Why is a short-term environmental change more likely to negatively affect a population than a long-term change?
Animals do not have time to adapt.
Animals always die.
Animals always move away and leave the ecosystem with less biodiversity.
All of the above.
Answers (1)
Know the Answer?
Not Sure About the Answer?
Find an answer to your question ✅ “Why is a short-term environmental change more likely to negatively affect a population than a long-term change? Animals do not have time to ...” in 📘 Biology if you're in doubt about the correctness of the answers or there's no answer, then try to use the smart search and find answers to the similar questions.
Search for Other Answers
You Might be Interested in
Explain why chances of nose bleeding increase with altitude in humans
Answers (1)
Living organisms respond to changes in environmental conditions in environmental conditions such as temperature. Which series lists the correct order in which the body would respond would respond to such a change?
Answers (1)
What are the conditions necessary for a population to be at a Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium (or evolutionary equilibrium) ?
Answers (1)
Are corals embryophytes?
Answers (1)
Which situation will most likely cause the sustainability of an ecosystem to weaken? A - A zebra is killed and eaten by a lion. B - A disease wipes out several plant species. C - A frog lays hundreds of eggs that hatch into tadpoles.
Answers (2)
New Questions in Biology
Why are there more genotypes than phenotypes for bloodtypes
Answers (1)
Witch organism would have the most similar traits
Answers (1)
Write the least common multiple of 7 and 14
Answers (2)
Each horizontal row in a pedigree chart represents a mating. a generation. several siblings. several characteristics.
Answers (1)
Simpler communications and decreased miscommunications are associated with
Answers (1)