We used new tags for the population estimate a year later. If we assume the tags stay on well over the year, what changes the proportion of the old marked tags in the population and make the use of new tags more accurate? (Hint: look back at the assumptions made by the mark and recapture method).

a. random loss of tags might sufficiently large to change the proportion of tagged fish.

b. as tagged fish die and larvae that were not tagged reach maturity the proportion of tagged changes.

c. The fish might eat the tags.

d. we cannot assume tags would stay on longer than six months, so we need new tags for the fishfish.

Question

Biology

Atkinson

7 April, 12:36

We used new tags for the population estimate a year later. If we assume the tags stay on well over the year, what changes the proportion of the old marked tags in the population and make the use of new tags more accurate? (Hint: look back at the assumptions made by the mark and recapture method).

a. random loss of tags might sufficiently large to change the proportion of tagged fish.

b. as tagged fish die and larvae that were not tagged reach maturity the proportion of tagged changes.

c. The fish might eat the tags.

d. we cannot assume tags would stay on longer than six months, so we need new tags for the fishfish.

+1

Answers (1)

Know the Answer?

Kale · Answer 1

Answer: Option B

Explanation:

It has been assumed that the tags remains on the body of the fishes and is not removed before a year.

The random tags of the fishes can be affected only when there is a high number of fishes born which are not tagged. The proportion of fishes can be affected in this case only.

The number of fatality can be same for both of the fishes, one which were tagged and the ones which were not tagged.

As the tagged fishes die and the larvae of fishes are also not tagged. When comparing both, there is a proportional difference in the number of fishes.