Good question! I don't know, but it should be possible to multiply the standard CO2 proportion of air by the density of air at your altitude by the volume of air in the greenhouse (216 cubic feet for a 6'x6'x6' greenhouse with nothing in it) to get the mass of CO2 inside at a given time. If you wanted to raise that by 10%, you'd just add that mass of dry ice - it has the same mass whether solid or gas.

But, air exchange with the outdoors will equalize that concentration gradient eventually, perhaps even as fast as the dry ice sublimates. Even in an airtight greenhouse, the enhanced CO2 levels will benefit some plant groups more than others, in a way that changes with day length and temperature. Timing probably matters too, with some plants shutting their stomata in the day.

Lots of plants from tropical climates have minimum temperature and humidity requirements. Gardeners and farmers in temperate or even polar climates cannot grow these plants outside at all, but greenhouses let them re-create those conditions indoors while still giving plants access to sunlight. Even plants that can survive outside often grow faster under the controlled conditions in a greenhouse. Pest management is also easier in the controlled environment. Some greenhouses can even have extra CO2 piped in for even faster growth.

For me, nothing at all. Murderbot reads as an introvert who may not be neurotypical, but their motivations and actions are hardly alien.

Many feathers' colors come from their structure, rather than the more common route of molecules like melanin. These molecules break down, like when chlorophyll disappears from leaves in autumn. The microscopic ridges that structurally select for reflected light of a certain range of wavelengths may be more resilient. Apparently Lexus spent 15 years developing a paint that uses the same method, called Structural Blue, that shouldn't fade in the sun.

We can infer that it will do less damage than broadly spraying chemicals or draining wetlands. A quick Google search found lots of animals that eat them, but none that rely on them exclusively. A few boreal orchids seem to depend on them as pollinators more than any other insect. Given that they kill more humans than any other non-human animal, adding a few more bog orchids to the list of species we're driving to extinction probably won't derail these mitigation efforts.

Parthenogenesis is a form of asexual reproduction that has been documented in turkey, condors, and quail, so one of them. If you restrict the query to animals who reproduce ~primarily~ asexually though, it's probably stick insects or thrips.

I'm just getting this from the Wikipedia article on asexual reproduction, if you'd like to read it for yourself - until checking it I would have said whiptail lizards.