Question

Which possible outcome below would not have supported the hypothesis?

if generation 3 had 33% of all three birds

if each bird ate only one type of food and not the other two

if generation 3 had flock distributions similar to those shown in the graph below

Answer 1

I can answer, but I need one piece of information: what was the hypothesis? If you can paste the exact hypothesis (and the graph or a description of it), I’ll give a definite choice.

Based on common classroom hypotheses about selection/specialization, though, the best answer is usually the first option: "if generation 3 had 33% of all three birds." Reason: an equal 33/33/33 split after three generations indicates no change in relative frequencies (no sorting or selection), so it would not support a hypothesis that predicted directional change, specialization, or differential survival.

Brief notes on the other options:
- "If each bird ate only one type of food and not the other two" would support a hypothesis predicting dietary specialization.
- "If generation 3 had flock distributions similar to those shown in the graph below" — whether this supports or not depends on what the graph predicts; I need the graph or its description to judge.

If you share the hypothesis and the graph, I’ll pick the correct option and explain why.