Before You Begin
Question #46067
The Question
Which of the following statements regarding ecosystem stability, biodiversity loss, and the Rivet Popper hypothesis is INCORRECT?
Options
- A.
In Paul Ehrlich’s analogy, the loss of a 'rivet' from the airplane wing represents the extinction of a keystone species, which disproportionately threatens ecosystem safety compared to the loss of a 'rivet' from a passenger seat.
- B.
David Tilman’s long-term ecosystem experiments revealed that plots with higher species richness showed less year-to-year variation in total biomass and contributed to higher productivity.
- C.
The Rivet Popper hypothesis implies that the initial loss of any species, regardless of its ecological niche, immediately triggers a non-linear collapse of ecosystem stability due to obligate co-extinctions.
- D.
Co-extinction accelerates biodiversity loss, as seen when the extinction of a host fish inevitably leads to the simultaneous extinction of its unique assemblage of dependent parasites.
Check Your Answer
Correct Answer
Step-by-Step Solution
Explanation
How the Examiner Thinks
Regulatory_Failure
Understand how NOT, EXCEPT, and logical constraints are used to manipulate exam results.
Concepts Behind This Question
Lantana camara|Forest Floor Stratification|Energy Flow
Why This Question Is Tricky
Common Mistakes
Conceptual Pivot: Students often misinterpret the Rivet Popper hypothesis as stating that every single species loss causes an immediate ecosystem crash.
The core NCERT nuance is the distinction between 'seat rivets' (minor species where initial loss is tolerated by the ecosystem's buffering capacity) and 'wing rivets' (keystone species whose loss causes a non-linear, catastrophic collapse).
Quick Facts About This Question
Question Information
| Subject | Biology |
| Chapter | Biodiversity and Conservation - Class 12 |
| Concept | Alien Species Invasion Impacts |
| Difficulty | 8 |
| Cognitive Load | 5 |
| Target Solve Time | 120 sec |
| Access | Free |