Which food web is more resilient one with many species or one with less species? I am not sure i hope someone knows or has a better reason than mine. I think that it would be the one with the few but it has few species which means its affected greater when only one species is affected. But the larger food web might be easier cause it has more species.... i am not sure.... Opinions???

Best Answer - Chosen by Voters

A food chain with a diversity of species (at several levels within the system) is much more stable than one that relies on the productivity and health just a few species at various levels.

A good example of this is what is happening to polar bears. They are having trouble hunting seals (the core of their diet) because of the diminishing ice shelf. If the seal population booms it will be very hard on the surrounding fish stocks -- some already in peril.

A healthy ecosystem that has a moderate range of change in the terrain, a multitude of wildlife at a number of levels in the food chain, an ability to adapt to moderate change in the culture, and a responsiveness that is adaptive to encroaching or outside influences. 75% 3 Votes

Other Answers (1)

• In theory, the food web with many components is more resilient. If in a smaller food web one or more of the species are impacted by disease, flood, fire, etc., it could irreparably damage the entire web. Here in southern California there are species like the gnatcatcher and the cactus wren that have very specific habitat requirements. Their numbers are still recovering from a devastating fire almost 15 years ago, because other factors were simultaneously at play that impacted their numbers. 25% 1 Vote