| Chronology | Current Month | Current Thread | Current Date |
| [Year List] [Month List (current year)] | [Date Index] [Thread Index] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] | [Date Prev] [Date Next] |
On Aug 9, 2011, at 8:43 AM, Dr Holly Priestley wrote:
Discuss whether or not a mushroom should be considered a predator.
The question is silly. Rather the question should be... Is the mushroom a scavenger or is it a decomposer?
There's a distinction between organisms that feed on dead organic matter: if they cause the decomposition of the dead animal or plant back to nutrients for soil so other things can grow, they are decomposers, if they feed on the carcasses of the dead plant or animals they are called scavengers. In the food chain, the scavengers start out and the decomposers finish the job back to soil nutrients. In other words, scavengers do not cause the remains to be turned back to nutrients. So, mushrooms are not scavengers, they are decomposers, while buzzards are not decomposers, they are scavengers.Pleaseexplain your reasoning.
With the above question you are now asking for distinction between
definitions. Usually a predator refers to something that preys on living
things. Those that seek out already dead are considered scavengers.
Perhaps that would be a better questions, "if a mushroom a scavenger".
However, since fungi break down their food supply outside of the cell and
then absorb their nutrients (hence the damage done by mildew to tents and
shoes) they are termed saprophytes. So, basically, in order to answer that
question the student has to have memorized the basic definitions.
_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l