Skip to main content

How does energy get from the Sun to a second-level consumer?

Energy is transferred through an ecosystem as organisms eat and are in turn eaten by other organisms.


The original energy source in most ecosystems is the energy of the sun, which is captured by primary consumers, or autotrophs. These are green plants and algae capable of carrying out photosynthesis. During this chemical reaction, light energy is converted to chemical energy in the form of glucose. Other organisms called primary consumers or herbivores, will eat the producers. Secondary consumers, which are carnivores, eat the primary consumers and obtain energy. Therefore, they indirectly get energy from the sun when they consume their prey.


As the trophic levels increase from producer, to primary consumer, to secondary consumer, and so on, the amount of energy decreases at each level. If 100% of available energy is at the producer level, the primary consumers will get 10% of that energy when they consume that producer, and secondary consumers will get 1%. This loss of energy is due to the fact that much of the energy is converted to heat and radiates into the environment. 


I have included a link to the pyramid of energy to help you better visualize the concept.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Is there a word/phrase for "unperformant"?

As a software engineer, I need to sometimes describe a piece of code as something that lacks performance or was not written with performance in mind. Example: This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. Based on my Google searches, this isn't a real word. What is the correct way to describe this? EDIT My usage of "performance" here is in regard to speed and efficiency. For example, the better the performance of code the faster the application runs. My question and example target the negative definition, which is in reference to preventing inefficient coding practices. Answer This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. In my opinion, reads more easily as: This coding style leads to unmaintainable and poorly performing code. The key to well-written documentation and reports lies in ease of understanding. Adding poorly understood words such as performant decreases that ease. In addressing the use of such a poorly ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Is 'efficate' a word in English?

I routinely hear the word "efficate" being used. For example, "The most powerful way to efficate a change in the system is to participate." I do not find entries for this word in common English dictionaries, but I do not have an unabridged dictionary. I have checked the OED (I'm not sure if it is considered unabridged), and it has no entry for "efficate". It does have an entry for "efficiate", which is used in the same way. Wordnik has an entry for "efficate" with over 1800 hits, thus providing some evidence for the frequency of use. I personally like the word and find the meaning very clear and obvious when others use it. If it's not currently an "officially documented" word, perhaps its continued use will result in it being better documented.
Post a Comment
Read more