QUESTION IMAGE
Question
the graph below shows the beak sizes of medium ground finches living on daphne major in 1976. which of the following conclusions can be supported by the data shown? beak sizes of a sample of 200 medium ground finches living on daphne major in 1976. graph: x - axis: beak depth (mm) with values 7.3, 7.8, 8.3, 8.8, 9.3, 9.8, 10.3, 10.8, 11.3; y - axis: number of birds with range 0 - 40; bars labeled “1978 offspring” the beak depth of the ground finches increased over time.
To solve this, we analyze the graph:
Step 1: Understand the Graph
The graph shows beak depth (x - axis) and number of birds (y - axis) for 1978 offspring of medium ground finches. It is a frequency distribution of beak depths.
Step 2: Evaluate the Option
The option claims “beak depth increased over time.” But the graph only shows 1978 offspring’s beak sizes (no data for other years to compare “over time”). So this conclusion is not supported (as we need time - series data for “over time” claims, and this graph is a single - year sample of offspring).
If we assume the intended correct analysis (e.g., if the graph were comparing years, but as given, the shown option is unsupported). However, since the problem likely expects analyzing the graph’s distribution: the peak is around 9.8 mm, showing most 1978 offspring had beak depths in that range, but the “over time” claim is invalid here.
(Note: Since the full options aren’t all shown, but based on the given option, it’s unsupported. If other options existed, we’d compare, but with the given info, the provided option is not supported.)
For the given option:
The graph only shows 1978 offspring’s beak sizes (no data for other years to support “increased over time”). A “over time” conclusion needs time - series data (multiple years), which is absent here.
Snap & solve any problem in the app
Get step-by-step solutions on Sovi AI
Photo-based solutions with guided steps
Explore more problems and detailed explanations
The conclusion “The beak depth of the ground finches increased over time” is not supported by the data (as the graph lacks time - series data to show change over time, only 1978 offspring’s beak size distribution).