Anthropology 1020

ePortfolio Signature Assignment

Lab Report
Natural Selection: Darwins Finches
Introduction
On his visit to the Galapagos Islands, Charles Darwin discovered several species
of finches that varied from island to island, which helped him to develop his theory
of natural selection. This also helped with Darwins theory of evolution. These
natural laws are Growth with Reproduction; Inheritance which is almost implied by
reproduction; Variability from the indirect and direct action of the external
conditions of life, and from use and disuse; a Ratio of Increase so high as to lead to
a Struggle for Life, and as a consequence to Natural Selection, entailing Divergence
of Character and the Extinction of less-improved forms. The flora and fauna of the
Galpagos Islands, visit in September 1835, underscored for Darwin how fraught
with uncertainty was the nature of species and varieties, and provided him with
provocative facts of distribution and affinity.
Hypothesis: Tongs will do better than clothes pins and hair clips. I developed this
hypothesis with past experiences using the tools. Realizing what tools are easier to
use based on the grip and size/ shape.
Materials/ Methods
In this experiment, we used seeds, Dixie cups, and one of these tools: tongs, hair
clips, clothes pins, chopsticks, tweezers, and chip clips. Our class of 30 students
were each given a cup and many seeds. With that we were given one of the
instruments to pick up as many seeds in a certain amount of time. We could only
pick up one seed at a time. Whoever had the least seeds would have their tool
taken away and replaced with the tool that picked up the most. Three would get
eliminated after each round and be replaced with the top three tools.

Results

We all started with the same number of tools and materials. In round 1 it could be
clearly seen that clothes pins and chopsticks do not do well with picking up seeds.
They are very tedious and small and take more time to pick up. At the end of round
5 the tongs dominate and is the tool that does best in the experiment.
Conclusion
With each round, we lost clothes pins and chopsticks and added on to the tong and
tweezer population. Although there were some mutations with the tongs they
continued to grow. With the tweezers, they also continued to grow and in round 4
the amount went back down, still having more than the original amount. Our
professor had done this experiment many times and had seemed to have different
results each time. This could be changed by the different ways the tools are used.
For example, someone who is fantastic at using chopsticks could make the
population grow or having other mutations added to the experiment.
Discussion

We had to form our hypothesis from the very beginning and test it out with each
round. Clearly determining the winners and losers of the round. With that we saw
the tong populations grow and the chopstick population almost extinct. We tested
out our hypothesis to either prove it wrong or right. This would be representing
Darwins theory of evolution. I could use the scientific method with picking the best
option for the best phone carrier. Having each go through a series of tests and doing
research on them. Another field that uses the scientific method is the psychology
field. There are always hypothesis about the brain specifically about how memories
are developed.
The theory of evolution is that a species is in a certain habitat develops
characteristics over time to better survive in the environment, this is done by
mutations in the DNA. With natural selection, much like the experiment, the ones
that cannot eat will die and the ones that can eat more will survive and have more
fertility to make the population bigger. Thus, making the birds with the better
beaks the only species in that certain environment.
References
APA (American Psychological Assoc.)
Godfrey-Smith, P. (2009). Darwinian Populations and Natural Selection. Oxford: OUP
Oxford.
James T. Costa; The Darwinian Revelation: Tracing the Origin and Evolution of an
Idea. BioScience 2009; 59 (10): 886-894. doi: 10.1525/bio.2009.59.10.10