I predict that the D. gliroides would shift its range where there are colder temperatures. I believe that this species would move its range more southern to cooler temperatures if its optimal survival range is in cooler temperatures. Although, if the optimal survival range is in hotter temperature then the D. gliroides would move northern to warmer temperatures. I base this prediction on the fact that animals will migrate to areas in which their survival is higher.
I will use the trait #6 to determine the evolution in each phylogeny. In Phylogeny A, the presence of the tail is a derived trait in the tree. The taxa without tails are the ancestral. Based on tails being the derived trait, the trait only evolved once within the tree and connects all taxa with the derived trait only separating them further with other derived traits. The taxa included are Bears, Sea Lions, Walrus, and Seals. In Phylogeny B, the presence of trait #6 is a derived trait and evolved twice independently. Those included with tails are Seals, Bears, Sea lions, and Walrus, although, Seals are not connected to the other taxa having separately earlier with the presence of other traits. In Phylogeny C, the appearance of #6 trait is an ancestral trait. The trait evolved twice independently. The trait also was lost once therefore the deriving of Civets, Hyenas, and Cats. Based on the parsimony principle, which suggests the alternative hypothesis that has the fewest assumptions or steps is usually the best, this would suggest that Phylogeny A would be the one that is most likely.
After looking at the population size data, I see the trend that each year the population of the D. gliroides has decreased. The cause of the population decreasing in the area of the Andes in this region is because of the rising of temperatures in this area due to climate change. Based on the rising temperatures and decreasing populations, I predict that the monito del monte is nearer its more northernmost part of its range in this area. I base this prediction on the fact that if it was the southernmost in its range the population of the species would go up with the temperature since the optimal range for successful survival would be in warmer temperatures. The data, however, suggests that this species needs cooler temperatures and would then migrate to cooler temperatures. Therefore, this species with their optimal range in cooler temperatures would move closer to the poles, where there is cooler temperatures.
Canis lupus familiaris (dogs), Canis lupus (wolves), and Canis latrans (coyote) are very similar and often a topic of conversation if the species are under one species or separate. The three animals are different species. In the article, Yes, eastern coyotes are hybrids, but the ‘coywolf’ is not a thing, the author points out that different species do not have to be completely reproductively isolated. The articles points out that in times when both the species of Canis lupus and Canis latrans were underpopulated and endangered that the different species would mate with each other and the other species Canis lupus familiaris. Although, when each species is not in endangered they choose to mate with their respective species.
The unknown specimen is tan in coloring, but also translucent as one can see through the outer layer. The specimen’s body looks like a meal worm body, although, has a long tail- like appendage at the posterior of the body. The tail-like appendage is thick at the base and becomes thinner until the end, which has a black color. The beginning of tail starts in the middle of the specimen’s body. The movement of the body can be described as slow, as it only moves in short distances. The specimen has eight short legs. The specimen seems to be attracted to the wood chips in the glass holder. When there is movement unknown to the specimen, it becomes docile and curls up into a ball. As observed, the specimen can roll itself over if in its back. It is bilateral symmetrical. The unknown specimen is about 15 mm in length, although, if movement is occurring the specimen is about 17-20 mm as it extends its anterior during movement. The thickest width of the body is 3 mm. The posterior tail-like appendage is 23 mm in length. Therefore, the specimen’s full length from the anterior to the posterior is about 38 mm. In order to identify the specimen I would ask certain questions. My first question would be: what type of environment does this unknown specimen live in? Is this specimen fully grown into its adult life? If the adult description different than the stage the specimen is at now? After carefully analysis of the unknown specimen, it was found the identity was a fly maggot.
The unknown specimen is tan in coloring, but also translucent as one can see through the outer layer. The specimen’s body is of a meal worm liking, although, has a long tail like appendage at the posterior of the body. The tail like appendage is thick at the base and becomes thinner until the end, which has a black color The movement of the body can be described as slow, as it only moves in short distances. The specimen has many short legs. The specimen seems to be attracted to the wood chips in the glass older. If there is movement unknown to the specimen, it becomes docile and curls up into a ball. As observed, the specimen can roll itself over if in its back. It is bilateral symmetrical.The unknown specimen is about 15 mm in length, while still, if movement is occurring the specimen is about 17-20 mm as it extends its anterior during movement. The thickest width of the body is 3mm. The posterior tail like appendage is 23 mm in length. Therefore, the specimen’s full length from the anterior to the end of the posterior is about 38 mm. My first question would be: what type of environment does this unknown specimen live in? Is this specimen fully grown into its adult life? If the adult description different than the stage the specimen is at now?
Recent comments