When it was first classified by biologists, the elephant shrew was placed with the bicolored shrew in a cladogram. Since then, additional evidence has been found that caused scientists to remove the elephant shrew from the shrew group and place it in a new position in a cladogram. In the new position, the elephant shrew is now closer to elephants than to shrews. What evidence would have been strong enough to support this change?
A. mating experiments
B. homologous structures
C. body fossils
D. DNA sequences
I think this is D?
Why do you think that it is D?
You are correct, the correct answer is D. DNA sequences.
To understand why DNA sequences would be strong evidence in supporting the change in the classification of the elephant shrew, let me explain the reasoning behind it.
DNA carries the genetic information that determines the traits and characteristics of an organism. When two organisms share more similar DNA sequences, it indicates that they are genetically more closely related.
In this case, if additional evidence caused scientists to move the elephant shrew closer to elephants, it suggests that they found similarities in the DNA sequences between the elephant shrew and elephants that are not present in shrews.
By comparing the DNA sequences of different species, scientists can track evolutionary relationships and construct cladograms that depict the evolutionary history and relatedness of organisms. If the elephant shrew was found to have more genetic similarities with elephants in comparison to shrews, it would support the decision to move it closer to elephants in the cladogram.
While other options like mating experiments, homologous structures, and body fossils can provide valuable information and insights into evolutionary relationships, DNA sequences are considered a more reliable and accurate tool for determining genetic relatedness and building cladograms.