Talk:Food chain

)

Needs a cleanup
This article, as of 20 August 2011, is one of the more accessed articles on Wikipedia, yet as of this date it must also rank among the more embarrassing Wikipedia articles. It needs rewriting. --Epipelagic (talk) 14:19, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree Epipelagic and it is my doing. I have every intent of coming back to work on this - I've been busy elsewhere, but will be getting back onto this issue. You will notice that a lot of changes have been made to food web. There was a misunderstanding between food web and food chain. Food chain is actually more complicated to explain, because it is a sub-component of a food web. It follows a linear path from the base of the food web to the apex. There is very little research that is devoted to food chain's in isolation - researchers usually build food webs and then calculate food chain length and other parameters. Hence, I wonder if there is even a need for a dedicated food chain page? Thoughts?Thompsma (talk) 19:46, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh, sorry Thompsma. I didn't check how the article got that way, and I'm sure you would have come back and cleaned it up. I think it is important to retain the food chain article. People seem more aware of food chains than food webs. For example, during July 2011, more people looked up food chain (42035 including redirects) than food web (17620) and trophic level (13148) put together. So it seems readers usually come to Wikipedia with food chains uppermost in their minds, so this article is the most appropriate place to try and make clear how food chains relate to webs and trophic levels. --Epipelagic (talk) 02:57, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Would it be logical to redirect Food chain to Food web? Furthermore, re: vandalism, I just restored the first paragraph of the lede, which was blanked a week ago! &#8211;  mono lemma  t  &#8211; 00:42, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

I bet that 90% of users that search for "food chain" or "trophic chain" are in fact looking for the food or trophic web concept instead, only that our mind is used to consider it a chain. It has happened to me. There may be some interest in keeping this article alive, but I propose to merge it to "food web", and redirect "food chain" to it.--Auró (talk) 12:30, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Disagree! Food webs are comprehensive depictions of ecological relationships in an ecosystem. Food chains are subsets of these but much more clearly illustrate energy dissipation at each trophic level, which is a critical concept in ecosystem dynamics. Improvement recommended instead. Evlshout (talk)

One animal in a food chain can be in many other food chains

"Tertiary consumer" redirects here, but that doesn't make any sense, because this page has no mention of tertiary consumers. 50.4.35.41 (talk) 20:33, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

I have done a bit of cleanup, but haven't actually added anything new. I think the article still needs a good deal of work, and is probably an important enough subject to merit a better effort. I'm not sure about the accuracy of all of the information either. For example, the claim that life could not exist without the sun is essentially correct, but this section also seems to imply that food chains are not possible without photosynthesis. It is my understanding that some ecosystems (such as those around deep sea hydrothermal vents) do not rely on solar energy, but still represent food chains, with producers relying on chemosynthesis. [Edit: I just noticed that this was explained in the next section] Also, the claim that the loss of a keystone species can lead to a mass extinction seems a bit extreme. NCBioTeacher (talk) 06:59, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

"in most food chains, all the organisms in a food chain are consumers"
This is claimed in the article. Seems pertinently untrue since there has to be a producer at the base of every complete food chain. Propose rewrite. Evlshout (talk) 07:05, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Isn't there a "food cycle"? This would be closed when plants consume the remains of dead animals.Grushenka (talk) 04:45, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

I added more information about the energy transfer of the food chain and added the concept of food chain efficiency. Tuj54739 (talk) 16:32, 4 November 2019 (UTC) The food chain alway starts with a producer and it ends with territory consumer. A food chain shows how each living thing gets food. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.207.119.122 (talk) 05:18, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Human
Hello! Where is human in food chain? --Nimelik (talk) 22:22, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Or humans are mammals that are outside of biological food chain? −−Nimelik (talk) 21:06, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Merge into Food web?
Food chains and food webs are practically the same thing. Food web is also a much more developed article, cites way more sources (not to mention better sources) and is overall just a better article than this one. Lyricca (talk) 19:45, 7 November 2022 (UTC)


 * I support that. Euro know (talk) 07:12, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I think we should definitely do that because they are basically the same thing 162.247.223.3 (talk) 19:39, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
 * I oppose this. Food chains are conceptually quite distinct from food webs. A food chain is a simple linear trophic path which has a distinct start and end, and does not branch anywhere in between. A food web is a network of food chains, and can become very complex. Food webs are defined in terms of food chains. Food chains are the building blocks from which food webs are built. The only case where a food chain could be said to be "basically the same thing" as a food web is in the special and rather unusual case where the entirety of a food web consists of a single chain. Often in ecology articles, a link needs to be made specifically to the concept of a food chain as opposed to the concept of a food web. — Epipelagic (talk) 17:30, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Principles of Biology 2
— Assignment last updated by Jch15718 (talk) 13:11, 20 March 2024 (UTC)