Bacteria decompose organic material and turn it into rich fertilizer.

True
False

Answers

Answer 1
Answer: This is True.
But you wouldn't want to say Bacteria it's better to say Insects and worms Break down the Organic Material and Microorganisms Decompose Organic material and turn turn them in to rich fertilisers such as compost.

Related Questions

Organisms are constantly interacting with their environment. Sometimes this interaction has a positive effect on the environment, other times a negative impact. Beetles in the forest infest and eat limbs of trees that have fallen to the forest floor. The best way to describe the beetles impact is to say that A) they are having a neutral impact on the environment by acting as decomposers. B) they are having a positive impact on the environment by acting as decomposers. C) they are having a negative impact on the environment by acting as decomposers. D) they are having a predatory impact on the environment by acting as decomposers.
Muscle tone is ________. A) the feeling of well-being following exercise B) the condition of athletes after intensive training C) the ability of a muscle to efficiently cause skeletal movements D) a state of sustained partial contraction
The organisms that form the base of most open-ocean food webs area. fish.b. coral.c. plankton.d. kelp.
The law of mass action suggests that _____.
Species of bacteria can evolve more quickly than species of mammals because bacteria have--

What type of bond is shown below, where electrons are shared between the bonded atoms?A: covalent bond
B: ionic bond
C: hydrogen bond
D: is crossed out

Answers

A. Covalent bond means sharing of electrons between both non metal molecules

Which of the following 9 objects is living or nonliving: bacteria, virus, moss, you, a lemon seed, the air, bread, lettuce and rocks. Apply each of the characteristics of life to each object in order to answer the question.

Answers

bacteria - living
virus
 - non living
moss
 - living
you
 - living 
a lemon seed
 - living
The air
 - non living
bread
 - non living
lettuce
 - living
rocks
 - non living
Bacteria and Virus exhibits asexual reproduction and hence living.
Moss, humans and lettuce exhibit sexual reproduction and growth with in them occurs from the inside due to multiplication of cells.Hence, they are considered living too..
lemon seed is a living thing because it exhibits growth due to multiplication of its cells and it participates in respiration also.
Bread is non-living as it is a man-made product and has no signs of life in it.
Air is non-living as its just a mixture of gases and gases possess no life with in!
Rocks are non-living as they are formed just by the accumulation of soil and mineral particles which are indeed non-living.

What experimental evidence led to the development of this atomic model from the one before it? A few of the positive particles aimed at a gold foil seemed to bounce back. The colors of light emitted from heated atoms had very specific energies. Equations were used to identify regions around the nucleus where electrons would likely be. Cathode rays were bent in the same way whenever a magnet was brought near them.

Answers

Few positive particles aimed at a gold foil seemed to bounce back is the evidence that is responsible for the development of atomic model. Rutherford performed an experiment in which alpha particles are allowed to fire on the gold foil.

Some of the particles bounced back which tell us that there are heavy particles present in the center of an atom.

Most alpha particles pass through the atom which tell us that there is a lot of empty space in an atom.

There is also a slight deflection that occur due to similar charge that tells us the element which is present in the nucleus has positive charge.

brainly.com/question/17332540

Final answer:

The Gold Foil Experiment conducted by Rutherford, Geiger, and Marsden led to the development of the Rutherford Atomic Model. The results of the experiment suggested that atoms contain a densely packed, positively charged nucleus in the center with electrons orbiting around it, and mostly, atoms are composed of empty space.

Explanation:

The key experimental evidence that led to the development of the Rutherford atomic model from the Thomson model was the Gold foil experiment. As described, physicist Ernest Rutherford, along with Geiger and Marsden, pointed a beam of alpha particles at a thin piece of gold foil. They observed that a small fraction of these alpha particles bounced back, suggesting they hit a densely packed, positively charged center in the atom. Most alpha particles passed through the gold foil indicating that atoms are mostly empty space. These observations couldn't be explained by the previous atomic model (Thomson Model) where it was assumed that positive and negative charges were uniformly distributed throughout the atom. Therefore, Rutherford proposed a new model, where the atom consists mostly of empty space, with a densely packed, positively charged nucleus in the center and negatively charged electrons orbiting around it.

Learn more about Rutherford Atomic Model here:

brainly.com/question/32840535

#SPJ12

Can a catalyst be used over and over again?

Answers

Yes they can because the catalyst does not take part in the chemical reaction and remains unchanged after the reaction has ended.  Biological catalysts are known to be recycled by the bodies in which they work.

During lactic acid fermentation, pyruvate is converted to lactic acid and carbon dioxide.False
True

Answers

Answer:

true

Explanation:

The answer is true.

                     

All of the following are positive aspects of PACs EXCEPT?A. Members of PACs have access to candidates and parties.

B. PACs allow their members to support a range of candidates with a single contribution.

C. Candidates receive contributions from so many PACs that the effect of any single PAC is diluted.

D. PACs allow organizations to form a close connection to the legislators they support.

Answers

The correct answer is option C, Candidates receive contributions from so many PACs that the effect of any single PAC is diluted.

Reason -

Different parties that contribute to a certain candidate assumes to at least have a recognition to their contribution but since there are several donors (big or small), usually the donors with small amount of donation get neglected and the effect of their contribution is felt diluted. This seems to generate a negative aspiration in the donor.

I think the answer is C