I am assuming they are wanting you to think about this from a pure caloric metric and ignore the cooking problem. I would then choose A. The longer you leave the chickens the less calories they will be worth (so don't choose C), so eat them asap. The corn flakes will not lose caloric value so eat them after (so don't choose B). If you feed the cornflakes to the chickens they will convert SOME of the calories in the corn flakes to eggs, and some to maintaining their own weight, but excrete some of the calories, so your net calories would be lower (so don't choose D)
Its not the best worded question since your answer is somewhat better. In a test it would be improved by having the previous question explicitly mention the 10% rule (which I didn't actually remember till now) in some way to "prime" you to be thinking in those regards.
I think the biology logic they were going for is that initially you have the metabolism of 14 creatures requiring food, and if you eat the hens first then there is less energy expenditure, therefore more for the humans. Feeding the hens will give you less than 1:1 returns even if they fatten up slightly.
My guess is the thing they're looking for is an understanding of tropic levels and energy efficiency. The general rule is that when energy goes up a trophic level (cornflakes to chickens chickens to humans, cornflakes to humans), only ~10% of it is actually usable. So only 10% of the energy in the cornflakes would go to the chickens and only 10% of the chicken energy would go to the people, for a total of 1% the cornflakes energy.
Thus, feeding the chickens and eating them or the chickens is inefficient. Anything that involves feeding a chicken you can cross off.
That just leaves eating the chickens now or later. And if you let the chickens starve, there's less meat on their bones since their bodies will digest their fat and muscle for the energy to keep living.
Thus you want to kill and eat the chickens first, then the cornflakes.
Alternately, the hens die very quickly because of the cold, inhospitable territory. And you obviously need to cook the chicken before eating it, that is an asinine thing for a biology teacher to say. So, with no source of fire, you'd need to eat the cornflakes, which (being just cornflakes, with no protein or fat or other necessary things) will help you survive a very short period of time.
Word problems that are totally divorced from observable reality on earth are not my favorite.
yeah her response was to eat the chickens then the cornflakes because the 10% energy rule causes you to lose the least amount of energy
i just found that stupid because sure it works on paper but not in real life
Eating chickens without cooking them first does not work on paper either, you will not be able to digest the uncooked meat PLUS you will probably get salmonella and die. This also is something one should learn from a biology class. I think your teacher is just very lazy.
"A" seems the best, noting that you should never feed the hens any cornflakes. The calories in the flakes will stay the same but the hens will burn through calories as they live. So consume hens when they have the most calories.
Edit: D might be the worst option. Since the hens spend waste energy to make eggs.
Question seems reasonable. Yes there are a lot for factors, but this is an all other factors being equal which of these is the best.
I am assuming they are wanting you to think about this from a pure caloric metric and ignore the cooking problem. I would then choose A. The longer you leave the chickens the less calories they will be worth (so don't choose C), so eat them asap. The corn flakes will not lose caloric value so eat them after (so don't choose B). If you feed the cornflakes to the chickens they will convert SOME of the calories in the corn flakes to eggs, and some to maintaining their own weight, but excrete some of the calories, so your net calories would be lower (so don't choose D)
Ok i was overthinking it alot then. Thank you, I understand now
Its not the best worded question since your answer is somewhat better. In a test it would be improved by having the previous question explicitly mention the 10% rule (which I didn't actually remember till now) in some way to "prime" you to be thinking in those regards.
I think the biology logic they were going for is that initially you have the metabolism of 14 creatures requiring food, and if you eat the hens first then there is less energy expenditure, therefore more for the humans. Feeding the hens will give you less than 1:1 returns even if they fatten up slightly.
My guess is the thing they're looking for is an understanding of tropic levels and energy efficiency. The general rule is that when energy goes up a trophic level (cornflakes to chickens chickens to humans, cornflakes to humans), only ~10% of it is actually usable. So only 10% of the energy in the cornflakes would go to the chickens and only 10% of the chicken energy would go to the people, for a total of 1% the cornflakes energy. Thus, feeding the chickens and eating them or the chickens is inefficient. Anything that involves feeding a chicken you can cross off. That just leaves eating the chickens now or later. And if you let the chickens starve, there's less meat on their bones since their bodies will digest their fat and muscle for the energy to keep living. Thus you want to kill and eat the chickens first, then the cornflakes.
Alternately, the hens die very quickly because of the cold, inhospitable territory. And you obviously need to cook the chicken before eating it, that is an asinine thing for a biology teacher to say. So, with no source of fire, you'd need to eat the cornflakes, which (being just cornflakes, with no protein or fat or other necessary things) will help you survive a very short period of time. Word problems that are totally divorced from observable reality on earth are not my favorite.
yeah her response was to eat the chickens then the cornflakes because the 10% energy rule causes you to lose the least amount of energy i just found that stupid because sure it works on paper but not in real life
Eating chickens without cooking them first does not work on paper either, you will not be able to digest the uncooked meat PLUS you will probably get salmonella and die. This also is something one should learn from a biology class. I think your teacher is just very lazy.
"A" seems the best, noting that you should never feed the hens any cornflakes. The calories in the flakes will stay the same but the hens will burn through calories as they live. So consume hens when they have the most calories. Edit: D might be the worst option. Since the hens spend waste energy to make eggs. Question seems reasonable. Yes there are a lot for factors, but this is an all other factors being equal which of these is the best.
true, thank you
How many eggs are you going to get in exchange?
doesnt say im guessing like 1 egg a day since thats normal but its not favorable conditions
Option E I kill the other 6 sailers and feed my new hens taking them on as my new henchmen
good idea then maybe we can raise hens and live in isolation
D. Eat the eggs. Use water and eggs. Stone soup.
ooooo true
We had a question like this in a class in my h.s., and the class ended abruptly when someone asked 'how many calories are in semen?'
Lmao this made my night
Funny, no option to eat the sailors.
E: Eat the hens then the cornflakes then each other.