Help plz Which statement best describes the flow of energy and the movement of chemical compounds in an ecosystem?

Energy flows out of living organisms and is lost, while chemical compounds remain permanently inside organisms.

Energy is transferred from organism to organism in a food chain, and chemical compounds are recycled

Energy flows into living organisms and remains there, while chemical compounds are transferred from organism to organism.

Chemical compounds flow in one direction in a food chain and energy is produced.

This is because in biology, energy is transferred from organism to organism and some energy is lost along the way. Each energy transfer results in a loss of energy, so that energy is always at a lower level and can never be returned to its original high energy level. On the other hand, chemical elements can form products, then that reaction can be reversed and break back down into reactants. Additionally, the law of conservation of matter says that matter can't be created or destroyed, only transferred from one form to another.

organisms that lack symmetry are called asymmetrical and belong to phylum porifera/sponges.

organisms with specialized stinging cells belong to phylum cnidaria. stinging cells are called cnidoblast cells.

cnidarians show two morphological forms : polyp (sessile) and medusa (mobile)

filter feeding is observed in porifera members.  

alternation of generation is observed in coelenterata or cnidaria. there is alternation of asexual polyp form and sexual medusoid form. it is also referred as metagenesis.

"1. it should be, it has been for about 20 years, and it's really not much different in the end than breeding animals to have particular traits. there are always concerns about genetically engineered animals/plants affecting the environment in unexpected negative ways, but i can't think of an example where the fears didn't turn out to be baseless.  

first, as you point out, it would be a great advance in pharmacology, to be able to tailor drugs and their doses to me. the pros involve better medical treatment. the cons involve privacy issues like insurance companies denying coverage to people with genetic risk factors. looking at dna markers wouldn't affect the frequency of genetic diseases, but it would allow detection of them earlier. and ok, actually i suppose that if people used this information to avoid having children with genetic diseases, some might decrease in frequency."