Study smarter with Fiveable
Get study guides, practice questions, and cheatsheets for all your subjects. Join 500,000+ students with a 96% pass rate.
Evolution isn't just a theory you memorize—it's a framework you'll use to interpret biological data across every unit of this course. The evidence for evolution comes from remarkably different sources (fossils, anatomy, molecules, geographic patterns, real-time observations), yet they all converge on the same conclusion: life shares common ancestry and changes over time through natural selection. Understanding how each type of evidence works—and what it specifically demonstrates—is essential for tackling both multiple choice and free-response questions.
You're being tested on your ability to connect evidence to mechanism. Examiners don't just want you to list types of evidence; they want you to explain why homologous structures indicate common ancestry or how biogeography supports adaptive radiation. Don't just memorize facts—know what evolutionary concept each piece of evidence illustrates and be ready to compare different lines of evidence that support the same conclusion.
These evidence types examine the physical structures of organisms—both in adults and during development—to reveal evolutionary relationships. Shared structural features that arise from common ancestry persist even when organisms adapt to vastly different environments.
Compare: Homologous structures vs. vestigial structures—both reveal common ancestry, but homologous structures retain function (modified for new purposes) while vestigial structures have lost their original function. If an FRQ asks you to explain evidence for common ancestry, use both types with specific examples.
Modern molecular techniques provide the most precise evidence for evolutionary relationships. DNA and protein sequences act as historical documents, accumulating changes over time that can be measured and compared.
Compare: DNA evidence vs. comparative anatomy—both establish evolutionary relationships, but molecular data can detect relationships invisible to anatomists (like grouping whales with hippos, not fish). Molecular evidence is often considered more objective because it's quantifiable.
The distribution of species across Earth provides crucial evidence for how evolution occurs in space and time. Geographic isolation creates the conditions for populations to diverge, while continental movements explain otherwise puzzling distribution patterns.
The fossil record provides direct physical evidence of past life and documents changes through geological time. While incomplete, fossils capture moments of evolutionary transition that no other evidence type can provide.
Compare: Fossil evidence vs. molecular evidence—fossils show what organisms looked like and when they lived, while molecular data reveals genetic relationships. Fossils can't provide DNA for most extinct species, but they document morphological changes that molecules can't capture.
These examples demonstrate evolution happening in real time, answering critics who claim evolution can't be observed. When selection pressures are strong and generation times are short, evolutionary change becomes visible within human lifetimes.
Compare: Natural selection vs. artificial selection—same mechanism (differential reproduction based on traits), different selecting agent (environment vs. humans). Artificial selection produces faster, more dramatic changes because humans select intensively for specific traits. Both demonstrate that populations can change over generations.
| Concept | Best Examples |
|---|---|
| Common ancestry (structural) | Homologous structures, embryological similarities, vestigial structures |
| Common ancestry (molecular) | DNA sequence comparisons, universal genetic code, cytochrome c |
| Divergent evolution | Homologous structures, adaptive radiation on islands |
| Geographic isolation | Island endemics, continental distribution patterns, Wallace's Line |
| Transitional forms | Tiktaalik, Archaeopteryx, whale evolution series |
| Natural selection mechanism | Peppered moths, antibiotic resistance, Darwin's finches |
| Artificial selection as model | Dog breeds, crop domestication |
| Molecular clocks | DNA divergence estimates, protein sequence comparisons |
Which two types of evidence both demonstrate common ancestry but operate at completely different scales—one visible to the naked eye, one requiring sequencing technology?
A student claims vestigial structures disprove evolution because "why would evolution create useless parts?" How would you correct this misconception using your understanding of how vestigial structures actually form?
Compare and contrast the peppered moth example with antibiotic resistance in bacteria. What do both demonstrate about natural selection, and why is the bacterial example often considered more compelling evidence?
An FRQ asks you to explain how biogeography supports evolution. Which specific examples would you use, and what mechanism (isolation, adaptive radiation, continental drift) does each illustrate?
Why do evolutionary biologists consider molecular evidence particularly powerful when it agrees with anatomical evidence? What would it mean if DNA data consistently contradicted relationships suggested by comparative anatomy?