Directions: In the following questions, a statement of assertion (A) ...
Herbivores obtain their food from plants. Hence, they are known as first order carnivores. The carnivores like tigers cannot be preyed upon further, lie at the top of the food chain and hence termed as top carnivores.
View all questions of this test
Directions: In the following questions, a statement of assertion (A) ...
Assertion: Herbivores are called first order consumers.
Reason: Tiger is a top carnivore.
The correct answer is option 'B': Both assertion (A) and reason (R) are true but reason (R) is not the correct explanation of assertion (A).
Explanation:
To understand why option 'B' is correct, let's break down the assertion and reason and analyze each statement separately.
Assertion (A): Herbivores are called first order consumers.
- Herbivores are animals that primarily feed on plants or plant material. They are considered first order consumers because they occupy the first trophic level in a food chain or food web.
- First order consumers are also known as primary consumers because they consume producers (plants) directly.
Reason (R): Tiger is a top carnivore.
- Tigers are meat-eating animals and are categorized as top carnivores in the food chain.
- Top carnivores are at the highest trophic level in a food chain or food web and feed on other carnivores or herbivores.
Explanation of the correct answer:
Both the assertion and reason are true, but the reason does not provide a correct explanation for the assertion. The reason talks about tigers being top carnivores, which is unrelated to the assertion about herbivores being called first order consumers.
The correct explanation for the assertion is that herbivores are called first order consumers because they consume producers directly, while tigers being top carnivores indicates their position at the highest trophic level in the food chain, but it does not relate to the classification of herbivores.
Hence, option 'B' is the correct choice as it accurately reflects the truthfulness of both the assertion and reason, but the reason does not explain the assertion.