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.
Ari reads the three plates and the chart together. Which claim fits both?
- The medicine got weaker, so more bacteria grew
- Bacteria that could already grow with it became more common
- The whole group became resistant in Round 2
- Each bacterium changed itself to resist the antibiotic in Round 1
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 bacteria needed to resist it, so they grew resistance
- The few in Round 1 multiplied and passed the trait on
- The medicine got weaker in Round 2
- The trait reached the whole group at once
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
- Most still grow, since resistant bacteria are most of the group
- Few grow, since bacteria of this kind are stopped by it
- More grow, since the medicine gets weaker each round
Dark moths helped in 1895, yet light moths rose after the clean-air laws. Jun asks how that fits natural selection. Which explanation fits?
- Clean air made light moths appear from nowhere
- Dark moths turned light when the air cleared, to match the bark
- A trait helps where it matches the place, and the bark changed
- The change finished within a single year
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) - Young differ from each other, so their average lands between groups
- Each young finch's beak shrank after hatching
- Finches share one beak depth, so the two averages should match exactly
- The drought ended, so the trait was undone
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) - 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
- No flaw, since each finch changed its beak to fit the large seeds
- The flaw is that seeds do not matter to a beak
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 - No flaw, since each plant sped up its own flowering to escape the dry weather
- The flaw is that the drought lasted several years
- A need does not cause a trait; early-flowering plants had more young
- The flaw is that the whole group changed in one year
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 stayed rare; the moths share one color and cannot vary
- Light moths rose; those matching pale bark had more young
- Light moths became common in one year; selection is instant
- Dark moths became light; each moth changed to match the clean bark
Tala reads the finch chart. Which claim and reason explain the change from 9.2 mm to 9.7 mm?
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 average rose; each finch strained its beak until it grew deeper
- The average stayed the same; the finches share one beak depth
- The average rose; deeper-beaked finches cracked seeds and had more young
- The average rose; the drought made the beaks of each finch grow deeper
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 stayed the same; the plants share one flowering time
- Flowering moved earlier; the plants needed to escape the dry weather
- Flowering moved earlier; each plant sped up its own flowers
- Flowering moved earlier; early-flowering plants had more young