To determine which evidence would best support a graph illustrating the relationships among different types of vertebrates, we need to analyze the options provided in light of evolutionary biology.
The first two options suggest similarities between amphibians and mammals, which would imply a close evolutionary relationship. This could align with a graph showing those two groups being more closely related to each other than to reptiles or birds.
The third option claims that mammals have more genes in common with birds than with amphibians. This could support a graph showing mammals as closer to birds than amphibians, which might contradict the previous option noting similarities between amphibians and mammals.
The fourth option discusses similarities between reptile embryos and birds, while claiming no similarities exist between reptiles and mammals or amphibians. This could support a graph that positions reptiles closer to birds, but again might contradict the similarities indicated between amphibians and mammals.
The last option states there are no similarities in amino acid sequences between birds and amphibians, which could substantiate a graph showing them as quite distantly related.
Without the actual graph for reference, one of the options that commonly supports evolutionary relationships is usually related to the presence of shared traits or gene commonality. Therefore, the response that indicates shared traits—especially if indicating a closer relationship—would likely be the most valid support for a relationship shown on such a graph.
In conclusion, if the graph suggests a closer relationship between amphibians and mammals, the evidence supporting that relationship would be:
"Amphibians and mammals have similar traits that are not seen in reptiles and birds."
This response best supports the idea of shared traits indicating a closer evolutionary relationship.
1 answer