Re: [Phys-l] Cow 1 is not Cow 2 (Obama and testing)

[Marty Weiss <martweiss@comcast.net>]

Why is it silly?  Because if the student has been taught the definitions of the niches on the food chain, then he has learned that predators hunt for their food.  To suggest even remotely that a student who has learned and memorized the definitions would even consider the mushroom to be in that category is silly.  Unless the teacher drew a cartoon of the evil mushroom roaming the countryside for a dead cow to eat.

Marty


On Aug 9, 2011, at 10:06 AM, Joseph Bellina wrote:

> Sorry it isn't silly.  Perhaps the answer would be no, and the student could then explain in terms that make sense to a biologist.
>
>
> Joseph J. Bellina, Jr. Ph.D.
> Retired Professor of Physics
> Co-Director
> Northern Indiana Science, Mathematics, and Engineering Collaborative
> 574-276-8294
> inquirybellina@comcast.net
>
>
>
>
> On Aug 9, 2011, at 9:51 AM, Marty Weiss wrote:
>
> > 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?
> >
> >
> > > > Please
> > > explain your reasoning.
> > 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.