Answer:
More information required
Explanation:
Is there a picture you forgot to post with the question?
In the problem you mention, which I assume comes from the study of finches in the Galapagos, some birds evolved to have different beaks, depending on the food available. Depending on what kind of seeds there are, different beak sizes were selected for, with those with the right fit eventually winning out over the rest on the individual islands.
Answer:
C) When common lands are protected, land degradation slowly disappears.
Explanation:
Answer: For decreased chances of rejection
Explanation:
The three higly polymorphic MHC 1 genes in human beings are HLA-A, HLA-B and HLA-C.
These determine the compatibility of the organ or tissue in the recipient's body each by the help of many alleles that segregates in a population.
There are very less chances that a random chosen donor will match the a recipient six allele genotype.
This is the reason parent may be the best donor for organ transplantation or tissue transplantation.
Answer:
The commensal relationship between the sharks and remoras can be described as although remoras consume parasites, sharks with remoras show no better health or growth than sharks without remoras.
Explanation:
A commensal relationship refers to a relationship where two or more organisms in a habitat neither benefit or harm each other.
- The second option infers that the remoras harm the sharks. This is a parasitic relationship.
- The third option infers that the sharks are harmed by the remoras because the sharks depend on something that the remoras are limiting. This is also a parasitic relationship.
- The fourth option infers a commensal relationship, but falsely describes it. The relationship described by this option is a parasitic relationship (one benefits, the other does not).
Therefore, the answer is the first option: Although remoras consume parasites, sharks with remoras show no better health or growth than sharks without remoras.
