Talk:Food chain

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Ecology (Rated Start-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Ecology, an effort to create, expand, organize, and improve ecology-related articles.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

Needs a cleanup[edit]

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! – monolemma t – 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) 11:36, 11 June 2014 (UTC)


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

"in most food chains, all the organisms in a food chain are consumers"[edit]

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)