Which of the following statements about maximum sustainable yield is incorrect?a) The maximum sustainable yield for a population is the population growth rate at $K...

Which of the following statements about maximum sustainable yield is incorrect? a) The maximum sustainable yield for a population is the population growth rate at $K / 2$ b) The maximum sustainable yield for a population can be difficult to determine, because it is not always possible to accurately measure $N$ c) The maximum sustainable yield for a population can be difficult to determine, because it is not always possible to accurately measure $K$ d) The maximum sustainable yield for a population is a useful management guideline for harvesting plant products such as timber but is not helpful for managing animal populations. e) The concept of maximum sustainable yield can generate useful information for fighting the growth of pest species.

All right. So today we're going to be talking about once again the negative feedback. So when we take a look at this negative feedback loop, we know that this means that when something happened to a body that fluctuates something in their body, such as for this case, let's look at body temperature. That means to maintain and keep it in a loop and making sure that they stay within a good homie of stasis. They they go through home. Eustace is to maintain equilibrium, which basically means that their body is stays between certain parameters. Um, this means that if they get too hot, they do something that makes them colder. If they get too cold to make coming, they do something that makes them hotter. So in these ways, we can tell that this sort of equilibrium is necessary. The difference. This is key. The difference between organisms, um, is how they do it. How do they maintain this equilibrium and in the context, a pony, A stasis. What do they do differently? And as we've seen before, their lots of differences between end of their miss, an act of them's echo terms, uh, can change their body temperature based on the environment so they can just go lay in a hot rock when they're too cold. End of the rooms might do something that changes their processes internally because their body heat is maintained Internet. So, for example, they might shiver out of all the options given to us in the choices below. We see that, um, on Lee, the 1st 1 a talks about how talks about a negative feedback loop at all, and talks about something that organisms might do to prevent this sort of, um ah, body from dropping too much in temperature Jane Cold seasons to the rest of the organ it. The rest of the answer choices don't have any sort of discussion about negative feedback loop, so we know that is the correct answer. And in it that's because we can see that, um, Thio combat the cold animals increase their fatty acids, which is something they do internally to make sure that they are insulated against the heat. And then the plants make anti freeze proteins. And these anti freeze proteins help protect them from the cold, um, and prevent them from dropping to low and temperature as well. So now that's the reason that we can see that different organisms handle home your stasis differently. Thanks

Hello. So the current option for this question is gonna be okay, then? This is the reason given. All right, thank you very much.

Okay, So 36 is interesting. Is it? Gives us, uh, four statements. Always start the exact same. Okay, so we are told how the human population growth has led to unsustainable resource use, fishing and hunting is those habitat destruction. And they were looking for what is wrong in those statements after that? Okay, so this time with the letter A a states that these incidents is result in slow ablution rate when in reality, uh, it can actually lead to increased selection. Right? So, for example, with over fishing, if we're always fishing larger fish, there's gonna be a selection advantage for small fish. Little puny ones that don't grow is big, right? So we can actually thes actions can increase selection and increase the evolutionary formation of new species and traits. Okay. And if you want to look and see, we'll see. Says that fossil Phil fuels lead to reduce populations. Well, that's incorrect. It's actually gonna be over fishing. That does that. So it's not the fossil fuels. It's not the existence of cool that reduces our are reduced population. Zits are over, are over fishing of them. Okay, so so season. Correct? For that reason, And then if we will get D here, he tells us about how the larger human populations are decreasing value of products and tame from species. Well, that's not true, right? So supply and demand so more people. So more people is going to lead to a greater demand for these products and silence us with a letter B as being correct. And let it be, of course, states that climate change is occurring due to our use of fossil fields, which is absolutely correct.

Problem, 53 gives us two graphs, which I've crudely drawn here of human population and the number of extinct species from 17 50 thio presently the year 2000 with, uh, the year 1950 being highlighted as a point in which this curve drastically increased, he says were then asked to identify of four statements. Which statement most likely explains how the increase in human population could lead to a decrease in biodiversity. So let's go through each of these. A. Every human added to the planet replaces a different species of organism. Uh, this simply is not true. You wouldn't necessarily have, Ah, one species of organism d disappear for every human added to the planet, part means the more people inhabiting the planet, the more the average temperature increases, causing a loss of other species. This could be true in the A CZ. More people, uh, live on earth. We're going to see a potential increase in the average temperature where increasing the temperature of the earth does cause loss of species and loss of decrease in biodiversity keep going. With the increase in population, the demands for land who had an energy increased, leading to destruction of habitat. This is definitely true in that the more people we have, the more land and food and energy is required to sustain those people, which would then lead to the destruction of habitat. And we're already seeing this across the Globe Party. The increase in human population reduces the amount of land available for use by other species. This is also true. Um however, when we look at B, c and D, as are viable options will go with C as being the most, uh, most likely Thio. Explain how this increase in human ah population has led to a a decrease in biodiversity. This is because it encompasses a lot more of the things but that humans were doing. Whereas we could see more people inhabit the planet. But if we work to decrease greenhouse gas emissions, we could in theory, a halt or, uh, stop where we are at, uh, the increase in in global temperatures. Um, and we could also do things in order to decrease the total land that humans humans use