Coelacanths and Lungfish V

Welcome! You are encouraged to register with the site and login (for free). When you register, you support the site and your question history is saved.

     How aquatic vertebrates evolved into land vertebrates has been difficult for evolutionary biologists to study, in part because the shift from water to land appears to have occurred rapidly and has yielded a scarce fossil record. Prior to the advent of DNA sequencing, the primary guideposts in tracing the emergence of tetrapods have been morphological considerations, which have highlighted the coelacanth and the lungfish as species of interest.
     Coelacanths and lungfish are distinct from other fish in that they are lobe-finned species. Lobe-finned species, like ray-finned fishes such as tuna and trout, possess not cartilage but a bony skeleton, a key prerequisite for survival on land. Lobe-finned fish species are distinguished from ray-finned species by fins that are joined to a single bone and which thus have the potential to evolve into limbs. Coelacanths and lungfish are two of the only lobe-finned species that are not extinct, and since they have evolved minimally since the time of the appearance of tetrapods, they are sometimes referred to as "living fossils." In fact, the first live coelacanth was discovered more than 100 years after the species had been discovered in fossilized form.
     Whether the coelacanth in particular is rightly called a living fossil and whether it is the closest living relative of the original tetrapods are two questions that have been illuminated more recently by genetic analysis. The coelacanth's genome has recently been sequenced, and this analysis has led to the conclusion that the lungfish is the closer relative of tetrapods. Moreover, the coelacanth DNA has shown evolution over time--although at a rate much slower than that of most animals. Possibly, the fish's morphology and its environment deep in the Indian Ocean have created favorable conditions allowing a more slowly evolving species to have survived for the last 400 million years.

The author suggests that which of the following is an evolutionary disadvantage of the prominence of cartilage in fish?

Review: Coelacanths and Lungfish V


Explanation 

This question will be answered by the beginning of the second paragraph, the only area in which cartilage and bones are discussed and compared. We can go back and check that portion of the passage, but no disadvantage appears to be mentioned in the passage. Puzzling. We can turn to the answer choices, keeping the main point in mind, which is the reason why the skeleton of the lobe-fish is of interest. Choice (E) is connected to this point. Indeed, the passage indicates that fish other than lobe-fish, the ones with cartilage, could not evolve into land-dwellers. The correct answer is (E). Again and again in reading comprehension, recalling and understanding the key points of the passage will help answer even the questions that appear to focus on random details.

Again, the correct answer is (E).


If you believe you have found an error in this question or explanation, please contact us and include the question title or URL in your message.