Nutritionists are advising people to eat more fish, since the omega-3 fatty acids in fish combat many diseases. if everyone took this advice, however, there would not be enough fish in oceans, rivers, and lakes to supply the demand; the oceans are already being overfished. the obvious method to ease the pressure on wild fish populations is for people to increase their consumption of farmed fish. which of the following, if true, raises the most serious doubt concerning the prospects for success of the solution proposed above
(a) aquaculture, or fish farming, raises more fish in a given volume of water than are generally present in the wild.
(b) some fish farming, particularly of shrimp and other shellfish, takes places in enclosures in the ocean.
(c) there are large expanses of ocean waters that do not contain enough nutrients to support substantial fish populations.
(d) the feed for farmed ocean fish is largely made from small wild-caught fish, including the young of many popular food species.
(e) some of the species that are now farmed extensively were not commonly eaten when they were only available in the wild.

D

Explanation:

A huge concern when farming fish wether it is in the ocean, lakes or rivers has to do with the maintenance of the populations of fish outside these artificial systems.

When thinking about the food, these fish have to be fed very well to have large productions, including small wild-caught fish; the young of many popular food species. This would mean that in a short, medium and long period of time, populations outside the fish farms would be affected due to extraction of young fish and in consequence, less grown-up fish, which means fewer eggs and so on, a reduction in the populations and a whole affectation in the animal community.

With this situation, the problem of extraction of fish would not be solved with fish farming unless there are alternative ways to feed the fish other than adding pressure on the wild fish populations.

it should be briana that has it to me

evidence and logical support is essential for a scientist to do in order to maintain credibility. this is because no one can believe without any logic and without any evidence.hence a scientist can maintain credibility by proving himself and by answering logically so experiments prove very beneficial. logical hypothesis give conclusion which is acceptable. therefore, there are two main factors to maintain credibility by a scientist is evidence and logical support.