Kelp Forest Balance
Explore how a hypothetical return of sea otters to Oregon could interact with sea urchins, kelp growth, ocean warming, and storms over thirty years.
Choose a starting system
Scenario presets
Start with a preset, then change one variable at a time for a fair investigation.
Observe
Hypothetical Oregon coastal kelp forest
Analyze and compare
Thirty-year ecosystem evidence
Saved runs
Save up to three trials, then turn on Compare Runs.
No trials saved yet.
Suggested investigation
How could sea otter abundance affect kelp forest stability?
- Predict: What will happen if the hypothetical starting otter population decreases?
- Test: Keep every variable constant except the scenario's starting sea otters.
- Compare: Save at least three 30-year trials.
- Explain: Describe how changes move from otters to urchins to kelp.
- Critique: Identify one real-world factor that this model simplifies.
Evidence prompts
Build a scientific explanation
Claim: Which conditions produced the healthiest long-term kelp forest?
Evidence: Cite at least two values and one pattern from the graph.
Reasoning: Explain the trophic cascade connecting otters, urchins, and kelp.
How the model works
A simplified trophic cascade
Sea otters reduce sea urchin abundance through predation. Sea urchins graze on kelp. Kelp provides structure and habitat, so changes at the top of the food web can affect the wider ecosystem. In Oregon, the sea otter population shown here is hypothetical rather than a representation of present-day abundance.
Ocean warming lowers kelp growth and recovery. Storm pressure removes kelp directly. Otter protection changes long-term otter survival.
Model limitations
What is left out?
- All otters, urchins, and kelp are treated as identical.
- Disease, migration, fisheries, currents, and genetics are simplified or omitted.
- The habitat is represented as one connected kelp forest.
- The sea otter population is a hypothetical restoration scenario, not a current Oregon population.
- The model demonstrates possible patterns; it does not predict whether, where, or how a real reintroduction would succeed.
