Question

A shark would not be a good index fossil because​

Answer 1

It doesnt have structures that can be preserved in a fossil.

Step-by-step explanation:

I'm assuming you're on Pennfoster cause me too.

4 options I'm not sure so correct me if I'm wrong

1. No fossil records exist for sharks.

( we have ancient shark teeth )

2. Salt water would degrade the fossil over time

(Idk maybe)

3. The species has survived too long

4. It doesnt have structure that can be preserved in fossil

( sharks are mostly collagen which doesnt preserve well, except teeth)

I'm about to submit my test I'll edit if I'm wrong.

Edit . I'm wrong

Answer 2

The shark cannot be considered as a good indicator for fossil study. Because the species is known to have survived for a very long period of time.

Step-by-step explanation:

Fossil studies are done by determining the age of the fossil preserved strata or rock. This is done in order to determine the period of time in which a species found as fossil presence.

Sharks have been known to have survived for a very long duration of time. And, therefore, do not corroborate to a specific period of time. Graptolites and Ammonites are considered as the best index fossils.