Why is it that only 10% is transferred and not more?

The consumer doesn't consume all of the producer, the producer uses some of the energy, some of the energy is put off in poop, and some of the energy escapes as heat.

In the energy flow diagram with numbers about the Silver Springs ecosystem, the tertiary consumers end up with only 21 kcal/m^2/yr, which seems like only 21 kcal flow through their trophic level every year. This seems utterly unreasonable as the article mentions snakes and large fish among that level, and I don't think they could all survive on 21 kcal/ yr, let alone one of them. Am I looking at these numbers the wrong way? Thanks in advance.

Never mind, it's about the rates, not the solid amounts.

Why does only a certain percentage of the energy get transferred but not all of it ?

Because nature is not perfectly efficient and that would probably take more energy than would be gained.

What is the difference between the productivity of the energy transfer and the efficiency of the energy transfer?

Efficiency of energy transfer is like looking at how well a system turns input energy into useful output energy, focusing on minimizing wasted energy. It's about getting the most out of what you put in. Productivity of energy transfer is a broader idea that not only considers efficiency but also looks at how quickly the system works and how well it performs overall. So, while efficiency is about making the most of what you have, productivity is about how effectively and swiftly the whole energy transfer process works. Both are important for understanding how efficiently we use energy.-hope this helps!

Main content

Course: High school biology > Unit 9

Lesson 5: Trophic levels

Energy flow and primary productivity

Google Classroom

Key points

Primary producers—usually plants and other photosynthesizers—are the gateway for energy to enter food webs.
Productivity is the rate at which energy is added to the bodies of a group of organisms—such as primary producers—in the form of biomass.
Gross productivity is the overall rate of energy capture. Net productivity is lower, adjusted for energy used by organisms in respiration/metabolism.
Energy transfer between trophic levels is inefficient. Only about 10% of the net productivity of one level ends up as net productivity at the next level.
Ecological pyramids are visual representations of energy flow, biomass accumulation, and number of individuals at different trophic levels.

Introduction

Have you ever wondered what would happen if all the plants on Earth disappeared—along with other photosynthesizers, like algae and bacteria?

Well, our beautiful planet would definitely look barren and sad. We would also lose our main source of oxygen, that important stuff we breathe and rely on for metabolism. Carbon dioxide would no longer be cleaned out of the air, and—as it trapped heat—Earth might warm up fast. And, perhaps most problematic, almost every living thing on Earth would eventually run out of food and die.

Why would this be the case? In almost all ecosystems, photosynthesizers are the only "gateway" for energy to flow into food webs—networks of organisms that eat one another. If photosynthesizers were removed, the flow of energy would be cut off, and the other organisms would run out of food. In this way, photosynthesizers lay the foundation for every light-receiving ecosystem.

Producers are the energy gateway

Plants, algae, and photosynthetic bacteria act as producers. Producers are autotrophs, or self-feeding organisms, that make their own organic molecules from carbon dioxide. Photoautotrophs, like plants, use light energy to build sugars out of carbon dioxide. The energy is stored in the chemical bonds of the molecules, which are used as fuel and building material by the plant.

The energy stored in organic molecules can be passed to other organisms in the ecosystem when those organisms eat plants or other organisms that have previously eaten plants. In this way, all the consumers—or heterotrophs, other-feeding organisms—of an ecosystem rely on the ecosystem's producers for energy. Consumers include herbivores, carnivores, and decomposers.

If the plants or other producers of an ecosystem were removed, there would be no way for energy to enter the food web, and the ecological community would collapse. That's because energy isn't recycled. Instead, it dissipates as heat as it moves through the ecosystem, and it must be constantly replenished.

Because producers support all the other organisms in an ecosystem, producer abundance, biomass—or dry weight—and rate of energy capture are key in understanding how energy moves through an ecosystem and what types and numbers of other organisms that ecosystem can sustain.

Primary productivity

In ecology, productivity is the rate at which energy is added to the bodies of organisms in the form of biomass. Biomass is simply the amount of matter that's stored in the bodies of a group of organisms. Productivity can be defined for any trophic level or other group, and it may take units of either energy or biomass. There are two basic types of productivity: gross and net.

To illustrate the difference, let's consider primary productivity—the productivity of the primary producers of an ecosystem.

Gross primary productivity, or GPP, is the rate at which solar energy is captured in sugar molecules during photosynthesis—energy captured per unit area per unit time. Producers such as plants use some of this energy for metabolism/cellular respiration and some for growth, building tissues.
Net primary productivity, or NPP, is gross primary productivity minus the rate of energy loss to metabolism and maintenance. In other words, it's the rate at which energy is stored as biomass by plants or other primary producers and made available to the consumers in the ecosystem.

Plants typically capture and convert about 1.3% to 1.6% of the solar energy that reaches Earth's surface and use about a quarter of the captured energy for metabolism and maintenance. So, around 1% of the solar energy reaching Earth's surface—per unit area and time—ends up as net primary productivity.

Net primary productivity varies among ecosystems and depends on many factors including solar energy input, temperature and moisture levels, carbon dioxide levels, nutrient availability, and community interactions—e.g., grazing by herbivores.

^{2}

These factors affect how many photosynthesizers are present to capture light energy and how efficiently they can perform their role.

In terrestrial ecosystems, primary productivity ranges from about 2,000 g/m

^{2}

/yr in highly productive tropical forests and salt marshes to less than 100 g/m

^{2}

/yr in some deserts. You can see how net primary productivity changes on shorter timescales in the dynamic map below, which shows seasonal and year-to-year variations in net primary productivity of terrestrial ecosystems across the globe.

How does energy move between trophic levels?

Energy can pass from one trophic level to the next when organic molecules from an organism's body are eaten by another organism. However, the transfer of energy between trophic levels is not usually very efficient.

How inefficient? On average, only about 10% of the energy stored as biomass in one trophic level—e.g., primary producers—gets stored as biomass in the next trophic level—e.g., primary consumers. Put another way, net productivity usually drops by a factor of ten from one trophic level to the next.

For example, in one aquatic ecosystem in Silver Springs, Florida, the net productivities—rates of energy storage as biomass—for trophic levels were as follows:

^{3}

Primary producers, such as plants and algae: 7,618 kcal/m $^{2}$ ‍/yr
Primary consumers, such as snails and insect larvae: 1,103 kcal/m $^{2}$ ‍/yr
Secondary consumers, such as fish and large insects: 111 kcal/m $^{2}$ ‍/yr
Tertiary consumers, such as large fish and snakes: 5 kcal/m $^{2}$ ‍/yr

Transfer efficiency varies between levels and is not exactly 10%, but we can see that it's in the ballpark by doing a few calculations. For instance, the efficiency of transfer between primary producers and primary consumers is calculated below:

Transfer efficiency =

\frac{1103 {kcal/m}^{2} /yr}{7618 {kcal/m}^{2} /yr} \times 100

Transfer efficiency = 14.5 %

Why is energy transfer inefficient? There are several reasons. One is that not all the organisms at a lower trophic level get eaten by those at a higher trophic level. Another is that some molecules in the bodies of organisms that do get eaten are not digestible by predators and are lost in the predators' feces—poop. The dead organisms and feces become dinner for decomposers. Finally, of the energy-carrying molecules that do get absorbed by predators, some are used in cellular respiration instead of being stored as biomass.

^{4, 5}

Want to put some concrete numbers behind these concepts?

Let's take a closer look at where the energy goes as it moves through the Silver Springs ecosystem. Energy flow is diagrammed in the chart below.

For instance, the uppermost box shows that primary producers capture 20,810 kcal/m

^{2}

/yr of solar energy, gross primary productivity, but use most of this—13,187 kcal/m

^{2}

/yr—for cellular respiration and body maintenance, energy that's dissipated as heat. The net primary productivity is the rate of primary productivity once this cellular respiration is accounted for: 7,618 kcal/m

^{2}

/yr.

So, we have 7,618 kcal/m

^{2}

/yr of energy captured in the bodies of plants, available to get eaten by primary consumers. However, most of this energy is not taken up by the bodies of primary consumers—4,250 kcal/m

^{2}

/yr pass to decomposers, either as dead plant matter or as the feces of the primary consumers, herbivores. The remaining 3,368 kcal/m

^{2}

/yr are taken up and used by primary consumers—gross productivity—but only 1,103 kcal/m

^{2}

/yr are stored as biomass—net productivity—with 2,265 kcal/m

^{2}

/yr dissipated as heat in respiration.

We can see this pattern repeating as we move downward through the flow chart to progressively higher trophic levels. Most of the net productivity of any level is lost to decomposers, and most of the gross productivity of any level goes to cellular respiration and maintenance, not net productivity. In the end, all of the energy captured through photosynthesis is dissipated as heat.

Ecological pyramids

We can look at numbers and do calculations to see how energy flows through an ecosystem. But wouldn't it be nice to have a diagram that captures this information in an easy-to-process way?

Ecological pyramids provide an intuitive, visual picture of how the trophic levels in an ecosystem compare for a feature of interest, such as energy flow, biomass, or number of organisms. Let's take a look at three types of pyramids and see how they reflect the structure and function of ecosystems.

Energy pyramids

Energy pyramids represent energy flow through trophic levels. For instance, the pyramid below shows gross productivity for each trophic level in the Silver Springs ecosystem. An energy pyramid usually shows rates of energy flow through trophic levels, not absolute amounts of energy stored. It can have energy units, such as

{kcal/m}^{2} /yr

, or biomass units, such as

{g/m}^{2} /yr

Energy pyramids are always upright, that is, narrower at each successive level—unless organisms enter the ecosystem from elsewhere. This pattern reflects the laws of thermodynamics, which tell us that new energy can't be created and that some energy must be converted to a not-useful form—heat—in each transfer.

That's a good point! Heat is not useless for endothermic animals like humans since we generate metabolic heat to maintain a steady internal body temperature.

However, in a thermodynamics sense, heat is not useful because it represents energy that cannot be fully converted into other, work-performing types of energy. In most biological contexts, heat is not used to do work at all and just goes to increase the entropy, or disorder, of the surroundings.

You can learn more in the tutorial on laws of thermodynamics.

Biomass pyramids

Another way to visualize ecosystem structure is with biomass pyramids. These pyramids represent the amount of energy that's stored in living tissue at the different trophic levels. Unlike energy pyramids, biomass pyramids show how much biomass is present in a level, not the rate at which it's added.

Below on the left, we can see a biomass pyramid for the Silver Springs ecosystem. This pyramid, like many biomass pyramids, is upright. However, the biomass pyramid shown on the right—from a marine ecosystem in the English Channel—is upside-down, or inverted.

The inverted pyramid is possible because of the high turnover rate of the phytoplankton. They get rapidly eaten by the primary consumers—zooplankton—so their biomass at any point in time is small. However, they reproduce so fast that, despite their low steady-state biomass, they have high primary productivity that can support large numbers of zooplankton.

Numbers pyramids

Numbers pyramids show how many individual organisms there are in each trophic level. They can be upright, inverted, or kind of lumpy, depending on the ecosystem.

As shown in the figure below, a typical grassland during the summer has a base of numerous plants, and the numbers of organisms decrease at higher trophic levels. However, during the summer in a temperate forest, the base of the pyramid instead consists of a few plants, mostly trees, that are vastly outnumbered by primary consumers, mostly insects. Because individual trees are big, they can support the other trophic levels despite their small numbers.

Summary

Primary producer, which are usually plants and other photosynthesizers, are the gateway through which energy enters food webs.

Productivity is the rate at which energy is added to the bodies of a group of organisms, such as primary producers, in the form of biomass. Gross productivity is the overall rate of energy capture. Net productivity is lower. It's gross productivity adjusted for the energy used by the organisms in respiration/metabolism, so it reflects the amount of energy stored as biomass.

Energy transfer between trophic levels is not very efficient. Only about 10% of the net productivity of one level ends up as net productivity at the next level.

Ecological pyramids are visual representations of energy flow, biomass accumulation, and number of individuals at different trophic levels.

Attribution

This article is a modified derivative of the following articles:

"Energy flow" by Robert Bear, David Rintoul, Bruce Snyder, Martha Smith-Caldas, Christopher Herren, and Eva Horne, CC BY 4.0; download the original article for free at http://cnx.org/contents/db89c8f8-a27c-4685-ad2a-19d11a2a7e2e@24.18.
"Energy flow through ecosystems" by OpenStax College, Concepts of Biology, CC BY 4.0; download the original article for free at http://cnx.org/contents/b3c1e1d2-839c-42b0-a314-e119a8aafbdd@9.10.
"Energy flow through ecosystems" by OpenStax College, Biology, CC BY 4.0; download the original article for free at http://cnx.org/contents/185cbf87-c72e-48f5-b51e-f14f21b5eabd@10.53.

The modified article is licensed under a CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

Works cited

Jan A. Nilsson, "Energy Flow Through Ecosystems," General Biology Hub, accessed June 11, 2016, http://www.desertbruchid.net/4_GB2_LearnRes_fa11_f/4_GB2_LearnRes_Web_10Ecol.html.
Ivan Valiela, "Factors Affecting Primary Production," in Marine Ecological Processes. (New York: Springer, 1995), 36-83. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-4125-4_2.
Howard T. Odum, "Trophic Structure and Productivity of Silver Springs, Florida," Ecological Monographs 27, no. 1 (1957): 106-107, https://www.jstor.org/stable/1948571?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents.
F. Stuart Chapin III, Pamela A. Matson, and Harold A. Mooney, "Trophic Dynamics," in Principles of Terrestrial Ecosystem Ecology (New York: Springer-Verlag, 2002), 250-251.
Peter H. Raven, George B. Johnson, Kenneth A. Mason, Jonathan B. Losos, and Susan R. Singer, "The Flow of Energy in Ecosystems," in Biology, 10th ed., AP ed. (New York: McGraw-Hill, 2014), 1216.

References

Abedon, Stephen T. "Trophic Efficiency." Biology As Poetry. Accessed June 14, 2016. http://www.biologyaspoetry.com/terms/trophic_efficiency.html.

Benke, Arthur C. "Secondary Production." Nature Education Knowledge 3, no. 10 (2010): 23. http://www.nature.com/scitable/knowledge/library/secondary-production-13234142.

"Biomass (Ecology)." Wikipedia. Last modified July 9, 2016. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biomass_(ecology).

Campbell, Neil A., Jane B. Reece, Lisa A. Urry, Michael L. Cain, Steven A. Wasserman, Peter V. Minorsky, and Robert B. Jackson. "Ecosystems." In Campbell Biology, 1222-1244. 8th ed. San Francisco: Benjamin Cummings, 2008.

Campbell, Neil A., Jane B. Reece, Lisa A. Urry, Michael L. Cain, Steven A. Wasserman, Peter V. Minorsky, and Robert B. Jackson. "Trophic Structure." In Biology, 1205-1207. 8th ed. San Francisco: Benjamin Cummings, 2008.

Chapin, F. Stuart III, Pamela A. Matson, and Harold A. Mooney. "Trophic Dynamics." In Principles of Terrestrial Ecosystem Ecology, 244-264. New York: Springer-Verlag, 2002.

"Ecological Efficiency." Wikipedia. Last modified February 7, 2016. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecological_efficiency.

"Ecological Pyramid." Wikipedia. Last modified June 8, 2016. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecological_pyramid.

Fester Kratz, Rene and Donna Rae Siegfried. "Moving Energy and Matter Around Within Ecosystems." In Biology for Dummies, 173-182. 2nd ed. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, 2010.

"Food Chains." BBC Bitesize GCSE. Accessed June 14, 2016. http://www.bbc.co.uk/education/guides/z2m39j6/revision/6.

"Food Web." Wikipedia. Last modified June 7, 2016. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_web.

Kimball, John W. "Ecosystem Productivity." Kimball's Biology Pages. Last modified February 25, 2011. http://users.rcn.com/jkimball.ma.ultranet/BiologyPages/N/NetProductivity.html.

Kimball, John W. "Food Chains." Kimball's Biology Pages. Last modified February 2, 2011. http://users.rcn.com/jkimball.ma.ultranet/BiologyPages/F/FoodChains.html.

Miller, G. Tyler and Scott E. Spoolman. "What Happens to Energy in an Ecosystem?" In Essentials of Ecology, 61-65. 5th ed. Belmont: Cengage Learning, 2009.

Nilsson, Jan A. "Energy Flow Through Ecosystems." General Biology Hub. Accessed June 11, 2016. http://www.desertbruchid.net/4_GB2_LearnRes_fa11_f/4_GB2_LearnRes_Web_10Ecol.html.

Odum, Howard T. "Trophic Structure and Productivity of Silver Springs, Florida." Ecological Monographs 27, no. 1 (1957): 55-112. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1948571?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents.

"Primary and Secondary Productivity." Mr. G's Environmental Systems. Last modified December 15, 2009. http://sciencebitz.com/?page_id=204.

"Primary Producers." Wikipedia. Last modified March 5, 2016. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primary_producers.

Purves, William K., David Sadava, Gordon H. Orians, and H. Craig Heller. "Food Web Structure Is Influenced by Productivity." In Life: The Science of Biology, 1060-1061. 7th ed. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates, 2003.

Raven, Peter H., George B. Johnson, Kenneth A. Mason, Jonathan B. Losos, and Susan R. Singer. "The Flow of Energy in Ecosystems." In Biology, 1214-1215. 10th ed., AP ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2014.

Ritchison, Gary. "Conservation of Wildlife Resources: Lecture Notes 2." BIO 317. Accessed June 14, 2016. http://people.eku.edu/ritchisong/317notes2.html.

Russell, Peter J., Paul E. Hertz, and Beverly McMillan. "Ecosystems." In Biology: The Dynamic Science, 1229-1253. 3rd ed. Belmont: Brooks/Cole, 2014.

"Soil Food Web." Wikipedia. Last modified June 5, 2016. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soil_food_web.

Starr, Cecie and Ralph Taggart. "Studying Energy Flow Through Ecosystems." In Biology: The Unity and Diversity of Life, 850-851. 11th ed. Belmont: Thomson/Brooks-Cole, 2006.

Starr, Cecie and Ralph Taggart. "The Nature of Ecosystems." In Biology: The Unity and Diversity of Life, 844-845. 11th ed. Belmont: Thomson/Brooks-Cole, 2006.

Starr, Cecie and Ralph Taggart. "The Nature of Food Webs." In Biology: The Unity and Diversity of Life, 850-851. 11th ed. Belmont: Thomson/Brooks-Cole, 2006.

The Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica. "Ecosystem." Encyclopedia Britannica. Last modified September 4, 2016. http://www.britannica.com/science/ecosystem#ref261241.

"Trophic Level." Wikipedia. Last modified June 6, 2016. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trophic_level.

Valiela, Ivan. "Factors Affecting Primary Production." In Marine Ecological Processes, 36-83. New York: Springer, 1995. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-4125-4_2.

Wilkin, Douglas and Jean Brainerd. "Food Chains and Food Webs." CK-12 Biology Advanced Concepts. Last modified June 7, 2016. http://www.ck12.org/book/CK-12-Biology-Advanced-Concepts/section/18.7/.

Wilkin, Douglas and Jean Brainard. "Trophic Levels." CK-12 Foundation. Last modified June 14, 2016. http://www.ck12.org/biology/Trophic-Levels/lesson/Trophic-Levels-BIO/.

Want to join the conversation?

Sort by:

cb04132
Posted 4 years ago. Direct link to cb04132's post “Why is it that only 10% i...”
Why is it that only 10% is transferred and not more?
Button navigates to signup pageButton navigates to signup page
(7 votes)
Answer
- Audrey A
  Posted 4 years ago. Direct link to Audrey A's post “The consumer doesn't cons...”
  The consumer doesn't consume all of the producer, the producer uses some of the energy, some of the energy is put off in poop, and some of the energy escapes as heat.
  Button navigates to signup page
  (8 votes)
Neal
Posted 9 months ago. Direct link to Neal's post “In the energy flow diagra...”
In the energy flow diagram with numbers about the Silver Springs ecosystem, the tertiary consumers end up with only 21 kcal/m^2/yr, which seems like only 21 kcal flow through their trophic level every year. This seems utterly unreasonable as the article mentions snakes and large fish among that level, and I don't think they could all survive on 21 kcal/ yr, let alone one of them.
Am I looking at these numbers the wrong way?
Thanks in advance.
Button navigates to signup pageButton navigates to signup page
(3 votes)
Answer
- Neal
  Posted 9 months ago. Direct link to Neal's post “Never mind, it's about th...”
  Never mind, it's about the rates, not the solid amounts.
  Button navigates to signup page
  (5 votes)
DAMIONR
Posted a year ago. Direct link to DAMIONR's post “Why does only a certain p...”
Why does only a certain percentage of the energy get transferred but not all of it ?
Button navigates to signup pageButton navigates to signup page
(2 votes)
Answer
- Lukas
  Posted a year ago. Direct link to Lukas's post “Because nature is not per...”
  Because nature is not perfectly efficient and that would probably take more energy than would be gained.
  Button navigates to signup page
  (4 votes)
0019860
Posted 3 years ago. Direct link to 0019860's post “what happens to the other...”
what happens to the other 90%?
Button navigates to signup pageComment on 0019860's post “what happens to the other...”
(3 votes)
Answer
Liyana Idil
Posted 3 months ago. Direct link to Liyana Idil's post “What is the difference be...”
What is the difference between the productivity of the energy transfer and the efficiency of the energy transfer?
Button navigates to signup pageButton navigates to signup page
(2 votes)
Answer
- William Crye
  Posted 3 months ago. Direct link to William Crye's post “Efficiency of energy tran...”
  Efficiency of energy transfer is like looking at how well a system turns input energy into useful output energy, focusing on minimizing wasted energy. It's about getting the most out of what you put in. Productivity of energy transfer is a broader idea that not only considers efficiency but also looks at how quickly the system works and how well it performs overall. So, while efficiency is about making the most of what you have, productivity is about how effectively and swiftly the whole energy transfer process works. Both are important for understanding how efficiently we use energy.-hope this helps!
  Button navigates to signup page
  (2 votes)
Isabella Nicolè
Posted 4 years ago. Direct link to Isabella Nicolè's post “What would the energy tra...”
What would the energy transfer efficiency be assuming that all individuals of each trophic level are eaten and therefore not wasted?
Button navigates to signup pageButton navigates to signup page
(2 votes)
Answer
oe616874
Posted 5 years ago. Direct link to oe616874's post “Why does unit of biomass ...”
Why does unit of biomass is g/m^2, why not kcal/m^2? and why do we need to use it for
Button navigates to signup pageComment on oe616874's post “Why does unit of biomass ...”
(2 votes)
Answer
- Christopher Peng
  Posted 4 years ago. Direct link to Christopher Peng's post “Biomass is measured in ma...”
  Biomass is measured in mass (grams) and energy transfer is measured in energy (kcal).
  Button navigates to signup page
  (1 vote)
a c
Posted 3 years ago. Direct link to a c's post “I was reading this articl...”
I was reading this article as supplementary information for my course and found this passage confusing: "Why is energy transfer inefficient? [...] Not all the organisms at a lower trophic level get eaten by those at a higher trophic level."

I have never seen anything like this before. Why does this necessarily lead to energy waste? What's the difference between an organisms of different trophic levels eating something? Wouldn't the energy transferred between organisms be consistent despite their trophic levels?

This also leads me to doubt my understanding of trophic levels. I thought that trophic levels had a rough structure of the producers at level one, herbivores at level two, omnivores at level three, and carnivores at level four (and that these two last levels were kind of the same thing anyway). Is the passage is referring to carnivores eating plant matter and thus excreting it as waste?
Button navigates to signup pageComment on a c's post “I was reading this articl...”
(2 votes)
Answer
- Owen Friedman
  Posted a year ago. Direct link to Owen Friedman's post “For your first question: ...”
  For your first question: if the organism dies without being eaten its energy is not passed to the next trophic level it is instead given to the decomposers. This loss results in a lower average energy transfer.
  
  Next: trophic levels are a way of mapping the path of energy and biomass through organisms, they do not have a ridged structure.
  
  And I believe the passage is referring to the inefficiency of our digestive systems. When you eat a meal your body can't collect all the energy from it, so energy leaves your body as poo without being taken up by your trophic level.
  Button navigates to signup page
  (1 vote)
stacey
Posted 15 days ago. Direct link to stacey's post “TEH sobrang dami Naman ne...”
TEH sobrang dami Naman neto
Button navigates to signup pageButton navigates to signup page
(1 vote)
Answer
MEXICAN MARIO
Posted 4 months ago. Direct link to MEXICAN MARIO's post “why is it tha only 10% is...”
why is it tha only 10% is transferred and not more
Button navigates to signup pageButton navigates to signup page
(1 vote)
Answer