Question

Tinbergen and his co-workers collected gull eggs and painted 69 of them white and left 68 of them with their natural color. (Statistically, these numbers are close enough to be considered equal.) The researchers then scattered the eggs next to a gull breeding area and observed from a nearby blind. Predation rates were recorded for white versus natural colored eggs. Do the results of Tinbergen's study support the hypothesis?

Answer 1

The results of Tinbergen's study support the hypothesis that camouflaged eggs provide protection against predation. This suggests that predators are more likely to locate and consume white eggs, while the natural colored eggs are better able to blend in with their surroundings and avoid predation.

Step-by-step explanation:

The results of Tinbergen's study support the hypothesis that camouflaged eggs provide protection against predation.

By painting a subset of gull eggs white and leaving others with their natural color, Tinbergen and his co-workers were able to compare the predation rates of the two groups.

If there was no difference in predation rates, then it would suggest that color does not affect the eggs' vulnerability to predators.

However, if the white eggs were predated upon at a higher rate than the natural colored eggs, it would indicate that camouflaged eggs have a protection advantage.

In this case, Tinbergen's study found that the predation rates of the white eggs were higher, providing evidence in support of the hypothesis.

This suggests that predators are more likely to locate and consume white eggs, while the natural colored eggs are better able to blend in with their surroundings and avoid predation.