I have to do a paper on ecosystems and I was wondering if there could be trophic levels within trophic levels?
Specifically amongst plants. As in can one plant be more dominant that another…?
:dubious:
Alien
That sounds like a question for you to do research on.
I’m not sure. I’d research it if I were you.
Google just brings up stuff about dentists… I don’t think dentists know this stuff either. 
Well, there are these things called books…
The answer to the first question is yes.
The answer to the second question is yes. However, the premise is wrong. Whether a plant is “dominant” over another does not have to do with trophic levels. Plants, however, do occur in several different trophic levels.
You’re not the only one who hates research
Check out terms like dominant, codominant, intermediate, overstory, overtopped, suppressed, understory. This will give you a start in regard to how this works in forests. Once you’ve got the basic terminology established, you should be able to find the rest that you’ll need.
:sniff: :sniff: :sniff:
I smell a homework assignment.
Yeah, but that doesn’t have anything to do with trophic levels.
The OP seems to have a couple of different topics mixed up.
He better start doing some research!
I’ve always suspected that, while we say we won’t help with homework, what we really mean is that we won’t do it for you. I don’t think we have any problems directing someone towards the research that they need to do. It’s kinda like asking a librarian for help.
My suggestion will be that, for just trying to understand the topic, Wikipedia is actually a pretty good resource. For actual research, you’ll have to either use their sources or go somewhere else, but it could help you get your brain wrapped around the concepts. As, apparently, you have some misconceptions.
I’m surprised that this thread hasn’t been closed yet.
I’ve left it open for the time being, since no one has actually been doing his work for him, but just pointing him in the right direction. But I may eventually close it.
Colibri
General Questions Moderator
Ah, gotcha.
Also be advised that on the rare occasions that Dopers are willing to do someone’s homework for them, we’re just as likely to give clever but wrong answers carefully constructed such that the OP would think it was genuine, but that anyone with any real knowledge on the topic would laugh him out of the class. So even if it were allowed, it’d be very unwise to try to get that kind of thing from us.
I’ve always wondered about those who seek homework answers from anonymous people on message boards-when the teacher asks for the source of your information, what do you say? “My sources are BigT and Markxxx.”?
It’s true, actually.
Quit school. Or go into politics.
This thread is a perfect example of why the “no homework” rule on this board has always been, IMO, completely pointless. It’s completely unnecessary.
If a question is clearly a homework question where the OP expects other people to answer his question for him, like this one is, then no-one helps him out anyway. Or, at most, they’ll point him in the right direction so that he can do the research himself.
And if someone is clever, they can very easily work out a way to ask a question without making it obvious that the topic is a homework question. In those cases, people will join the discussion and probably help out, and the rule will be irrelevant because no-one will know it’s a homework question.
Either way, the rule is a waste of time.
Who in the nine hells hates research?
I love research. It is looking for things, finding them and then learning. I’m currently doing research on Baba Yaga (The Wikipedia entry on her is excellent and I highly recommend it) and homonculi. It’s a very enjoyable process.