How helpful traits become more common over many generations
Grade 7 Science Worksheet - Challenge Me

Circle the best answer.
Read this first
Use the table
Three rounds of an antibiotic on a lab plate (model data). Agar plate diagram, zones: Zone 1: Round 1: antibiotic on the plate | a few small colonies; Zone 2: Round 2: bacteria from those colonies, same antibiotic | many colonies; Zone 3: Round 3: bacteria from the Round 2 colonies, same antibiotic | colonies cover most of the plate. Comparison chart.
Round Able to grow with the antibiotic (per 1,000 bacteria) Round 1 3 Round 2 480 Round 3 910 Bar graph: x axis Round; y axis Able to grow with the antibiotic (per 1,000), ticks every 200 from 0 to 1000. Bars: Round 1 3; Round 2 480; Round 3 910.
The chart shows 3 per 1,000 in Round 1 and 480 per 1,000 in Round 2. Bo asks where the Round 2 resistant bacteria came from. What fits the plates?
- The medicine got weaker in Round 2
- The bacteria needed to resist it, so they grew resistance
- The trait reached the whole group at once
- The few in Round 1 multiplied and passed the trait on
Esme plans Round 4 with the same antibiotic. Using the plates and the chart, what will Round 4 most likely show?
- Fewer grow, since each bacterium slowly loses its resistance over time
- More grow, since the medicine gets weaker each round
- Few grow, since bacteria of this kind are stopped by it
- Most still grow, since resistant bacteria are most of the group
Dark moths helped in 1895, yet light moths rose after the clean-air laws. Jun asks how that fits natural selection. Which explanation fits?
- The change finished within a single year
- Dark moths turned light when the air cleared, to match the bark
- A trait helps where it matches the place, and the bark changed
- Clean air made light moths appear from nowhere
The finches that had young averaged 9.9 mm, but their offspring averaged 9.7 mm. Kira asks why the numbers differ. What explains it?
Medium ground finches, Daphne Major (real data: Boag and Grant 1981, via Open University OpenLearn). Comparison chart, columns: Group | Average beak depth (mm). Row 1: Finches before the drought | 9.2. Row 2: Survivors that had young | 9.9. Row 3: Their offspring | 9.7. Bar graph: x axis Group; y axis Average beak depth (mm), ticks every 2 from 0 to 10. Bars: Before drought 9.2; Survivors 9.9; Offspring 9.7. Medium ground finches, Daphne Major (real data: Boag and Grant 1981, via Open University OpenLearn). Comparison chart, columns: Group | Average beak depth (mm). Row 1: Finches before the drought | 9.2. Row 2: Survivors that had young | 9.9. Row 3: Their offspring | 9.7. Bar graph: x axis Group; y axis Average beak depth (mm), ticks every 2 from 0 to 10. Bars: Before drought 9.2; Survivors 9.9; Offspring 9.7. Medium ground finches, Daphne Major (real data: Boag and Grant 1981, via Open University OpenLearn). Comparison chart Group Average beak depth (mm) 1. Finches before the drought 9.2 2. Survivors that had young 9.9 3. Their offspring 9.7 Bar graph 0 2 4 6 8 10 9.2 Before drought 9.9 Survivors 9.7 Offspring Group Average beak depth (mm) - The drought ended, so the trait was undone
- Finches share one beak depth, so the two averages should match exactly
- Young differ from each other, so their average lands between groups
- Each young finch's beak shrank after hatching
Seeds saved in 1997 and 2004 were grown together in one greenhouse, yet the 2004 plants flowered earlier. Luz asks what that shows. What fits?
Field mustard (Brassica rapa) before and after a drought (real data: Franks, Sim and Weis 2007, PNAS, Table 1 (long-season treatment)). Comparison chart, columns: Site | Days to first flower, 1997 seed | Days to first flower, 2004 seed. Row 1: Wet Site | 58.8 | 50.1. Row 2: Dry Site | 42.8 | 41.0. Bar graph: x axis Seed collected; y axis Days to first flower, Wet Site, ticks every 10 from 0 to 60. Bars: 1997 seed 58.8; 2004 seed 50.1. Field mustard (Brassica rapa) before and after a drought (real data: Franks, Sim and Weis 2007, PNAS, Table 1 (long-season treatment)). Comparison chart, columns: Site | Days to first flower, 1997 seed | Days to first flower, 2004 seed. Row 1: Wet Site | 58.8 | 50.1. Row 2: Dry Site | 42.8 | 41.0. Bar graph: x axis Seed collected; y axis Days to first flower, Wet Site, ticks every 10 from 0 to 60. Bars: 1997 seed 58.8; 2004 seed 50.1. Field mustard (Brassica rapa) before and after a drought (real data: Franks, Sim and Weis 2007, PNAS, Table 1 (long-season treatment)). Comparison chart Site Days to first flower, 1997 seed Days to first flower, 2004 seed 1. Wet Site 58.8 50.1 2. Dry Site 42.8 41.0 Bar graph 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 58.8 1997 seed 50.1 2004 seed Seed collected Days to first flower, Wet Site - They grew in the same place, so the difference is inherited
- The drought made the seeds flower earlier in the greenhouse
- The greenhouse was warmer for the 2004 plants
- Each plant hurried its own flowers after the drought
Milo says: "The moths needed light wings, so they grew light wings after the air cleared." What is the flaw?
Peppered moths and the Clean Air Act (real data: Christ's College Cambridge Darwin200 page). Comparison chart, columns: Year | Light moths per 100. Row 1: 1959 | 6. Row 2: 1984 | 30. Bar graph: x axis Year; y axis Light moths per 100, ticks every 10 from 0 to 40. Bars: 1959 6; 1984 30. Peppered moths and the Clean Air Act (real data: Christ's College Cambridge Darwin200 page). Comparison chart, columns: Year | Light moths per 100. Row 1: 1959 | 6. Row 2: 1984 | 30. Bar graph: x axis Year; y axis Light moths per 100, ticks every 10 from 0 to 40. Bars: 1959 6; 1984 30. Peppered moths and the Clean Air Act (real data: Christ's College Cambridge Darwin200 page). Comparison chart. Year Light moths per 100 Row 1: 1959 6 Row 2: 1984 30 Bar graph 0 10 20 30 40 6 1959 30 1984 Year Light moths per 100 - No flaw, since moths that need to match will quickly change their wings
- The flaw is that the light form took a single year
- The flaw is that bark cannot become lighter
- A need does not cause a trait, and light moths were already there
Noah says: "Each finch grew a deeper beak during the drought, so the average beak depth rose." Which flaw fits the chart?
Medium ground finches, Daphne Major (real data: Boag and Grant 1981, via Open University OpenLearn). Comparison chart, columns: Generation | Average beak depth (mm). Row 1: Finches before the 1977 drought | 9.2. Row 2: Their offspring, born after the drought | 9.7. Bar graph: x axis Generation; y axis Average beak depth (mm), ticks every 2 from 0 to 10. Bars: Before drought 9.2; Offspring 9.7. Medium ground finches, Daphne Major (real data: Boag and Grant 1981, via Open University OpenLearn). Comparison chart, columns: Generation | Average beak depth (mm). Row 1: Finches before the 1977 drought | 9.2. Row 2: Their offspring, born after the drought | 9.7. Bar graph: x axis Generation; y axis Average beak depth (mm), ticks every 2 from 0 to 10. Bars: Before drought 9.2; Offspring 9.7. Medium ground finches, Daphne Major Generation Average beak depth (mm) Row 1: Finches before the 1977 drought 9.2 Row 2: Their offspring, born after the drought 9.7 real data: Boag and Grant 1981, via Open University OpenLearn 0 2 4 6 8 10 9.2 Before drought 9.7 Offspring Generation Average beak depth (mm) - The flaw is that seeds do not matter to a beak
- No flaw, since each finch changed its beak to fit the large seeds
- Beaks do not grow to fit; deeper-beaked finches had more young
- The flaw is that beak depth cannot vary, so the average cannot rise
Pia says: "The plants flowered earlier because the drought made them need to." Which flaw fits the chart?
Field mustard (Brassica rapa) before and after a drought (real data: Franks, Sim and Weis 2007, PNAS, Table 1 (long-season treatment)). Comparison chart, columns: Site | Days to first flower, 1997 seed | Days to first flower, 2004 seed. Row 1: Wet Site | 58.8 | 50.1. Row 2: Dry Site | 42.8 | 41.0. Field mustard (Brassica rapa) before and after a drought (real data: Franks, Sim and Weis 2007, PNAS, Table 1 (long-season treatment)). Comparison chart, columns: Site | Days to first flower, 1997 seed | Days to first flower, 2004 seed. Row 1: Wet Site | 58.8 | 50.1. Row 2: Dry Site | 42.8 | 41.0. Field mustard (Brassica rapa) before and after a drought (real data: Franks, Sim and Weis 2007, PNAS, Table 1 (long-season treatment)). Comparison chart Site Days to first flower, 1997 seed Days to first flower, 2004 seed 1. Wet Site 58.8 50.1 2. Dry Site 42.8 41.0 - The flaw is that the drought lasted several years
- The flaw is that the whole group changed in one year
- A need does not cause a trait; early-flowering plants had more young
- No flaw, since each plant sped up its own flowering to escape the dry weather
Ren reads the moth chart for 1959 and 1984. Which claim and reason fit it?
Peppered moths and the Clean Air Act (real data: Christ's College Cambridge Darwin200 page). Comparison chart, columns: Year | Light moths per 100. Row 1: 1959 | 6. Row 2: 1984 | 30. Bar graph: x axis Year; y axis Light moths per 100, ticks every 10 from 0 to 40. Bars: 1959 6; 1984 30. Peppered moths and the Clean Air Act (real data: Christ's College Cambridge Darwin200 page). Comparison chart, columns: Year | Light moths per 100. Row 1: 1959 | 6. Row 2: 1984 | 30. Bar graph: x axis Year; y axis Light moths per 100, ticks every 10 from 0 to 40. Bars: 1959 6; 1984 30. Peppered moths and the Clean Air Act (real data: Christ's College Cambridge Darwin200 page). Comparison chart. Year Light moths per 100 Row 1: 1959 6 Row 2: 1984 30 Bar graph 0 10 20 30 40 6 1959 30 1984 Year Light moths per 100 - Light moths became common in one year; selection is instant
- Light moths rose; those matching pale bark had more young
- Light moths stayed rare; the moths share one color and cannot vary
- Dark moths became light; each moth changed to match the clean bark
Zee reads the flowering chart for both sites. Which claim and reason fit it?
Field mustard (Brassica rapa) before and after a drought (real data: Franks, Sim and Weis 2007, PNAS, Table 1 (long-season treatment)). Comparison chart, columns: Site | Days to first flower, 1997 seed | Days to first flower, 2004 seed. Row 1: Wet Site | 58.8 | 50.1. Row 2: Dry Site | 42.8 | 41.0. Field mustard (Brassica rapa) before and after a drought (real data: Franks, Sim and Weis 2007, PNAS, Table 1 (long-season treatment)). Comparison chart, columns: Site | Days to first flower, 1997 seed | Days to first flower, 2004 seed. Row 1: Wet Site | 58.8 | 50.1. Row 2: Dry Site | 42.8 | 41.0. Field mustard (Brassica rapa) before and after a drought (real data: Franks, Sim and Weis 2007, PNAS, Table 1 (long-season treatment)). Comparison chart Site Days to first flower, 1997 seed Days to first flower, 2004 seed 1. Wet Site 58.8 50.1 2. Dry Site 42.8 41.0 - Flowering moved earlier; early-flowering plants had more young
- Flowering stayed the same; the plants share one flowering time
- Flowering moved earlier; each plant sped up its own flowers
- Flowering moved earlier; the plants needed to escape the dry weather