Clues that living things share ancestors
Grade 7 Science Worksheet - Challenge Me

Circle the best answer.
Ari reads the whale chart. Which claim uses both the fossil rows and the flipper row?
- Fossil limbs shrink in order, and a living land animal became a whale
- Fossil limbs grow in order, and the flipper keeps the leg bones
- Fossil limbs shrink in order, and the flipper has new bones
- Fossil limbs shrink in order, and the flipper keeps the leg bones
Bo says a flipper cannot be related to a leg, since one swims and one walks. What does the chart show?
Use the picture in question 1.
- Wrong: fossils go from legs to paddles, and the flipper keeps leg bones
- Wrong: flippers and legs look alike, so the animals must be close relatives
- Right: fossils cannot show how limbs change
- Right: a different job means different bones
Esme asks why a swimming flipper and a walking cat leg share bones. Which reason fits the chart?
Use the picture in question 1.
- Both limbs move the animal about, so the two limbs must have the same bones in them
- Both limbs look alike, so the animals are close relatives
- A living cat turned into a whale, so they share bones
- Both came from a shared ancestor's limb, as the fossils show limbs changing
Three wings (real: Understanding Evolution, Open University OpenLearn and OpenStax Biology 2e). Comparison chart, columns: Animal | Job of the wing | Build of the wing. Row 1: Bird wing | flying | forelimb bones: humerus, radius, ulna. Row 2: Bat wing | flying | forelimb bones: humerus, radius, ulna (ulna small). Row 3: Butterfly wing | flying | a different build and origin. Three wings (real: Understanding Evolution, Open University OpenLearn and OpenStax Biology 2e). Comparison chart, columns: Animal | Job of the wing | Build of the wing. Row 1: Bird wing | flying | forelimb bones: humerus, radius, ulna. Row 2: Bat wing | flying | forelimb bones: humerus, radius, ulna (ulna small). Row 3: Butterfly wing | flying | a different build and origin. Three wings (real: Understanding Evolution, Open University OpenLearn and OpenStax Biology 2e). Comparison chart Animal Job of the wing Build of the wing Row 1: Bird wing flying forelimb bones: humerus, radius, ulna Row 2: Bat wing flying forelimb bones: humerus, radius, ulna (ulna small) Row 3: Butterfly wing flying a different build and origin The bird wing and butterfly wing both fly, yet Jun says they are not close relatives. Which explanation fits the chart?
- Same job, so the animals share a recent ancestor
- Same job, different build, so the wings evolved separately
- Different build, so the wings must do different jobs
- A living butterfly came from a living bird, since both of them fly
Kira reads the wing chart. Which two animals does it link most closely, and why?
Use the picture in question 4.
- Bat and butterfly, since both wings work in flight
- Bird and bat, since their wings share the same forelimb bones
- Bird, bat and butterfly equally, since each wing has the same job
- Bird and butterfly, since both wings are used for flying
Luz reads two results on the wing chart, the job and the bones. Which is better evidence of a shared ancestor?
Use the picture in question 4.
- The bones, since matching parts come from a shared ancestor
- Neither, since a chart cannot show ancestry
- The job, since animals that fly share a recent common ancestor
- The job, since bones follow the job
Read this first
Use the table
Three stretches of DNA that chicken and turkey both have (real data: Dalloul et al. 2010, PLoS Biology; percents are about) (real data: Dalloul et al. 2010, PLoS Biology). Comparison chart.
DNA stretch Length (letters) Chicken and turkey match (percent) CR1_B 2,000 91 Birddawg_I 3,600 89 Galluhop 1,200 91 Milo says: Chicken and turkey match in 91 percent of their body traits. What is the flaw?
- The flaw is that 91 percent is too low to show any link
- The 91 percent counts matching DNA letters in one stretch, not body traits
- The flaw is that chicken and turkey are the same animal
- No flaw, since a high DNA percent means most traits match
“layers never moved” Pia says: The moth wing print is in Layer 1, the top layer, so it is the oldest fossil. What is the flaw?
Four rock layers (model data). Rock-layers diagram, layers never moved, top to bottom. Layer 1 (top): moth wing print. Layer 2: seed. Layer 3: mussel shell. Layer 4 (deepest): crab shell. Four rock layers (model data). Rock-layers diagram, layers never moved, top to bottom. Layer 1 (top): moth wing print. Layer 2: seed. Layer 3: mussel shell. Layer 4 (deepest): crab shell. Rock-layers diagram (model data) top bottom Layer 1 (top) moth wing print Layer 2: seed Layer 3: mussel shell Layer 4 (deepest) crab shell - The flaw is that the crab shell should be the youngest
- The flaw is that fossils in one quarry share an age
- The top layer is the youngest, so the moth wing print is the youngest
- No flaw, since layers on top formed first
Ren reads the embryo chart. Which claim and reason fit best?
Early embryos (chart only; drawn fresh from modern descriptions) (drawn from modern descriptions). Comparison chart, columns: Animal | Early embryo has pharyngeal arches | Early embryo has a tail | Adult has gills. Row 1: Shark | yes | yes | yes. Row 2: Lizard | yes | yes | no. Row 3: Rabbit | yes | yes | no. Early embryos (chart only; drawn fresh from modern descriptions) (drawn from modern descriptions). Comparison chart, columns: Animal | Early embryo has pharyngeal arches | Early embryo has a tail | Adult has gills. Row 1: Shark | yes | yes | yes. Row 2: Lizard | yes | yes | no. Row 3: Rabbit | yes | yes | no. Early embryos (chart only; drawn fresh from modern descriptions) (drawn from modern descriptions) Animal Early embryo has pharyngeal arches Early embryo has a tail Adult has gills 1 Shark yes yes yes 2 Lizard yes yes no 3 Rabbit yes yes no - Unrelated animals, since the adults differ in gills
- A living shark became a rabbit, since the early parts match
- The same kind of animal as adults, since the early embryos look much alike
- A shared ancestor, since all three early embryos have the same parts
Zee reads the DNA chart. Which claim and reason fit best?
DNA letters compared in one short stretch (model data, made-up kinds) (model data). Comparison chart, columns: Pair of kinds | DNA letters that match (percent). Row 1: Kind 5 and Kind 6 | 97. Row 2: Kind 5 and Kind 7 | 90. DNA letters compared in one short stretch (model data, made-up kinds) (model data). Comparison chart, columns: Pair of kinds | DNA letters that match (percent). Row 1: Kind 5 and Kind 6 | 97. Row 2: Kind 5 and Kind 7 | 90. DNA letters compared in one short stretch (model data, made-up kinds) (model data) Pair of kinds DNA letters that match (percent) 1 Kind 5 and Kind 6 97 2 Kind 5 and Kind 7 90 - Kind 6 is closer to Kind 5, since more DNA letters match
- Neither kind is closer to Kind 5, since a percent says nothing about relatives
- Kind 6 shares 97 percent of body traits with Kind 5, since the percent counts traits
- Kind 7 is closer to Kind 5, since fewer DNA letters match