Three species of lizard, labeled A, B, and C, are being studied using molecular analysis by two research colleagues in different laboratories. The mitochondrial DNA of lizards A and B are compared and are found to differ by 0.1%. The ribosomal RNA of lizards B and C are found to differ by 0.02%. They compare their findings and conclude that lizard B is more closely related to C than to A. What is the flaw in their reasoning, and how can their analysis be improved?

Question

anonymous · Answer

They applied different mathematical formulas for their computations. They should recalculate using the same formulas.

They compared different molecules which have different mutation rates. They should compare same molecule in the lizards.

They only made one measurement each. They should repeat their measurements to reduce the uncertainty in their results.

They used different equipment for analyzing the molecules since they work in different labs. They should work in the same lab.

anonymous · Answer

@Destinymasha can you help?

anonymous · Answer

@beccaboo333

anonymous · Answer

@blues

anonymous · Answer

@klipker Are those the options?

anonymous · Answer

@klipker Given the choices, it is the second one. Although this is not really correct. You have to check to see if the gene are in conflict or not. A better answer would point out that depending on the location of the differences they might mean nothing, or they might represent such fundamental differences that we can use them.