For a school project I need to create create an artifact within the four categories of evidence for evolution (Fossils, Embryology and Anatomy, Biogeography, and Molecular). I have already thought of making a fossil replica but most other people are doing that. Can someone please suggest another artifact that would be easy to make and would also support the theory of evolution. Also I would be grateful if you could provide instructions on how to make it and the materials needed.
Also supposing if I were to do a fossil, what would I make it out of? Additionally what ancient species would best represent the evolutionary change? I was thinking of making a replica of Archaeopteryx, but how would I do that. Please help. Thank you.
Also supposing if I were to do a fossil, what would I make it out of? Additionally what ancient species would best represent the evolutionary change? I was thinking of making a replica of Archaeopteryx, but how would I do that. Please help. Thank you.
-
Honestly, I have no idea how you’d make an archaeopteryx fossil replica. You might be better off making something like a map of Africa showing where the various fossil hominids have been found. That could get you both anatomy and fossils. You could color code the sites to show age, and possibly show an associated proposed phylogenetic tree to show likely evolutionary relationships.
Alternatively you could make an “artifact” out of a cladogram (stylized evolutionary tree) like the one here for birds and dinos: http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2011/… . I think this is really interesting because it indicates that birds and deinonychosaurids are sister groups, and that it was the deinonychosaurids rather than the birds that are actually the most different from the common ancestor. The linked article talks about how archaeopteryx no longer groups with the birds, but I have heard that a subsequent analysis indicates otherwise, so you’d want to look into the original published article (http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v47… ) and any published articles citing to it. The cladogram doesn’t come from the original article itself, but rather from a different, summary, article in the same issue of Science. Note that the likely ancestors of birds and deinonychosaurs, as indicated by the cladogram, are oviraptorosaurids. I haven’t looked into it closely yet, but you should check whether any oviraptorosaurid fossils are known from that time period. If not, then this might support a prediction (just based on the comparitive similarities of oviraptorosaurids and early birds and deinonychisaurids) that we will eventually find such early oviraptorosaurid fossils.
Alternatively you could make an “artifact” out of a cladogram (stylized evolutionary tree) like the one here for birds and dinos: http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2011/… . I think this is really interesting because it indicates that birds and deinonychosaurids are sister groups, and that it was the deinonychosaurids rather than the birds that are actually the most different from the common ancestor. The linked article talks about how archaeopteryx no longer groups with the birds, but I have heard that a subsequent analysis indicates otherwise, so you’d want to look into the original published article (http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v47… ) and any published articles citing to it. The cladogram doesn’t come from the original article itself, but rather from a different, summary, article in the same issue of Science. Note that the likely ancestors of birds and deinonychosaurs, as indicated by the cladogram, are oviraptorosaurids. I haven’t looked into it closely yet, but you should check whether any oviraptorosaurid fossils are known from that time period. If not, then this might support a prediction (just based on the comparitive similarities of oviraptorosaurids and early birds and deinonychisaurids) that we will eventually find such early oviraptorosaurid fossils.