Reading Comprehension - Biology and Evolution

According to you, the passage is sourced from

Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question based on the passage.

PASSAGE – II:

Passing over some doubtful remains of Silurian age, we find in rocks usually regarded as Devonian the most ancient fossils that can be certainly referred to the insects, while from beds of the succeeding Carboniferous period, a number of insect remains have been disinterred. These Paleozoic insects were frequently of large size, and they show distinct affinities with our recent may-flies, dragon-flies, stone-flies, and cockroaches. In the Permian period, the latest of the divisions of the Paleozoic, lived Eugereon, an insect with hemipteroid jaws and orthopteroid wings.

All these insects must have been exopterygote in their life-history, if we may trust the indications of affinity furnished by their structure. In the Mesozoic period, however, insects with complete transformations must have been fairly abundant. Rocks of Triassic age have yielded beetles and lacewing-flies, while from among Jurassic fossils specimens have been described as representing most of our existing orders, including Lepidoptera, Hymenoptera and Diptera. In Cenozoic rock fossils insects of nearly six thousand species have been found, which are easily referable to existing families and often to existing genera. We may conclude then, imperfect though our knowledge of extinct insects is, that some of the most complex of insect life-stories were being worked out before the dawn of the Cenozoic era. Some instructive hints as to differences in the rate of change among different insect groups may be drawn from the study of parasites. For example, V.L. Kellogg points out that an identical species of the Mallophaga (Bird-lice) infests an Australian Cassowary and two of the South American Rheas; while two species of the same genus (Lipeurus) are common to the African Ostrich and a third kind of South American Rhea. These parasites must have been inherited unchanged by the various members of these three families of flightless birds from their common ancestors that is from early Cenozoic times at latest. On the other hand, the various kinds of such highly specialized parasites as the warble-flies of the oxen and deer must have become differentiated during those later stages of the Cenozoic period which witnessed the evolution of their respective mammalian hosts.

' Rocks of Triassic age have yielded beetles and lacewing-flies ', implies:

Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question based on the passage.

PASSAGE – II:

Passing over some doubtful remains of Silurian age, we find in rocks usually regarded as Devonian the most ancient fossils that can be certainly referred to the insects, while from beds of the succeeding Carboniferous period, a number of insect remains have been disinterred. These Paleozoic insects were frequently of large size, and they show distinct affinities with our recent may-flies, dragon-flies, stone-flies, and cockroaches. In the Permian period, the latest of the divisions of the Paleozoic, lived Eugereon, an insect with hemipteroid jaws and orthopteroid wings.

All these insects must have been exopterygote in their life-history, if we may trust the indications of affinity furnished by their structure. In the Mesozoic period, however, insects with complete transformations must have been fairly abundant. Rocks of Triassic age have yielded beetles and lacewing-flies, while from among Jurassic fossils specimens have been described as representing most of our existing orders, including Lepidoptera, Hymenoptera and Diptera. In Cenozoic rock fossils insects of nearly six thousand species have been found, which are easily referable to existing families and often to existing genera. We may conclude then, imperfect though our knowledge of extinct insects is, that some of the most complex of insect life-stories were being worked out before the dawn of the Cenozoic era. Some instructive hints as to differences in the rate of change among different insect groups may be drawn from the study of parasites. For example, V.L. Kellogg points out that an identical species of the Mallophaga (Bird-lice) infests an Australian Cassowary and two of the South American Rheas; while two species of the same genus (Lipeurus) are common to the African Ostrich and a third kind of South American Rhea. These parasites must have been inherited unchanged by the various members of these three families of flightless birds from their common ancestors that is from early Cenozoic times at latest. On the other hand, the various kinds of such highly specialized parasites as the warble-flies of the oxen and deer must have become differentiated during those later stages of the Cenozoic period which witnessed the evolution of their respective mammalian hosts.

Which of the following statements is true according to the passage?

Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question based on the passage.

PASSAGE – II:

Passing over some doubtful remains of Silurian age, we find in rocks usually regarded as Devonian the most ancient fossils that can be certainly referred to the insects, while from beds of the succeeding Carboniferous period, a number of insect remains have been disinterred. These Paleozoic insects were frequently of large size, and they show distinct affinities with our recent may-flies, dragon-flies, stone-flies, and cockroaches. In the Permian period, the latest of the divisions of the Paleozoic, lived Eugereon, an insect with hemipteroid jaws and orthopteroid wings.

All these insects must have been exopterygote in their life-history, if we may trust the indications of affinity furnished by their structure. In the Mesozoic period, however, insects with complete transformations must have been fairly abundant. Rocks of Triassic age have yielded beetles and lacewing-flies, while from among Jurassic fossils specimens have been described as representing most of our existing orders, including Lepidoptera, Hymenoptera and Diptera. In Cenozoic rock fossils insects of nearly six thousand species have been found, which are easily referable to existing families and often to existing genera. We may conclude then, imperfect though our knowledge of extinct insects is, that some of the most complex of insect life-stories were being worked out before the dawn of the Cenozoic era. Some instructive hints as to differences in the rate of change among different insect groups may be drawn from the study of parasites. For example, V.L. Kellogg points out that an identical species of the Mallophaga (Bird-lice) infests an Australian Cassowary and two of the South American Rheas; while two species of the same genus (Lipeurus) are common to the African Ostrich and a third kind of South American Rhea. These parasites must have been inherited unchanged by the various members of these three families of flightless birds from their common ancestors that is from early Cenozoic times at latest. On the other hand, the various kinds of such highly specialized parasites as the warble-flies of the oxen and deer must have become differentiated during those later stages of the Cenozoic period which witnessed the evolution of their respective mammalian hosts.

What is the central idea of the passage?

Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question based on the passage.

PASSAGE – II:

Passing over some doubtful remains of Silurian age, we find in rocks usually regarded as Devonian the most ancient fossils that can be certainly referred to the insects, while from beds of the succeeding Carboniferous period, a number of insect remains have been disinterred. These Paleozoic insects were frequently of large size, and they show distinct affinities with our recent may-flies, dragon-flies, stone-flies, and cockroaches. In the Permian period, the latest of the divisions of the Paleozoic, lived Eugereon, an insect with hemipteroid jaws and orthopteroid wings.

All these insects must have been exopterygote in their life-history, if we may trust the indications of affinity furnished by their structure. In the Mesozoic period, however, insects with complete transformations must have been fairly abundant. Rocks of Triassic age have yielded beetles and lacewing-flies, while from among Jurassic fossils specimens have been described as representing most of our existing orders, including Lepidoptera, Hymenoptera and Diptera. In Cenozoic rock fossils insects of nearly six thousand species have been found, which are easily referable to existing families and often to existing genera. We may conclude then, imperfect though our knowledge of extinct insects is, that some of the most complex of insect life-stories were being worked out before the dawn of the Cenozoic era. Some instructive hints as to differences in the rate of change among different insect groups may be drawn from the study of parasites. For example, V.L. Kellogg points out that an identical species of the Mallophaga (Bird-lice) infests an Australian Cassowary and two of the South American Rheas; while two species of the same genus (Lipeurus) are common to the African Ostrich and a third kind of South American Rhea. These parasites must have been inherited unchanged by the various members of these three families of flightless birds from their common ancestors that is from early Cenozoic times at latest. On the other hand, the various kinds of such highly specialized parasites as the warble-flies of the oxen and deer must have become differentiated during those later stages of the Cenozoic period which witnessed the evolution of their respective mammalian hosts.

Which of the following statements can be derived from the passage?
I. Insects that go through a complete transformation in their life-cycle are more specialized than the ones that undergo lesser change.
II. Scientists have deduced some facts regarding the evolutionary changes of insects from the study of parasites.
III. Highly complex insects evolved only long after the Cenozoic era.
IV. Species of insects highly representative of the existing generation is found in the fossils of the Jurassic era.

Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question based on the passage.

PASSAGE – II:

Passing over some doubtful remains of Silurian age, we find in rocks usually regarded as Devonian the most ancient fossils that can be certainly referred to the insects, while from beds of the succeeding Carboniferous period, a number of insect remains have been disinterred. These Paleozoic insects were frequently of large size, and they show distinct affinities with our recent may-flies, dragon-flies, stone-flies, and cockroaches. In the Permian period, the latest of the divisions of the Paleozoic, lived Eugereon, an insect with hemipteroid jaws and orthopteroid wings.

All these insects must have been exopterygote in their life-history, if we may trust the indications of affinity furnished by their structure. In the Mesozoic period, however, insects with complete transformations must have been fairly abundant. Rocks of Triassic age have yielded beetles and lacewing-flies, while from among Jurassic fossils specimens have been described as representing most of our existing orders, including Lepidoptera, Hymenoptera and Diptera. In Cenozoic rock fossils insects of nearly six thousand species have been found, which are easily referable to existing families and often to existing genera. We may conclude then, imperfect though our knowledge of extinct insects is, that some of the most complex of insect life-stories were being worked out before the dawn of the Cenozoic era. Some instructive hints as to differences in the rate of change among different insect groups may be drawn from the study of parasites. For example, V.L. Kellogg points out that an identical species of the Mallophaga (Bird-lice) infests an Australian Cassowary and two of the South American Rheas; while two species of the same genus (Lipeurus) are common to the African Ostrich and a third kind of South American Rhea. These parasites must have been inherited unchanged by the various members of these three families of flightless birds from their common ancestors that is from early Cenozoic times at latest. On the other hand, the various kinds of such highly specialized parasites as the warble-flies of the oxen and deer must have become differentiated during those later stages of the Cenozoic period which witnessed the evolution of their respective mammalian hosts.

Which of the following can be the best suited title of the passage?

Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question based on the passage.

PASSAGE – III:

The antithesis of nature and nurture is not a new one; it was met long ago by biologists and settled by them to their own satisfaction. The whole body of experimental and observational evidence in biology tends to show that the characters which the individual inherits from his ancestors remain remarkably constant in all ordinary conditions to which they may be subjected. Their constancy is roughly proportionate to the place of the animal in the scale of evolution; lower forms are more easily changed by outside influence, but as one ascends to the higher forms, which are more differentiated, it is found more and more difficult to effect any change in them. Their characters are more definitely fixed at birth. A student in biology, interested in the highest of all forms, is not likely to doubt that the differences in men are due much more to inherited nature than to any influences brought to bear after birth, even though these latter influences include such powerful ones as nutrition and education within ordinary limits.
The biological evidence does not lend itself readily to summary treatment, and we shall therefore examine the question by statistical methods. The problem of nature vs. nurture can not be solved in general terms; a moment's thought will show that it can be understood only by examining one trait at a time.
To ask whether nature in general contributes more to a man than nurture is futile; but it is not at all futile to ask whether the differences in a given human trait are more affected by differences in nature than by differences in nurture. It is easy to see that a verdict may be sometimes given to one side, sometimes to the other. Albinism in animals, is a trait which is known to be inherited, and which is very slightly affected by differences of climate, food supply, etc. Professor Morgan, for example, has found a strain of fruit flies whose offspring in cold weather are usually born with supernumerary legs. If this strain were bred only in the tropics, the abnormality would probably not be noticed; on the other hand, if it were bred only in cold regions, it would be set down as one characterized by duplication of limbs. The heredity factor would be the same in each case, the difference in appearance being due merely to temperature.
Mere inspection does not always tell whether some feature of an individual is more affected by changes in heredity or changes in surroundings. On seeing a swarthy man, one may suppose that he comes of a swarthy race, or that he is a fair-skinned man who has lived long in the desert. In the one case the swarthiness would be inheritable, in the other not. Which explanation is correct, can only be told by examining a number of such individuals under critical conditions, or by an examination of the ancestry.

Which of the following would the author not agree with?
I. The highest of all forms is man.
II. Heredity means the same as nature.
III. The constancy of the behavioral traits in animals is roughly proportionate to the place of the animal in the scale of evolution.
IV. Observation of a person's changed trait determines whether the change is brought about by nature or nurture.

Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question based on the passage.

PASSAGE – III:

The antithesis of nature and nurture is not a new one; it was met long ago by biologists and settled by them to their own satisfaction. The whole body of experimental and observational evidence in biology tends to show that the characters which the individual inherits from his ancestors remain remarkably constant in all ordinary conditions to which they may be subjected. Their constancy is roughly proportionate to the place of the animal in the scale of evolution; lower forms are more easily changed by outside influence, but as one ascends to the higher forms, which are more differentiated, it is found more and more difficult to effect any change in them. Their characters are more definitely fixed at birth. A student in biology, interested in the highest of all forms, is not likely to doubt that the differences in men are due much more to inherited nature than to any influences brought to bear after birth, even though these latter influences include such powerful ones as nutrition and education within ordinary limits.
The biological evidence does not lend itself readily to summary treatment, and we shall therefore examine the question by statistical methods. The problem of nature vs. nurture can not be solved in general terms; a moment's thought will show that it can be understood only by examining one trait at a time.
To ask whether nature in general contributes more to a man than nurture is futile; but it is not at all futile to ask whether the differences in a given human trait are more affected by differences in nature than by differences in nurture. It is easy to see that a verdict may be sometimes given to one side, sometimes to the other. Albinism in animals, is a trait which is known to be inherited, and which is very slightly affected by differences of climate, food supply, etc. Professor Morgan, for example, has found a strain of fruit flies whose offspring in cold weather are usually born with supernumerary legs. If this strain were bred only in the tropics, the abnormality would probably not be noticed; on the other hand, if it were bred only in cold regions, it would be set down as one characterized by duplication of limbs. The heredity factor would be the same in each case, the difference in appearance being due merely to temperature.
Mere inspection does not always tell whether some feature of an individual is more affected by changes in heredity or changes in surroundings. On seeing a swarthy man, one may suppose that he comes of a swarthy race, or that he is a fair-skinned man who has lived long in the desert. In the one case the swarthiness would be inheritable, in the other not. Which explanation is correct, can only be told by examining a number of such individuals under critical conditions, or by an examination of the ancestry.

Which of the following can be a parallel case as that of Arthur Duffy?

Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question based on the passage.

PASSAGE – III:

The antithesis of nature and nurture is not a new one; it was met long ago by biologists and settled by them to their own satisfaction. The whole body of experimental and observational evidence in biology tends to show that the characters which the individual inherits from his ancestors remain remarkably constant in all ordinary conditions to which they may be subjected. Their constancy is roughly proportionate to the place of the animal in the scale of evolution; lower forms are more easily changed by outside influence, but as one ascends to the higher forms, which are more differentiated, it is found more and more difficult to effect any change in them. Their characters are more definitely fixed at birth. A student in biology, interested in the highest of all forms, is not likely to doubt that the differences in men are due much more to inherited nature than to any influences brought to bear after birth, even though these latter influences include such powerful ones as nutrition and education within ordinary limits.
The biological evidence does not lend itself readily to summary treatment, and we shall therefore examine the question by statistical methods. The problem of nature vs. nurture can not be solved in general terms; a moment's thought will show that it can be understood only by examining one trait at a time.
To ask whether nature in general contributes more to a man than nurture is futile; but it is not at all futile to ask whether the differences in a given human trait are more affected by differences in nature than by differences in nurture. It is easy to see that a verdict may be sometimes given to one side, sometimes to the other. Albinism in animals, is a trait which is known to be inherited, and which is very slightly affected by differences of climate, food supply, etc. Professor Morgan, for example, has found a strain of fruit flies whose offspring in cold weather are usually born with supernumerary legs. If this strain were bred only in the tropics, the abnormality would probably not be noticed; on the other hand, if it were bred only in cold regions, it would be set down as one characterized by duplication of limbs. The heredity factor would be the same in each case, the difference in appearance being due merely to temperature.
Mere inspection does not always tell whether some feature of an individual is more affected by changes in heredity or changes in surroundings. On seeing a swarthy man, one may suppose that he comes of a swarthy race, or that he is a fair-skinned man who has lived long in the desert. In the one case the swarthiness would be inheritable, in the other not. Which explanation is correct, can only be told by examining a number of such individuals under critical conditions, or by an examination of the ancestry.

The following about the author can be true, except:

Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question based on the passage.

PASSAGE – I

"It is a truly wonderful fact - the wonder of which we are apt to overlook from familiarity - that all animals and all plants throughout all time and space should be related to each other in group subordinate to group, in the manner which we everywhere behold - namely, varieties of the same species most closely related together, species of the same genus less closely and unequally related together, forming sections and sub-genera, species of distinct genera much less closely related, and genera related in different degrees, forming sub-families, families, orders, sub-classes, and classes.

The several subordinate groups in any class cannot be ranked in a single file, but seem rather to be clustered around points, and those around other points, and so on in almost endless cycles. On the view that each species has been independently created, I can see no explanation of this great fact in the classification of all organic beings; but, to the best of my judgment, it is explained through inheritance and the complex action of natural selection, entailing extinction and divergence of character.

The affinities of all the beings of the same class have sometimes been represented by a great tree. I believe this simile largely speaks the truth. The green and budding twigs may represent existing species; and those produced during each former year may represent the long succession of extinct species. At each period of growth all the growing twigs have tried to branch out on all sides, and overtop and kill the surrounding twigs and branches, in the same manner as species and groups of species have tried to overmaster other species in the great battle for life. The limbs divided into great branches, and these into lesser and lesser branches, were themselves once, when the tree was small, budding twigs; and this connection of the former and present buds by ramifying branches may well represent the classification of all extinct and living species in groups subordinate to groups.

Of the many twigs which flourished when the tree was a mere bush, only two or three, now grown into great branches, yet survive and bear all the other branches; so with the species which lived during long-past geological periods, very few now have living and modified descendants. From the first growth of the tree, many a limb and branch has decayed and dropped off; and these lost branches of various sizes may represent those whole orders, families, and genera, which have now no living representatives, and which are known to us only from having been found in a fossil state. As we here and there see a thin, straggling branch springing from a fork low down in a tree, and which by some chance has been favored and is still alive on its summit, so we occasionally see an animal like the Ornithorhynchus or Lepidosiren, which in some small degree connects by its affinities two large branches of life, and which has apparently been saved from fatal competition by having inhabited a protected station. As buds give rise by growth to fresh buds, and these, if vigorous, branch out and overtop on all sides many a feebler branch, so by generation I believe it has been with the great Tree of Life, which fills with its dead and broken branches the crust of the earth, and covers the surface with its ever-branching and beautiful ramification."

It may also be noted that there is a significant correspondence between the rival theories as to the main facts employed. Apparently every capital fact in the one view is a capital fact in the other. The difference is in the interpretation.

How can one determine whether it is nature or nurture that is responsible for the change in a particular trait?

Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question based on the passage.

PASSAGE – III:

The antithesis of nature and nurture is not a new one; it was met long ago by biologists and settled by them to their own satisfaction. The whole body of experimental and observational evidence in biology tends to show that the characters which the individual inherits from his ancestors remain remarkably constant in all ordinary conditions to which they may be subjected. Their constancy is roughly proportionate to the place of the animal in the scale of evolution; lower forms are more easily changed by outside influence, but as one ascends to the higher forms, which are more differentiated, it is found more and more difficult to effect any change in them. Their characters are more definitely fixed at birth. A student in biology, interested in the highest of all forms, is not likely to doubt that the differences in men are due much more to inherited nature than to any influences brought to bear after birth, even though these latter influences include such powerful ones as nutrition and education within ordinary limits.
The biological evidence does not lend itself readily to summary treatment, and we shall therefore examine the question by statistical methods. The problem of nature vs. nurture can not be solved in general terms; a moment's thought will show that it can be understood only by examining one trait at a time.
To ask whether nature in general contributes more to a man than nurture is futile; but it is not at all futile to ask whether the differences in a given human trait are more affected by differences in nature than by differences in nurture. It is easy to see that a verdict may be sometimes given to one side, sometimes to the other. Albinism in animals, is a trait which is known to be inherited, and which is very slightly affected by differences of climate, food supply, etc. Professor Morgan, for example, has found a strain of fruit flies whose offspring in cold weather are usually born with supernumerary legs. If this strain were bred only in the tropics, the abnormality would probably not be noticed; on the other hand, if it were bred only in cold regions, it would be set down as one characterized by duplication of limbs. The heredity factor would be the same in each case, the difference in appearance being due merely to temperature.
Mere inspection does not always tell whether some feature of an individual is more affected by changes in heredity or changes in surroundings. On seeing a swarthy man, one may suppose that he comes of a swarthy race, or that he is a fair-skinned man who has lived long in the desert. In the one case the swarthiness would be inheritable, in the other not. Which explanation is correct, can only be told by examining a number of such individuals under critical conditions, or by an examination of the ancestry.

The following can be inferred from the passage, except:

Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question based on the passage.

PASSAGE – I

"It is a truly wonderful fact - the wonder of which we are apt to overlook from familiarity - that all animals and all plants throughout all time and space should be related to each other in group subordinate to group, in the manner which we everywhere behold - namely, varieties of the same species most closely related together, species of the same genus less closely and unequally related together, forming sections and sub-genera, species of distinct genera much less closely related, and genera related in different degrees, forming sub-families, families, orders, sub-classes, and classes.

The several subordinate groups in any class cannot be ranked in a single file, but seem rather to be clustered around points, and those around other points, and so on in almost endless cycles. On the view that each species has been independently created, I can see no explanation of this great fact in the classification of all organic beings; but, to the best of my judgment, it is explained through inheritance and the complex action of natural selection, entailing extinction and divergence of character.

The affinities of all the beings of the same class have sometimes been represented by a great tree. I believe this simile largely speaks the truth. The green and budding twigs may represent existing species; and those produced during each former year may represent the long succession of extinct species. At each period of growth all the growing twigs have tried to branch out on all sides, and overtop and kill the surrounding twigs and branches, in the same manner as species and groups of species have tried to overmaster other species in the great battle for life. The limbs divided into great branches, and these into lesser and lesser branches, were themselves once, when the tree was small, budding twigs; and this connection of the former and present buds by ramifying branches may well represent the classification of all extinct and living species in groups subordinate to groups.

Of the many twigs which flourished when the tree was a mere bush, only two or three, now grown into great branches, yet survive and bear all the other branches; so with the species which lived during long-past geological periods, very few now have living and modified descendants. From the first growth of the tree, many a limb and branch has decayed and dropped off; and these lost branches of various sizes may represent those whole orders, families, and genera, which have now no living representatives, and which are known to us only from having been found in a fossil state. As we here and there see a thin, straggling branch springing from a fork low down in a tree, and which by some chance has been favored and is still alive on its summit, so we occasionally see an animal like the Ornithorhynchus or Lepidosiren, which in some small degree connects by its affinities two large branches of life, and which has apparently been saved from fatal competition by having inhabited a protected station. As buds give rise by growth to fresh buds, and these, if vigorous, branch out and overtop on all sides many a feebler branch, so by generation I believe it has been with the great Tree of Life, which fills with its dead and broken branches the crust of the earth, and covers the surface with its ever-branching and beautiful ramification."

It may also be noted that there is a significant correspondence between the rival theories as to the main facts employed. Apparently every capital fact in the one view is a capital fact in the other. The difference is in the interpretation.

The example of 'fruit flies' is given to explain that

Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question based on the passage.

PASSAGE – III:

The antithesis of nature and nurture is not a new one; it was met long ago by biologists and settled by them to their own satisfaction. The whole body of experimental and observational evidence in biology tends to show that the characters which the individual inherits from his ancestors remain remarkably constant in all ordinary conditions to which they may be subjected. Their constancy is roughly proportionate to the place of the animal in the scale of evolution; lower forms are more easily changed by outside influence, but as one ascends to the higher forms, which are more differentiated, it is found more and more difficult to effect any change in them. Their characters are more definitely fixed at birth. A student in biology, interested in the highest of all forms, is not likely to doubt that the differences in men are due much more to inherited nature than to any influences brought to bear after birth, even though these latter influences include such powerful ones as nutrition and education within ordinary limits.
The biological evidence does not lend itself readily to summary treatment, and we shall therefore examine the question by statistical methods. The problem of nature vs. nurture can not be solved in general terms; a moment's thought will show that it can be understood only by examining one trait at a time.
To ask whether nature in general contributes more to a man than nurture is futile; but it is not at all futile to ask whether the differences in a given human trait are more affected by differences in nature than by differences in nurture. It is easy to see that a verdict may be sometimes given to one side, sometimes to the other. Albinism in animals, is a trait which is known to be inherited, and which is very slightly affected by differences of climate, food supply, etc. Professor Morgan, for example, has found a strain of fruit flies whose offspring in cold weather are usually born with supernumerary legs. If this strain were bred only in the tropics, the abnormality would probably not be noticed; on the other hand, if it were bred only in cold regions, it would be set down as one characterized by duplication of limbs. The heredity factor would be the same in each case, the difference in appearance being due merely to temperature.
Mere inspection does not always tell whether some feature of an individual is more affected by changes in heredity or changes in surroundings. On seeing a swarthy man, one may suppose that he comes of a swarthy race, or that he is a fair-skinned man who has lived long in the desert. In the one case the swarthiness would be inheritable, in the other not. Which explanation is correct, can only be told by examining a number of such individuals under critical conditions, or by an examination of the ancestry.

The process of evolution of a particular species to its present day varieties can also be equated with

Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question based on the passage.

PASSAGE – I

"It is a truly wonderful fact - the wonder of which we are apt to overlook from familiarity - that all animals and all plants throughout all time and space should be related to each other in group subordinate to group, in the manner which we everywhere behold - namely, varieties of the same species most closely related together, species of the same genus less closely and unequally related together, forming sections and sub-genera, species of distinct genera much less closely related, and genera related in different degrees, forming sub-families, families, orders, sub-classes, and classes.

The several subordinate groups in any class cannot be ranked in a single file, but seem rather to be clustered around points, and those around other points, and so on in almost endless cycles. On the view that each species has been independently created, I can see no explanation of this great fact in the classification of all organic beings; but, to the best of my judgment, it is explained through inheritance and the complex action of natural selection, entailing extinction and divergence of character.

The affinities of all the beings of the same class have sometimes been represented by a great tree. I believe this simile largely speaks the truth. The green and budding twigs may represent existing species; and those produced during each former year may represent the long succession of extinct species. At each period of growth all the growing twigs have tried to branch out on all sides, and overtop and kill the surrounding twigs and branches, in the same manner as species and groups of species have tried to overmaster other species in the great battle for life. The limbs divided into great branches, and these into lesser and lesser branches, were themselves once, when the tree was small, budding twigs; and this connection of the former and present buds by ramifying branches may well represent the classification of all extinct and living species in groups subordinate to groups.

Of the many twigs which flourished when the tree was a mere bush, only two or three, now grown into great branches, yet survive and bear all the other branches; so with the species which lived during long-past geological periods, very few now have living and modified descendants. From the first growth of the tree, many a limb and branch has decayed and dropped off; and these lost branches of various sizes may represent those whole orders, families, and genera, which have now no living representatives, and which are known to us only from having been found in a fossil state. As we here and there see a thin, straggling branch springing from a fork low down in a tree, and which by some chance has been favored and is still alive on its summit, so we occasionally see an animal like the Ornithorhynchus or Lepidosiren, which in some small degree connects by its affinities two large branches of life, and which has apparently been saved from fatal competition by having inhabited a protected station. As buds give rise by growth to fresh buds, and these, if vigorous, branch out and overtop on all sides many a feebler branch, so by generation I believe it has been with the great Tree of Life, which fills with its dead and broken branches the crust of the earth, and covers the surface with its ever-branching and beautiful ramification."

It may also be noted that there is a significant correspondence between the rival theories as to the main facts employed. Apparently every capital fact in the one view is a capital fact in the other. The difference is in the interpretation.