resource for photosynthesis in aquatic plants, and when muddy water blocks light, plant populations typically decline because they cannot produce enough food. The evidence of increased dead plant material shows plants are already dying from insufficient light, supporting a prediction of population decrease. To check predictions, verify that the resource change would logically impact the organism's essential life processes. A common misconception is that plants don't need resources because they make their own food, but they need light, water, and nutrients to do so. Population predictions are based on understanding that all organisms, including producers, depend on specific resources. When light becomes limited underwater, plant populations respond predictably through reduced growth and increased mortality.
Question 19
Starting condition (before): A beach has a stable population of crabs that feed on small shellfish and other food washed in by tides. Change in resources (after): A new seawall changes the tide flow, and less food washes onto the beach. Evidence: Over the next few months, fewer crab burrows are counted in the sand during surveys. Time: before vs after is described. Population changes can be predicted from evidence.
Which prediction about the crab population change is supported by evidence about resources?
- The crab population will definitely increase because fewer crabs means each crab gets more food, so the population must rise.
- The crab population will likely decrease over time because the resource supply from tides decreased, and the burrow trend supports that prediction.
- The crab population will not change because the seawall only affects water movement, not living things.
- The crab population will instantly match the old level again because populations respond immediately to any change.
Explanation: Predicting population changes means using evidence about resource availability to forecast how organism numbers will likely change over time. When tidal food delivery decreases due to physical barriers, populations of tide-dependent organisms like crabs typically decline because their food supply is reduced. The evidence of fewer crab burrows over months shows the population is already decreasing, supporting the prediction based on resource limitation. To verify predictions, check that the timeline and evidence match the expected population response to resource changes. Some students incorrectly think physical structures only affect water, not organisms, but habitat modifications directly impact resource availability. Population predictions are grounded in cause-and-effect relationships between environmental changes and organism needs. Long-term evidence like burrow counts provides strong support for population trend predictions.
Question 20
Starting condition (before): A small island has a stable lizard population that eats insects. Change in resources (after): A pesticide spray reduces insect numbers for several weeks. Evidence: After the spray, fewer insects are seen and lizards spend more time basking and less time feeding. Time: before vs after is described. Population changes can be predicted from evidence.
Which prediction about the lizard population is supported by evidence about resources?
- The lizard population change will be random and cannot be predicted from evidence about resources.
- The lizard population will immediately increase because lizards will be less busy hunting and can reproduce instantly.
- The lizard population will likely decrease over time because fewer insects means less food to support the same number of lizards.
- The lizard population will stay the same because pesticide affects only insects, not lizards.
Explanation: Predicting population changes means using evidence about resource availability to forecast how organism numbers will likely change over time. When a key food source decreases, like insects for lizards, the predator population typically declines because there isn't enough food to support the same number of individuals. The evidence that lizards spend less time feeding and more time basking indicates they're finding less food, supporting a prediction of population decrease. To check predictions, verify that the resource change logically leads to the predicted outcome based on organism needs. Some students incorrectly think indirect effects don't matter, but food web connections mean changes to prey affect predators. Population predictions are based on energy flow through ecosystems, where reduced prey means reduced energy for predators. Evidence-based predictions consider both direct observations and logical consequences of resource changes.