EXERCISE 2

PHYLOSTRAT:DO THE TRAITS OF ORGANISM PROVIDE EVIDENCE FOR

EVOLUTION?

Year & Section: 2MBIO7 Group No. : 10

Name:
Tubaon, Normin Gem Villanueva, Carl Jonnen
Uy, John Christian Yamamoto, Alicia Monique
***Villamanca, John Jerald*** ______________________________

****************************************************************************
Hypothesis:
Ho: No significant difference was found between the manner of groupings between the lizards
formed by design-based theory and theory of evolution (descent by modification).
Ha: Significant difference was found between the manner of groupings between the lizards formed
by design-based theory and theory of evolution (descent by modification).

A. Designer Lizard (Attached your results)

B. Evolving Lizards (Attached your results)

C. The Challenge. Attached the cladogram showing the different relationship and automorphic
character of is lizard to recreate their evolutionary history.

GUIDE QUESTIONS:
1. Observe the organization of designer lizards in the experiment. Do they form groups
readily? Will it be easy to assign taxonomic names according to group? Explain your
answer.

The groups in the “designer lizard” activity were formed together with those immediately
preceding them. The said setup caused the first designer lizard to form a group with the last
one. Viewed from afar, the groupings formed a circular pattern from first to last lizard. While
they readily form groups in this manner, the distribution of characters and character states
among them impedes and inhibits the formation of a coherent phylogenetic tree.

2. Explain why independent creation is likely to produce organisms whose traits are
organized the you discovered in designing lizards.

The concept of independent creation states that species are brought to life as they are
without any trace of evolutionary origins. Hence, they may be given or assigned certain traits
unique to them (autapomorphies) or common with other species (synapomorphies). Either
way, the creator of those species need not bother deriving their traits from previously existing
ones. Thus, there is an absence of evolutionary flow of characters due to the subjective manner
of assigning traits to organisms.
3. Explain why descent with modification from a common ancestor produces organisms
whose evolutionary innovations are organized in just the way you discovered evolving
Lizards?

In general, phylogenetic trees are organized in a way that new taxa differentiated from a
common ancestor along with the arising of new traits. Hence, the phylogenetic tree of the
evolving lizard was constructed in a congruent way. Descent by modification produces
organisms with evolutionary relationships organized this way since all species are derived from
a common ancestor rather than independently. Events or factors such as mutation, natural
selection, migration, and genetic drift gave rise to the diverging lineages which resulted in an
increased number of species. Hence, several species may arise from one species.

4. If evolution produces organisms with failed or lost evolutionary innovations, does the
resulting pattern exhibit the same distinguishable patterns of traits produced by
independent creation? Elaborate. Kindly compare the results from designer and evolving
lizards to prove or disprove this point.

There are times that lineages lose their derived characters, and return back to its ancestral
state. This event is called evolutionary reversal. Evolution that produces organisms with failed
or lost evolutionary innovations results in difference in distinguishable patterns of traits. For
example, in our activity, we have manipulated the characters that our lizards must acquire.
Consequently, we have used these characters to group them using their synapomorphies.
However, removal/loss of the character that was used to group the lizards will make the lizard
belong to another group. For the case of the evolving lizard, it is observed that evolutionary
reversal was not observed, for the lizards diverge into new lineage due to the presence of new
traits that were added to its branch.

5. In the Designer Lizards vs Evolved lizards, It is noticeable that the arrangement of the
evolved lizard groups are more organized than the designer lizard groups. Try to describe
the nature of this organization in your own words.

As observed in our Phylostrat activity, the arrangement of the Designer Lizards were not
comparable from that of the Evolved Lizards. This was caused by us, designing each one
carefully to arrange the changes in characters gradually. Usually, the arrangement of the
Evolved Lizards is more organized that of the Designer Lizards because each lizard descended
from a common ancestor and were organized based on their new acquired traits that they obtain
from generation to generation.
6. If the original ancestral lizard possessed the various traits that were lost to evolution
rather than gained, would that have warped how lizards grouped themselves together
when they change through evolution?

If the original ancestral lizard possessed the various traits that were lost to evolution rather
than gained, it would not distort how the lizards are grouped together. The loss of traits can still
be considered as a modification since the ancestral traits can be lost or maintained depending
on various factors. Over a period of time, some traits can be absent if it’s not useful or necessary.
This may become a vestigial feature. However, this does not mean that they are not related to
their ancestors since they can still be traced back by means of other similarities.