Question

A scientist claims to have studied a genetic drift in the natural world. However, another scientist who studied the same event claimed it was natural selection. The trait they observed was the coat color of mice that helped them blend in their background. Which scientist do you think is correct and why?

Answer 1

Both genetic drift and natural selection can play a role in changing traits within a population. However, in the case of coat color in mice, genetic drift is likely the correct explanation, as coat color changes due to chance events rather than adaptation to the environment.

Step-by-step explanation:

Both genetic drift and natural selection can play a role in changing traits within a population, but they operate through different mechanisms. In the case of the coat color of mice, it is more likely that genetic drift is the correct explanation, rather than natural selection. Genetic drift is a random process where certain alleles become more or less common in a population due to chance events, while natural selection is driven by the survival and reproduction of individuals with favorable traits.

In this specific scenario, the scientists observed that the coat color of the mice helped them blend in with their background. If natural selection was the driving force, we would expect that the mice with coat colors that provided the best camouflage would have a higher chance of survival and reproduction. However, if genetic drift was at play, the changes in coat color would be due to chance events rather than an adaptation to the environment.

Additionally, the fact that there are two scientists with different claims suggests that further research and evidence are needed to confidently determine which mechanism is at play. It is important to consider other factors such as population size, genetic variation, and environmental conditions to make a conclusive determination.