I read that invasive species destroy ecosystem that they are in other than their original place but how do they not destroy the ecosystem where they are from?
In: 1
If bears and wolves are present in the same area. Enough wolves can overwhelm a bear, but a bear can maul a small enough pack of wolves, or alternatively wound and/or kill enough wolves the pack becomes unable to sustain itself, while the bear gets a good meal. In either circumstance conflict between the two may barely be worth it. Wolves kill something, bear shows up to steal, and gets chased off by wolves. Bear kills something, wolves show up to steal, the bear wants it’s kill, but will accept a dead wolf, as food in exchange for the pack getting it’s kill, so the wolves are unlikely to directly challenge the bear unless the know they can win.
As a result, there is an uneasy not-quite-a-truce between them. Conflict usually only happens when there is something to be gained.
Then, because reasons, mountain lions show up in the area. A mountain lion isn’t strong enough to solo-kill, either, a pack of wolves, or a bear. The mountain lion loses either way. But the lion is clever, and will wait for the wolves and bear to fight, and then, kill and eat the wounded, and thus weakened winner of the conflict. (Or steal the food of the wounded, knowing they can’t fight back in thier wounded state or risk death and becoming food)
As a result the mountain lion is the invasive species. In other places, the lion either has it’s own predators, or is limited by some other factor.
Additionally, the example isn’t perfect, as what would likely happen, is that the bears and wolves, would go well out of thier way to avoid each other, so as to not fall victim to the mountain lion. As a result, the mountain lion would likely take to hunting the prey normaly belonging to the wolves/bears. As a result, there is less food for both native predators, caising thier numbers to dwindle, **AND** they now have to compete directly over the exact same food source. This leads to more direct conflict between the two, which niether can afford to avoid, unless they choose to starve.
As a result, the mountain lion is now feasting upon, both, the bears’/wolves’ prey, and the bear/wolf/wolves who won/lost the fight. While the bears and wolves are each having thier food source stolen by 2 predators, and have to fight those other 2 predators, for what food remains, while simultaneously, not falling victim to the second predator (the first was fought off), that swoops in to either, make prey of **them** (in thier wounded state) or **steal** thier food, with the predator knowing, they can’t fight back in thier wounded state, and must let thier food be stolen, or die and become food.
I read that invasive species destroy ecosystem that they are in other than their original place but how do they not destroy the ecosystem where they are from?
In: 1
If bears and wolves are present in the same area. Enough wolves can overwhelm a bear, but a bear can maul a small enough pack of wolves, or alternatively wound and/or kill enough wolves the pack becomes unable to sustain itself, while the bear gets a good meal. In either circumstance conflict between the two may barely be worth it. Wolves kill something, bear shows up to steal, and gets chased off by wolves. Bear kills something, wolves show up to steal, the bear wants it’s kill, but will accept a dead wolf, as food in exchange for the pack getting it’s kill, so the wolves are unlikely to directly challenge the bear unless the know they can win.
As a result, there is an uneasy not-quite-a-truce between them. Conflict usually only happens when there is something to be gained.
Then, because reasons, mountain lions show up in the area. A mountain lion isn’t strong enough to solo-kill, either, a pack of wolves, or a bear. The mountain lion loses either way. But the lion is clever, and will wait for the wolves and bear to fight, and then, kill and eat the wounded, and thus weakened winner of the conflict. (Or steal the food of the wounded, knowing they can’t fight back in thier wounded state or risk death and becoming food)
As a result the mountain lion is the invasive species. In other places, the lion either has it’s own predators, or is limited by some other factor.
Additionally, the example isn’t perfect, as what would likely happen, is that the bears and wolves, would go well out of thier way to avoid each other, so as to not fall victim to the mountain lion. As a result, the mountain lion would likely take to hunting the prey normaly belonging to the wolves/bears. As a result, there is less food for both native predators, caising thier numbers to dwindle, **AND** they now have to compete directly over the exact same food source. This leads to more direct conflict between the two, which niether can afford to avoid, unless they choose to starve.
As a result, the mountain lion is now feasting upon, both, the bears’/wolves’ prey, and the bear/wolf/wolves who won/lost the fight. While the bears and wolves are each having thier food source stolen by 2 predators, and have to fight those other 2 predators, for what food remains, while simultaneously, not falling victim to the second predator (the first was fought off), that swoops in to either, make prey of **them** (in thier wounded state) or **steal** thier food, with the predator knowing, they can’t fight back in thier wounded state, and must let thier food be stolen, or die and become food.
Latest Answers