× Didn't find what you were looking for? Ask a question
Top Posters
Since Sunday
e
5
e
4
4
d
4
o
3
p
3
t
3
3
m
3
p
3
m
3
f
3
New Topic  
RikTelner RikTelner
wrote...
Posts: 33
Rep: 0 0
10 years ago
Why aren't snakes on top of foodchain?
I just watched video one that had eaten alligator.
I heard from guy, that he saw video when snake ate brown bear.
I know, they eat humans and I am eager to believe their
gigantic mouth could fit elephant. Their venom is super toxic and
could kill many lions.

They eat everything, not everything eats them. Why aren't they on food of top foodchain?
Read 1476 times
8 Replies

Related Topics

Replies
wrote...
Donated
Valued Member
10 years ago
Guns.
Pretty fly for a SciGuy
RikTelner Author
wrote...
10 years ago
Guns.
Humans are only on top of foodchain because of weapons and intelligence we posses. But I don't see you or me, winning against 10m Python that won against Alligator whose bite is 10.000 pounds per inch.
wrote...
Valued Member
On Hiatus
10 years ago
First of all, which animal is on the top of the food chain is a subjective matter. For a certain ecosystem, being at the top of the food chain means that you are not a food source for any other specie. That said, human is certainly not the only specie that is considered to be at the top of the food chain. For example, at a forest, a bear and an owl might be at the top of the food chain. In this case, it doesn't make much sense to compare the bear and the owl as to who is on the top of the chain, since no one eats each other. For the same reason, it might not always make sense to compare humans with certain non-edible species of snakes as to who is on the top.

Quote
Humans are only on top of foodchain because of weapons and intelligence we posses. But I don't see you or me, winning against 10m Python that won against Alligator whose bite is 10.000 pounds per inch.
The fact that a speice (e.g. human) is  on top of the food chain does not mean that it is invulnerable, or that it is the strongest and will never get eaten by anything. It just means that, it generally is not a food source for any animal (e.g. no animals eat humans often). The reason that humans do not get eaten often is our intelligence and technology. For another specie the reason might be another (for example a poisonous fish that is not edible might be considered to be at the top of the food chain because it is not getting eaten)

If we lived somewhere without technology and weapons, we might were a great food source for animals like lions, bears etc. but it's because we posses this technology that we do not get eaten often.
wrote...
Donated
10 years ago
For a certain ecosystem, being at the top of the food chain means that you are not a food source for any other specie.

That sums it up.
wrote...
Donated
Valued Member
10 years ago
Snakes are missing their trigger fingers
Pretty fly for a SciGuy
wrote...
Donated
10 years ago
Snakes are missing their trigger fingers

^ Precisely Grinning Face
wrote...
10 years ago
Resolved.
wrote...
10 years ago
In the Florida Everglades they are, eating deer, rabbits, raccoons, possums, and right now all humans can try to do is contain them. Emphasis on try.
Right now, they are clearly not on top, but in the Everglades they are, because they were introduced for hunting a long time ago, and the population grew too large and the other wild animals had no idea how to adapt to this new creature.
Hopefully we can control them. We, afterall, have guns.
New Topic      
Explore
Post your homework questions and get free online help from our incredible volunteers
  942 People Browsing
Related Images
  
 1567
  
 326
  
 49
Your Opinion
What percentage of nature vs. nurture dictates human intelligence?
Votes: 432

Previous poll results: What's your favorite math subject?