Answer:
Evolution is the process that allows the appearance and elaboration of signals, but the key question is: what selective forces led - and lead - to the appearance of color characteristics and chromatic patterns ?, not only in the scope of a species concrete - such as the black bib of the common sparrow (Passer domesticus) - but also within each family or even within a wider framework, for example the light colored spots that we see in the outer feathers of the tail of the bird species Dr. Senar explains the methods and results of the experiments performed so that the reader can compare their interpretation with the scientific advocacy, but also involve other alternative hypotheses. For example, the supposed signals of dominance Do they represent correlations with age and sex, which in turn correlate with dominance? And what can we say about deception, of those signs that exaggerate the status of an individual? The presentation of the different alternatives offers the reader the opportunity to detect the complexity of the selective forces and the difficulty of designing clear and conclusive experiments. In a similar way, the author presents the multiple hypotheses that address sexual selection and delayed maturation of plumage, thus facilitating the reader, understanding of the different topics discussed and a better appreciation of the elegant experiments that have been used to formulate and defend some of these hypotheses. Camouflage is treated in a separate chapter, but Dr. Senar not only focuses on the colors of the prey, which affects the object of investigations, but also on the color of predators, whose study has been the subject of much attention minor The interpretation of color as a bioindicator is an innovative approach that is proposed towards the end of the book. This is the first time that this possibility was raised, but, as the author points out, if the birds determine the quality of the habitat by the color of the potential couple that lives in it, there is no doubt that we should also be able to determine the quality of a habitat using similar means. Experiments that allow us to evaluate this approach are described throughout the book.
<span>Dense connective tissue</span>
The answer is that the criteria of classification change with the improved understanding of organisms around us. During the time of Aristotle, not much was known about the living organisms. So, he classified them as he observed. Plants were classified into herbs, shrubs and trees; very much like what’s taught to a second grade student. Animals as Enaima and Anaima based on the presence or absence of RBCs. After him, Carolus Linnaeus tried his hand over classification. He came up with the 2 kingdom classification: Plants and Animals. He considered only a set of morphological and physiological criteria to decide the kingdom to which an organism belongs. It includes presence of cell wall, mode of nutrition, contractile vacuole, locomotion and others. Based on these criteria, he included widely differing organisms into a single kingdom, for example, fungi, bacteria, algae, and higher plants were included into plant kingdom just because they have cell wall as a common aspect. Then came, Ernst Haeckel, who came with a third kingdom of Protista to include unicellular organisms. Copeland gave a 4 kingdom classification segregating unicellular organisms into 2 separate kingdoms based on their nuclear structure. R.H. Whittaker came next introducing the most accepted 5 kingdom classification system. You should understand one thing that man’s knowledge of classifying organisms improved with the improving technologies available to him, which he exploited to very effective extent. Carl Woese gave the 6 kingdom classification and 3 domain system based on the 16S rRNA sequence.
Our understanding of organisms around us is improving day by day and the system of classification will also change further in pace with the improvement in technology.
I hope this helps! :D]
~ Kana ^^
This is correct, because aerobic is more efficient than anaerobic, making it preferable. Cellular respiration is energetically more efficient than anaerobic respiration.
<h3>Cellular respiration and anaerobic respiration </h3>
Cellular respiration refers to the generation of energy in the form of ATP in presence of oxygen.
Conversely, anaerobic respiration generates energy (ATP) in absence of oxygen.
Cellular respiration is an energetically more efficient pathway than anaerobic respiration, thereby facultative organisms generate ATP by cellular respiration when it is possible.
Learn more about cellular respiration here:
brainly.com/question/2809259
-They ignore historical evidence showing how present-day arrangements contrast with earlier social arrangements
- They direct attention away from current social inequalities, insisting that these inequalities are so deeply rooted that attempting to change them would be impossible.
-They ignore variations in social arrangements in other present-day societies, which show that social life may be organized differently
