1.

Most of the solar energy striking the earth's surface is reflected or

absorbed, and thus scattered or transformed into heat. Of the
sunlight falling on green plants, approximately 56% is reflected
and 44% is absorbed. The percentage absorbed varies with
different species of plants and various environmental conditions.
Of the amount absorbed by plants, most is spent in transpiration
and other physical processes; less than 10% is utilized in
photosynthesis. Ultimately, only about 1% of the total solar energy
striking plants is converted to chemical energy through
photosynthesis. Thus, the ecological efficiency of green plants is
typically on the order of 1%.
2. The Arctic terrestrial environment and the Antarctic seas tend to be
relatively productive during their short summer season because
they have short, simple food chains. The shorter the food chain, the
greater the biomass that can be produced from a given amount of
solar energy. The reason for this is that the majority of energy,
normally about 90%, is lost in the form of heat or motion at each
trophic level. A typical herbivore converts only about 10% of the
plant energy it consumes into the chemical energy of its own body
tissues, and a typical carnivore, in turn, converts only about 10% of
the energy it consumes into its own body tissues. Thus a two- or
three-link food chain produces more animal biomass than a five-
link food chain. In practical terms, this means that a given prairie
or alfalfa field can produce more pounds of bison or cattle than it
can wolves or human beings. Similarly, a given pond or lake can
produce more pounds of grass carp than trout.
3. Food web contribute to agricultural management in several ways.
They permit comparison of the efficiencies of different crops and
analyses of how much energy is lost to insects, disease, rodents,
birds, and other crop pests. They can also help in evaluating the
cost effectiveness of fertilizers, pesticides, cultivation procedures,
and watershed management.
4. Trophic structures tend to become progressively more complex as
we proceed from polar regions to temperate regions to the tropics,
and also as we proceed from agriculture to natural ecosystems.
Agriculture is, of course, intentionally simplified in order to funnel
as much primary production as possible to humans. Natural
systems become more complex in temperate and tropical zones
because of greater biological diversity. In most temperate food
webs, the patterns of energy flow become so complicated that it is
difficult or impossible to diagram all of the existing relationships.
A typical temperate forest, for example, may have 40% or 50% of
insectivorous birds feeding on hundreds of species of insects.
Numerous phyla and virtually countless species of invertebrates
and microorganisms exist in the leaf litter and soil, representing
several different trophic levels. No one has fully described all of
these potential relationships, or even enumerated all the kinds of
organisms in 10 square meters of any community on earth. In
tropical forests, much greater complexities occur. We have not
even named or identified the majority of species, let alone studied
their ecological roles.
5. An ecosystem can achieve a certain amount of self-regulation
within limits, but if these limits are exceeded, the ecosystem may
no longer be able to function normally and will thus show various
patterns of change, injury, or breakdown. A major task of modem
science is to study ecosystems with the purpose of understanding
natural homeostatic mechanisms and limitations. It is particularly
important that we recognize the tolerance levels of different
systems. How much disturbance can ecosystems of various types
withstand? How much variation and perturbation is normal within
the homeostatic abilities of the system, and at what point does
serious injury or irreparable damage occur? These questions are
being addressed by a major program of Long-term Ecological
Research (LTER) within the National Science Foundation (NSF).
 The questions and the answers are of vital importance in the
maintenance of viable environments for ourselves as well as for
countless other organisms on earth. It is obvious in many areas that
we have exceeded ecosystem tolerance, through high pollution,
excessive land scarring, and total displacement of some biotic
communities.
6. In a very broad and massive way, the global ecosystem has also
maintained certain homeostatic balances which are now changing
due to human activities. Atmospheric carbon dioxide is probably
the best example. Its increase in the twentieth century is well
documented as a result of increased combustion and decreased
CO2 uptake due to deforestation. Although we can sketch the main
outlines of the carbon cycle, we certainly do not understand all of
its quantitative ramifications.
7. Ecosystems are not static. They are dynamic, showing patterns of
growth, development, and maturation. Young ecosystems tend to
have low species diversity, low nutrient storage, low biomass, but
high productivity. Mature ecosystems have higher species
diversity, higher nutrient storage, and higher biomass, but lower
productivity per unit biomass.
8. Most ecosystems have a certain resilience or capability for
restoration, though this capability varies greatly. Some ecological
communities are very fragile, while others are surprisingly tough.
Both history and current science can provide examples of
irreversible damage, as well as remarkable recovery. Biodiversity
is a vital aspect of ecosystem function and stability. Many human
activities reduce biodiversity, threatening local and even global
homeostasis. The need for greater scientific knowledge coupled
with an ethical concern for ecosystem integrity is more apparent
than ever.
9. Primary and secondary succession occur after both human and
natural events that cause drastic change in the makeup of an area.
 Primary succession occurs in areas where there is no soil and
secondary succession occurs in areas where there is soil already
present. Secondary succession can follow primary succession once
pioneer species have contributed to the development of soil during
primary succession. Secondary succession, however, can also
happen without primary succession if an event caused extensive
loss of plant and animal life without destroying the soil. One
example of this is wildfires. Soil is not destroyed in these cases and
therefore secondary succession can occur.
10. Primary succession takes longer than secondary succession
because soil needs to be created and it involves development of the
soil. Primary succession is a process of gradual changes in the
ecosystem, that starts where no living organisms are there
e.g., bare rock, newly created pond or reservoir. In this period
weathering of rocks and formation of soil takes place which is
time-consuming process. On the other hand, soil is already present
in secondary succession. Succession occurs in areas that somehow,
lost all the living organisms, which existed there. Secondary
succession begins in areas where natural biotic communities have
been destroyed, such as in abandoned farmlands, burned or cut
forests, lands that have been flooded. Since some soil or sediment
is present, secondary succession is faster than primary succession.