Calling MARTIANBISHOP -- or any other biology teachers!

[frogs]

Dd1 is doing Y6 SATS revision -- I try to steer well clear usually, as the simplistic banality of the tasks brings me out in a rash.

However -- on this occasion they are learning about food chains, and were told that everything is either a producer (green plants that produce their own food) or a consumer (something that eats a producer or another consumer).

Dd1, with her unerring eye for the awkward question, wanted to know where the Venus Fly Trap fits into this scenario. The teacher didn't know the answer, but at least had the sense to admit it (this is the nice class teacher, rather than mad creationist teacher, luckily).

Can anyone help us out?

.

Can a Venus fly trap live without consuming fl if so its a producer, I think it can??
Come on prove me wrong

bit of both really

I would say producer as it is a green plant. But don't know for sure.

I'm not a biology teacher but I have been doing an ecology course recently. I would say the answer is that the either/or is an oversimplification, and that Venus fly traps are both producers (as they photosynthesize) and consumers (as they consume flies).

\link{http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/gen01/gen01701.htm\Look here}

OK

All green plants make their own food via photosynthesis.

Carbon Dioxide + water -> glucose (a sugar) + oxygen

The use energy from sunlight to make this happen and Chorophyll (green stuff and enzyme)

All it neads are the above things.

Bow it makes everything else it needs using the glucose and mineral salts (from the soil) Mostly it needs nitrates. When soil is very waterlogged there are not enough nitrates in it (and also oxygen which the roots need to get the energy to pump in the nitrates). So some plants , like the venus flytrap get their nitrates from breaking down the protien in dead insects.

So they are still primary produces, but get their nitrates from insects rather than the soil.

Does that make sense>>>

Would like to say thye definitely won't ask about Venus Fly Traps in the Year 6 SATs

It is in our year 9 scemen of work for the middle to more able children.

Agree it will not be in year 6....but felt I should answer anyway

how did your sex ed go matianbishop?

Surprisingly well! They rather enjoyed it. We have just finished 5 lessons on acids and alkalis and they have enjoyed that too. Lots of 'magic' colour changes that get the 'ooh' factor in lessons!

Oh yes chemocal changes always get crowd appreciation. Remember vaguely doing vinegar and bicarb?? would that be right?

That is the one. Univeral indicator acids and bases, they love it. Not sure what I am doing with them next. Physics I think....circuits. they enjoy that but get dreadfuly confused

oh I hate doing circuits. You can tell I am not an expert on science! Usually the batteries don't work.

Have had a letter this week about marking Year 6 SATs - am quite excited about it. Probably will deeply regret it when marking the 500th one!

hate marking. I understand once you get your 'eye' in, it can pay well. One of our department does the KS3 sats in science

Pays well???? YIPPEE. Not really sure how much I will be getting , think it is per paper.

Thank you, MB. I think that should give dd1 enough to think about for the time being!

frogs sorry to hijack your thread.

sounds like your dd is very clever - is she going for a level 5?

She was at level 5 halfway thro' Y5, cece. You may rightly ask what she has been doing since then; from the school's pov, sweet FA.

Luckily she set herself the task of getting into grammar school rather than the (v. good) comprehensive all her friends are going to, so that kept her busy and gave her something to aim for. And a sense of achievement too -- we had a letter back in January telling us that she got the highest mark out of all the 400 or so kids who took the test. I found out recently that the school was sent that letter too, but has any member of staff seen fit to congratulate her? Have they hell.

IMO removing the possibility for kids to get level 6 was a massive mistake, since it removes from the school all incentive to do anything for the top end. And judging by the moaning going on the Y6 secondary transfer thread, we're far from alone in finding this a problem.

She was at level 5 halfway thro' Y5, cece. You may rightly ask what she has been doing since then; from the school's pov, sweet FA.

Luckily she set herself the task of getting into grammar school rather than the (v. good) comprehensive all her friends are going to, so that kept her busy and gave her something to aim for. And a sense of achievement too -- we had a letter back in January telling us that she got the highest mark out of all the 400 or so kids who took the test. I found out recently that the school was sent that letter too, but has any member of staff seen fit to congratulate her? Have they hell.

IMO removing the possibility for kids to get level 6 was a massive mistake, since it removes from the school all incentive to do anything for the top end. And judging by the moaning going on the Y6 secondary transfer thread, we're far from alone in finding this a problem.

Yes level 6 was very diffiuclt - well the maths and literacy ones were - I never knew a child get either...

Never saw the science level 6 before they did away with it!

She sounds lovely You must be very proud of her.