A scientist compares the amino acid sequences of a protein produced by flowering plants, a cone-producing plant, and green algae.

What prediction about these sequences is supported by the data in the table?

(1 point)
Responses

The amino acid sequences for flowering plants and cone-producing plants will be the most similar.
The amino acid sequences for flowering plants and cone-producing plants will be the most similar.

The amino acid sequences for all three organisms will have no similarities.
The amino acid sequences for all three organisms will have no similarities.

The amino acid sequences for all three organisms will be identical.
The amino acid sequences for all three organisms will be identical.

The amino acid sequences for flowering plants and green algae will be the most similar.

11 answers

Based on common evolutionary relationships, the prediction that is generally supported is:

The amino acid sequences for flowering plants and cone-producing plants will be the most similar.

This is because flowering plants (angiosperms) and cone-producing plants (gymnosperms) are both vascular plants and share a more recent common ancestor compared to green algae, which are more distantly related. Therefore, the amino acid sequences between flowering plants and cone-producing plants are expected to show more similarities than those with green algae.

Which statement best describes the relationship between protein, amino acids, and DNA?(1 point)
Responses

Amino acids code for DNA. DNA is made up of protein.
Amino acids code for DNA. DNA is made up of protein.

DNA codes for amino acids. Amino acids are made up of proteins.
DNA codes for amino acids. Amino acids are made up of proteins.

Amino acids code for protein. Protein is made up of DNA.
Amino acids code for protein. Protein is made up of DNA.

DNA codes for proteins. Proteins are made up of amino acids.

The statement that best describes the relationship between protein, amino acids, and DNA is:

DNA codes for proteins. Proteins are made up of amino acids.

This accurately reflects the central dogma of molecular biology, where DNA is transcribed to messenger RNA (mRNA), which is then translated into proteins made of amino acids.

How does DNA analysis help scientists better understand evolution?(1 point)
Responses

It shows us an organism’s genome sequence.
It shows us an organism’s genome sequence.

It shows us what codons an organism has.
It shows us what codons an organism has.

It helps chart changes in amino acid sequences over time.
It helps chart changes in amino acid sequences over time.

It spells out the amino acids that make up an organism.
It spells out the amino acids that make up an organism.

The response that best describes how DNA analysis helps scientists better understand evolution is:

It helps chart changes in amino acid sequences over time.

By analyzing DNA sequences and the corresponding amino acids they code for, scientists can track evolutionary changes, compare genetic similarities and differences among species, and study how these changes relate to evolutionary relationships.

Based on this diagram, which two groups of organisms share the most similar DNA?

(1 point)
Responses

bears and salmon
bears and salmon

warm-blooded and cold-blooded
warm-blooded and cold-blooded

turtles and frogs
turtles and frogs

vertebrates and invertebrates

Without the specific diagram you're referring to, I can provide a general approach. In a typical phylogenetic diagram, organisms that are closer together on the tree share more recent common ancestors and therefore have more similar DNA.

However, if you want the correct response based on common biological knowledge:

Bears (which are warm-blooded) and salmon (which are cold-blooded) would not be the pair that shares the most similar DNA, as they belong to different classes of vertebrates.

Warm-blooded and cold-blooded animals encompass a wider variety and would not be directly comparable as closely related groups.

Turtles and frogs are both reptiles and amphibians, respectively, and are more distantly related than other groups, but they might be closer than bears and salmon (depending on what the tree shows).

Vertebrates and invertebrates are clearly distinct groups with significant differences in DNA.

If the diagram shows a relationship, and without seeing it, typically, you would expect the closest relatives to be found in categories like "turtles and frogs" since they are both part of the larger group of animals. However, in an actual phylogenetic analysis, one would rely on the specific diagram for an accurate response.

If you have the diagram, I would recommend looking for the group that shares a more recent common ancestor. If you need a more precise answer, please provide the details from the diagram!

Which claim is supported by the evidence in the table?


(1 point)
Responses

Humans have the closest evolutionary relationship to Species 1.
Humans have the closest evolutionary relationship to Species 1.

Humans have the most distant evolutionary relationship to Species 4.
Humans have the most distant evolutionary relationship to Species 4.

Humans do not have any common ancestors with Species 2 or 3.
Humans do not have any common ancestors with Species 2 or 3.

Humans have the fewest common ancestors with Species 1 and 4.

To accurately determine which claim is supported by the evidence in the table, one would need to analyze the specific data presented in that table regarding the similarities or differences between humans and the various species (Species 1, Species 2, Species 3, Species 4).

However, based on typical evolutionary relationships:

  1. Humans have the closest evolutionary relationship to Species 1. – If Species 1 is a primate or closely related mammal, this could be true.

  2. Humans have the most distant evolutionary relationship to Species 4. – If Species 4 is a very different organism (e.g., a fish or a plant), this could also be true.

  3. Humans do not have any common ancestors with Species 2 or 3. – This is usually not accurate, as all life forms share some distant common ancestors.

  4. Humans have the fewest common ancestors with Species 1 and 4. – This would depend on the specific relationships shown in the table.

In the absence of specific details from the table, I would suggest looking for traits or genetic similarities that clearly indicate the relatedness of humans to the listed species. Typically, humans are closely related to primate species (like Species 1, if applicable), while they are more distantly related to species like fish (Species 4).

If you have the actual evidence from the table or more context, please share, and I can give a more precise answer!

A scientist compares the amino acid sequences of four species to a similar protein produced by a human. The table shows the percentage of similarity in the amino acid sequence of each organism compared to the human sequence.

Organism Amino acid sequence similarity to human (%)
Species 1 85
Species 2 48
Species 3 39
Species 4 57
Which claim is supported by the evidence in the table?


(1 point)
Responses

Humans have the closest evolutionary relationship to Species 1.
Humans have the closest evolutionary relationship to Species 1.

Humans have the most distant evolutionary relationship to Species 4.
Humans have the most distant evolutionary relationship to Species 4.

Humans do not have any common ancestors with Species 2 or 3.
Humans do not have any common ancestors with Species 2 or 3.

Humans have the fewest common ancestors with Species 1 and 4.
Humans have the fewest common ancestors with Species 1 and 4.
Skip to navigation

Based on the provided amino acid sequence similarity percentages, the claim that is supported by the evidence in the table is:

Humans have the closest evolutionary relationship to Species 1.

This is evident because Species 1 has the highest percentage of similarity (85%) to the amino acid sequence of humans compared to the other species listed. This high degree of similarity suggests a closer evolutionary relationship.