1

ENV 1111 – Chapters 2 and 3

Student’s Name

Affiliation

Course Number and Name

Instructor Name

Due Date
 2

Question One

Part 1:

1. Independent Variable

The independent variable in the study is the removal of the coyote. It is the treatment applied at

the experiment treatment sites.

2. Dependent Variable.

The dependent variables include:

i. Mesopredator population: Bobcats, foxes, skunks, and badgers.

ii. Rodent diversity (Simpson’s Index)

iii. Rodent biomass in grams per hectare (g/h)

iv. Population size of individual rodent species

3. Importance of Control Group.

Control groups in this case are the sites without coyote removal. They offer effective data for

comparison. The research is also able to isolate the effects of the independent variable by

creating a baseline for comparison. The observed changes in the treatment site can therefore be

linked to actions in the treatment site or other factors.

Part 2:

4. Predictions Concerning Effects of Coyote Removal on the other Animal Life of West Texas.

i. The rodent individual population size will increase as there will be a reduction in predator

pressure.

ii. The rodent biodiversity will increase as there will be less predator pressure.

Part 3:
 3

5. Effects of Coyote Removal had on the Mesopredator Populations.

The mesopredator population significantly increased after the coyote removal.

Due to the fact that a higher population of coyotes suppresses the mesopredators’ population, as

coyotes are higher-level predators. Removing the coyotes allows the mesopredators to thrive, as

there will be relatively easy access to food.

6. Prediction of the Impact on to the Rodent Populations as a Result of the Changes in the

Mesopredator Populations.

The rodent population will initially increase as the coyotes are eliminated. However, the

predicted increase in the mesopredator population will eventually lead to a reduction in the

rodent population, as the rodents will face more predators but without the coyotes. There will be

an imbalance between the rodent and mesopredator populations. However, in the long term, the

rodent population will stabilize and increase.

Part 4:

7. Primary Factor Controlling Rodent Population Growth.

The coyotes’ population was the primary factor that controlled rodent population growth. The

increase in the biomass and biodiversity of the rodents immediately after rodent removal implies

that the coyotes were responsible for population regulation as they seemed to have been

consuming more rodents than the mesopredators.

8. Negative Feedback Loop in Rodent Population Growth:

As the coyotes are removed from the treatment sites, the rodent population increases. This

therefore results in more pressure on resources like food and shelter for the rodents. The
 4

competition among the different species of rodents will lead to the depletion of the vegetation

and seeds they feed on. This will, in turn, affect certain species’ survival and reproduction. Some

species will become extinct or migrate from the treatment areas. The overall rodent population

therefore declines, closing the loop.

Question 2

a. Carbon Removal from the Atmosphere:

The primary natural process for removing carbon from the atmosphere is photosynthesis. This is

aided by photosynthetic organisms like plants, bacteria, and algae. They conduct the

photosynthesis process by capturing carbon dioxide (CO2) from the air to be used in the

production of organic compounds, hence cycling carbon through the ecosystem.

b. Carbon Addition to the Atmosphere:

Carbon is added back to the atmosphere through the natural process of cellular respiration. This

is done by all living organisms, like heterotrophs such as animals and autotrophs such as plants.

It involves breaking down organic carbon compounds and releasing CO2 as a by-product back

into the atmosphere.

c. Anthropogenic Means Carbon Enters the Atmosphere:

i. Burning fossil fuels: This includes pollution activities like burning oil, coal, and natural gas

for energy, leading to the release of CO2 into the atmosphere.

ii. Deforestation: The trees that store carbon are cleared, leading to an increase in atmospheric

CO2.

Question 3

a. Mutualism
 5

Mutualism is a symbiotic relationship that results in a net benefit to both species in the

interaction (Douglas, 2021). The organisms provide resources or services to each other. In

Colorado, a mutualistic relationship is evident between yucca moths and yucca plants. The moths

pollinate the yucca flowers while using the site to lay their eggs. The developing seeds also serve

as food for the moth larvae.

b. Parasitism

Parasitism involves an organism, referred to as a parasite, benefiting from feeding or living on

another organism, referred to as the host. The host is harmed in the process and could die in the

long term (Douglas, 2021). In Colorado, parasitism relationships can be observed between ticks

and mammals like deer. The ticks have been observed attacking the dears to feed on their blood.

They can also transmit diseases to the host.

c. Commensalism

Commensalism involves an interaction between organisms where one organism benefits while

the other is neither harmed nor benefits from the interaction (Douglas, 2021). In Colorado,

commensalism can be seen in birds that accompany herbivores like Mule Deer; these birds feed

on the insects the deer stirs up.

Question 4

a. Species 1: American Beavers (Castor canadensis)

The American Beaver is a major keystone species in Colorado. They are key to the wetlands and

waterways. Their ecological impact makes them environmental engineers, as they are known for

cutting trees and shrubs to create dams, canals, and bank burrows with ponds that become

important habitat for water animals and for the expansion of wetlands (Hanophy & Teitelbaum,

2003). They shape the water system and ecosystem in Colorado.

 6

If these American beavers in Colorado go extinct, the ecosystem in the wetlands will be

impacted, such that creatures that depend on these ponds will lack stable water levels to survive.

The sediment deposit and water flow patterns will change, hence shifting other organisms to

different places.

b. Species 2: Prairie Dogs (Cynomys ludovicianus)

Prairie dogs found in Colorado are a major keystone species. They take part in habitat

engineering by creating extensive burrowing systems for their shelter, but they also shelter other

animals like burrowing owls. Their burrows aerate the soil, thus enhancing nutrient cycling.

They maintain the grasslands through their grazing behavior to promote plant diversity. Prairie

dogs are also food sources for coyotes, red-tailed hawks, and ferruginous (Hanophy &

Teitelbaum, 2003).

In the event of their extinction, dependents of prairie dogs like the predators will face food

scarcity. Those that depend on them for shelter in their burrows will lack shelter, exposing them

to predators and harsh environments.

Question 5

1. Time Lag Between Moose and Wolf Peak:

The moose peak and the wolf peak appear to experience a time lag. The moose first peaked in

1972, before the wolf did in 1976.

This is because the moose were the primary food source for the wolves, and the few wolves at

the time could not significantly reduce their population. The wolves only thrived as the number

of moose increased. It led to a subsequent decline in the number of moose from the predation.

The wolves eventually followed suit in a declining population.

2. Large Wolf Die-Off Year:

 7

The large wolf die-off was in 1980.

3. Huge Moose Die-Off Year:

The large moose die-off was in 1996.

4. Cause of Wolf Die-Off After 1980:

The 1980 wolf die-off was after a dog introduced the parvovirus on the island.

5. Cause of Moose Die-Off in 1996:

This was due to the extreme winter that staved the moose. The balsam fir trees, which are a

major source of food, died off during the winter. There was also a massive tick infestation that

weakened the moose.

6. Species Interaction Between Ticks and Moose:

The tick-moose interaction is a parasitic relationship. The tick heavily infested the moose,

making them lose a lot of blood and becoming weak, dying, and vulnerable to the predators.

7. Species Interaction Between Moose and Wolves:

The interaction between the moose and wolves is a predator-prey relationship. On Isle Royale

Island, wolves are the main predators of the moose. The fluctuations in the moose population

directly affect the wolf population and survival.

8. Factors Limiting Moose Population Other than their food source:

i. Density-dependent factor: wolf food availability is directly linked to the moose population

and survival. With low populations of moose, wolves are forced to depend on a low number

to survive, which further limits moose survival.

ii. Density-Independent Factor: Climate change that has seen warmer summers contributes to

the tick infestation, affects moose behavior in terms of seeking food and resting, and has

other negative effects on the overall ecosystem dynamics.

 8

9. Problem Faced by Isle Royale Wolves Due to Population Isolation:

Genetic diversity is a major problem with the wolf isolation on the island. The limited

immigration of new wolves to the island makes their genetic pool less diverse, which impacts

their long-term survival.

10. Prediction of what will happen to the Wolves of Isle Royale over the next 10 Years (2005 –

2015):

Over the next 10 years, ranging from 2005 to 2015, the wolves on Isle Royale may face harsher

climate change-related issues and ecological shifts. With the declining moose population, the

food source for the wolves will be scarce, leading to more completion. To add to the limitations

in genetic diversity, the wolves will become more vulnerable to new diseases and physiological

limitations. Their general survival will depend on their ability to adapt to changes in the

ecosystem.

11. The data below represent wolf and moose population from 1980 to today. Were your

predictions correct? Why or why not?

The predictions about the wolf population were correct. The data indicates a gradual annual

decline in the wolf population since the 2005 peak. It depicts that there were no interventions in

the climate and genetic aspects of the wolves.

12. Moose Population Trends from 2005 to Present:

The general trend of the moose population as presented in the graph shows an increase in the

numbers. From about 500 in 2005 to over 2,000 in 2019. It shows the stabilization of ecological

conditions and reflects the reduced predator pressure.

13. Wolf Population Trends from 2005 to Present:

 9

The wolf population has generally shown massive drops from 2005 at 30 to a few tens in 2018

before the sudden increase in 2019. It is a reflection of the weakened wolves and physical

abnormalities leading to many deaths from the competition for food.

14. Spike in Wolf Population in 2019:

The 2019 spike in wolf population could be attributed to the decision by the National Park

Service to introduce more wolves to the island. The new 20–30 wolves will help restore

predator-prey dynamics in three to five years (Green, 2018). Limited ice bridge formation and

genetic inbreeding made it unlikely for the park to survive.

15. Reflection on the Actions towards Wolf Population Stabilization:

The reintroduction of additional wolves to the island is effective for achieving proper predator-

prey dynamics in the island’s ecosystem. With better genetic pools introduced to the area, they

will become stronger, and their population will stabilize, making the wolf reintroduction

successful (Green, 2018). It is important to ensure effective monitoring and proper adaptive

management for the balance and long-term sustainability of the ecosystem.

16. Impact of Inaction on Moose Population:

If nothing is done to the current moose population, they are more likely to continue increasing

in numbers, though at a slower rate due to the reintroduction of the wolves. There should be

intervention for the moose, as an excessive moose population could create a negative loop in

relation to vegetation and other food sources.

 10

References

Douglas, A. E. (2021). The symbiotic habit. Princeton University Press.

Green, P. (2018). PRESS RELEASE National Park Service releases record of decision to

introduce wolves at Isle Royale National Park - Isle Royale National Park (U.S. National

Park Service). [Link]

[Link]

Hanophy, W., & Teitelbaum, H. (2003). WILD Colorado: Crossroads of Biodiversity. Colorado

Division of Wildlife, Education Section.

[Link]

df