Academic Integrity: tutoring, explanations, and feedback — we don’t complete graded work or submit on a student’s behalf.

please answer these 4 questions DQuestion 1 1 pts In 1997, François Lutzoni and

ID: 261837 • Letter: P

Question

please answer these 4 questions

DQuestion 1 1 pts In 1997, François Lutzoni and Marc Pagel compared the rate of nucleotide substitution in free-living versus mutualistic fungi in order to test a hypothesis that coevolution could promote the rate of molecular evolution in participating species. Which of the following was NOT supported by their results? The rates of nucleotide substitution were higher in fungal species involved in mutualistic relationships with algae and liverworts than the rates in the closely related, free-living fungal species The increased rate of nucleotide substitution in mutualistic species was widespread across many sections of the genome The increased rate of nucleotide substitution occurred only during or after the transition to the mutualistic relationship There was a more rapid rate of molecular evolution in the free-living fungi (related to the species that lives in lichens) than in the mutualistic species DQuestion 2 1 pts In some species of prey animals, we can find evidence of mimicry, or false visual signals to predators suggesting that the prey is most likely unpalatable. One example is a species of Ensatina salamanders that mimics a sympatric species of toxic newts (Taricha torosa) What type of mimicry is this? aposematic mimicry Mertensian mimicry Müllerian mimicry Batesian mimicry

Explanation / Answer

Question 1: There was a more rapid rate of molecular evolution in free living fungi (related to the species that lives in lichens), than in the mutualistic species.

Question 2: aposematic mimicry

Question 4: In all studied locations, the woodland star rarely aborted flower capsules that contained moth eggs comared to capsules that contained no moth eggs.

Question 5: Rats routinely chose the food that was not given to their tutor's as a means to monopolize a food source was not being exploited.