missdeemented1
New member
Which do you think is the better answer? I've been on a 48 hour bio study frenzy and I need help with this one.
Biologists have found that young fast-growing trees remove more carbon from the atmosphere per unit time than do huge old trees, which grow slowly. Which argument below best supports the idea that old growth forests should not be cut down and replaced by young trees in order to decrease the atmospheric carbon load?
a) Old trees have low rates of photosynthesis.
b) Old trees have high death rates, resulting in decomposition.
c) Old trees shed large amounts of debris, which decomposes in the soil.
d) Old trees have a huge biomass that stores a great amount of carbon.
e) Old trees that have high rates of respiration.
Biologists have found that young fast-growing trees remove more carbon from the atmosphere per unit time than do huge old trees, which grow slowly. Which argument below best supports the idea that old growth forests should not be cut down and replaced by young trees in order to decrease the atmospheric carbon load?
a) Old trees have low rates of photosynthesis.
b) Old trees have high death rates, resulting in decomposition.
c) Old trees shed large amounts of debris, which decomposes in the soil.
d) Old trees have a huge biomass that stores a great amount of carbon.
e) Old trees that have high rates of respiration.