Imoku01 ik u stalking me but this is also a real question

why is a short-term environmental change more likely to negatively affect a population than a long-term change?

question 1 options:

animals do not have time to adapt.

animals always die.

animals always move away and leave the ecosystem with less biodiversity.

all of the above.

A.

Explanation: In a long-term process they have time to adapt and multiply, but in a short term they wont be able to and they will cease to exists.

i would expect light rain in pittsburgh throughout the following 24 to 48 hours. the lower/falling weights in urban areas toward the west demonstrate that a low weight framework is moving from west to east toward pittsburgh. low weight frameworks are ordinarily connected with precipitation. the way that you don't see a major drop in temperature in the more western urban areas demonstrates the low weight framework is moving with a warm front, so just light rain would be normal. substantial downpours or progressively vicious climate is just typically connected with chilly fronts, where the warm air is pushed up and over a cool front quickly. this quickly rising air (convection) is what gives you heavier torrential downpours, and other conceivably serious weather conditions.

because the two particles have an equal charge, the charges will cancel out and give the atom an overall charge of 0. so, if at atom has 35 protons in the nucleus, we could expect it to have 35 electrons orbiting that nucleus.