Darwin’s Finches: Darwin observed that beak shape varies among finch species. He postulated that the beak of an ancestral species had adapted over time to equip the finches to acquire different food sources. This illustration shows the beak shapes for four species of ground finch: 1. Geospiza magnirostris (the large ground finch), 2. G. fortis (the medium ground finch), 3. G. parvula (the small tree finch), and 4. Certhidea olivacea (the green-warbler finch) the Grants measured beak sizes in the much-reduced population, they found that the average bill size was larger. This was clear evidence for natural selection of bill size caused by the availability of seeds. The Grants had studied the inheritance of bill sizes and knew that the surviving large-billed birds would tend to produce offspring with larger bills, so the selection would lead to evolution of bill size. Subsequent studies by the Grants have demonstrated selection on and evolution of bill size in this species in response to other changing conditions on the island. The evolution has occurred both to larger bills, as in this case, and to smaller bills when large seeds became rare.
Answer:
invasive species are a problem both in anthropogenically altered and natural environments
Explanation:
An invasive species can be defined as a non-native species introduced into a new environment which then becomes abundant. Only in the US, it is believed that there are approximately 4,000 invasive species (some examples include the feral pigs, grey squirrels, European rabbits, etc.). In general, invasive species have a negative impact on the ecosystem, especially by displacing native species and thereby altering the trophic chain. In anthropogenically altered environments (anthromes), human beings are considered to be an invasive species.
It is a very interesting question - the technology is real and the research on eDNA published in a journal in 2017.
eDNA stands for enviornmental DMA sampling. It allows scientist to test water samples for the presence of the DNA of the invasive fish species. It is more effective than traditional methods of sampling because it does not require trapping or sighting of the invasive species. Water samples can be collected anywhere any time and the DNA results are as accurate and detailed as collected from the invasive species themselves. It provides a complete picture of what invasive species are there.
