An ecological pyramid (also trophic pyramid or energy pyramid) is a graphical representation designed to show the biomass or biomass productivity

at each trophic level in a given ecosystem. Biomass is the amount of living or organic matter present in an organism. Biomass pyramids show how much biomass is present in the organisms at each trophic level, while productivity pyramids show the production or turnover in biomass. Ecological pyramids begin with producers on the bottom (such as plants) and proceed through the various trophic levels (such as herbivores that eat plants, then carnivores that eat herbivores, then carnivores that eat those carnivores, and so on). The highest level is the top of the food chain. Contents

phytoplankton reproduce very quickly, but have much shorter individual lives. One problem with biomass pyramids is that they can make a trophic level look like it contains more energy than it actually does. For example, all birds have beaks and skeletons, which despite taking up mass are not eaten by the next trophic level. In a pyramid of biomass the skeletons and beaks would still be quantified even though they do not contribute to the overall flow of energy when ripping and tearing into the next trophic level. Pyramid of productivity An ecological pyramid of productivity is often more useful, showing the production or turnover of biomass at each trophic level. Instead of showing a single snapshot in time, productivity pyramids show the flow of energy through the food chain. Typical units would be grams per meter2 per year or calories per meter2 per year. As with the others, this graph begins with producers at the bottom and places higher trophic levels on top. When an ecosystem is healthy, this graph produces a standard ecological pyramid. This is because in order for the ecosystem to sustain itself, there must be more energy at lower trophic levels than there is at higher trophic levels. This allows for organisms on the lower levels to not only maintain a stable population, but to also transfer energy up the pyramid. The exception to this generalization is when portions of a food web are supported by inputs of resources from outside of the local community. In small, forested streams, for example gone up greater than could be supported by the local primary production.

An ecological pyramid of numbers shows graphically the population of each level in a food chain. The diagram to the right shows a (nonfictional) example of a five level pyramid of numbers: 10,000 fresh water shrimps support 1,000 bleak, which in turn support 100 perches followed by 10 northern pikes and finally one osprey.

1 Pyramid of biomass 2 Pyramid of productivity 3 Pyramid of numbers 4 See also 5 References 6 External links

Read more: http://www.answers.com/topic/ecologicalpyramid#ixzz1TdpdeujR Introduction We are always considerate of the energy (as trophic structures or layers) in an ecosystem for many reasons. It is the availability of energy that determines the length and complexity of any ecosystem. Ecologists are always eager to both determine and explain the energy flow in a system, and food chains, webs and pyramids are one of many ways to describe the trophic structure in an ecosystem. Food Chains

Pyramid of biomass An ecological pyramid of biomass shows the relationship between biomass and trophic level by quantifying the amount of biomass present at each trophic level of an ecological community at a particular moment in time. Typical units for a biomass pyramid could be grams per meter2, or calories per meter2. The pyramid of biomass may be 'inverted'. For example, in a pond ecosystem, the standing crop of phytoplankton, the major producers, at any given point will be lower than the mass of the heterotrophs, such as fish and insects. This is explained as the

Read more: http://www.answers.com/topic/ecologicalpyramid#ixzz1TdpWVyyi Pyramid of numbers

A food chain is the most simple of the three common trophic descriptors, and is probably a concept quite familiar to you already. With primary and secondary productivity explained, we need to look at how energy

flows throught the system from an effiecieny point of view once more. When we follow the path of energy from the initial rays of sunlight right through to the top carnivore, we find that the rule of thumb known as the 1%/10% rule applies. Figure 3.3 Hypothetical example of a food chain showing the approximate percentage of energy that is transferred between each link in the chain. Food chains depict the shortest chain in an ecosystem with the average length of a food chain being about 4 or 5 trophic levels long. This rule states, firstly, that of all the sunlight that falls on the Earth, only 1% is used by primary producers. Secondly, only 10% of the primary biomass is used by primary consumers, and only 10% of that energy is used by secondary consumers etcetera. The trend in energy reduction is linear (in the sense that it is not cyclic) between the trophic layers, yet approaches a somewhat logarithmic or exponential decay pattern in the loss between each trohic layer. Overall, the transfer of energy through the environment is not very efficient which is in perfect accordance with the Second Law. Efficiency is related to many other factors and is very much dependant upon the type of ecosystem in question. Food chains (which were first decribed by Elton in 1927) are often depicted graphically, as seen in the Figure 3.3 above, which is a simple food chain for a grassland. Food chains are used to depict the depth (or length) of the ecosystems trophic structure (layers) and are usually quite short with maximum chainlengths of between 5 and 8. The food chain stops when there is insufficient energy to maintain another trophic layer, which may be brought about by two possible mechanisms; the intial quality of primary productivity, or by the effectiveness of the Lindeman efficiencies in the secondary productivity stage of the ecosystem, at this stage though, ecologist are not certain how the length of a food chain is controlled.

Although this is very simple, it is not difficult to relate the concepts of energy transfer along the chain. Unfortunately it is too simple, as the chain concept ignores many of the important complexities associated with ecosystems and we need to find another way to describe the transfer of energy through an ecosystem the food web. Food Webs Food webs are exactly the same as food chains, but are more representative of what is actually happening in the ecosystem. As mentioned, food chains are to simple, and neglect important factors such as an organisms competitors, or other food sources. A food web allows us to incorporate such information, and can best be viewed as many individual food chains strung together.

Numbers Energy Biomass

Each type has its own uses, pros and cons, of which the main points are discussed below. The numbers pyramids involve counting the relative abundance for each functional trophic layer of the community, for ecmaple, counting the numbers of photosyntheitic species, herbivores and carnivores. obviously there would be some ecosystems in which it would be easy to do this, and there are some that are practibly impossible. Using numbers of organisms can provide a unique insight into the trophic structure though, as seen in figure 3.5 above. Note that the forest pyramid has a smaller primary production layer than does the grassland pyramid for numbers. The reason for this is simple, there are fewer trees in a forest than there are grasses in grassland, yet the equivalent energy and biomass pyramids for a forest would look normal.

The quantitiative nature of pyramids means that we can construct them using several types of ecological data. The three types of food pyramids that are commonly encountered are;