DOCSLIB.ORG

Question #1 Unicellular and Multicellular Organisms Would Both Perform Which Processes? A) Making Food and Removing Waste

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Question #1 Unicellular and Multicellular Organisms Would Both Perform Which Processes? A) Making Food and Removing Waste 7/26/2017 5.L.1.1 LEE COUNTY Name: Class: Date: Question #1 Unicellular and multicellular organisms would both perform which processes? A) making food and removing waste B) specializing cells and taking in nutrients C) growing and reproducing D) migrating and finding shelter Question #2 What do bacteria and the pictured organism share? A) Both are multicellular. B) Both are unicellular. C) Both make their own food. D) Both are have specialized cells. https://app.masteryconnect.com/materials/1403689/print 1/5 7/26/2017 5.L.1.1 LEE COUNTY Question #3 Why have multicellular organisms developed internal transport systems? A) Internal cells are too far away to exchange substances with the external environment. B) External cells must travel to internal cells to exchange material. C) Internal cells perform all life processes needed for the multicellular organism without contact with the external environment D) Surface cells perform all life processes needed for the multicellular organism. Question #4 A student is classifying organisms as single-celled or multicellular. Which characteristic will help the student identify an organism as single-celled? A The cell of the organism can perform all life processes. B The cell of the organism can communicate with other cells. C The organism is able to survive in an aquatic environment. D The organism is able to undergo the process of reproduction. https://app.masteryconnect.com/materials/1403689/print 2/5 7/26/2017 5.L.1.1 LEE COUNTY Question #5 A student listed a few points about single-celled organisms. Which points did the student list incorrectly? A 1 and 2 B 2 and 3 C 3 and 4 D 4 and 5 Question #6 A student reads some characteristics of organisms in a journal. Which characteristics only describe multi-celled organisms? A 1, 2, and 3 B 1, 3, and 5 C 3, 4, and 5 D 1, 2, and 5 https://app.masteryconnect.com/materials/1403689/print 3/5 7/26/2017 5.L.1.1 LEE COUNTY Question #7 Which question helps separate a unicellular organism from a multicellular organism? A Does the organism contain genetic material? B Does the organism die if a single cell is damaged? C Does the organism have the ability to reproduce? D Does the organism have the ability to make its own food? Question #8 Michael listed the features of some organisms. Which features best describe multi-celled and single-celled organisms? A 1, 2: single-celled; 3, 4: multi-celled B 1, 3: multi-celled; 2, 4: single-celled C 1, 3: single-celled; 2, 4: multi-celled D 1, 2: multi-celled; 3, 4: single-celled https://app.masteryconnect.com/materials/1403689/print 4/5 7/26/2017 5.L.1.1 LEE COUNTY Question #9 How are the pictured organisms different? A) Organism 1 is unicellular while organism 2 is multicellular. B) Organism 2 is unicellular while organism 1 is multicellular. C) Organism 1 can move and organism 2 cannot. D) Organism 2 can move and organism 1 cannot. Question #10 Despite being very different, unicellular and multicellular organisms have many of the same functions. Which function is shared in both types of organism? A) intake of nutrients for growth B) use of developed transport systems C) creation of specialized tissues D) all life processes occurring in all cells https://app.masteryconnect.com/materials/1403689/print 5/5.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Life Science Vocabulary
    Life Science Vocabulary 1. ABSORPTION – The process by which nutrient molecules pass through the wall of the digestive system into the blood - If a doctor was trying to see why a person could eat a lot but the food was not being used to produce energy in the cells, the first thing the doctor might test would be how well this process was working to get the nutrients through the villi in the stomach. ABSORPTION 2. ACTIVE TRANSPORT – The movement of materials through a cell membrane using energy -If a cell needs a material too large to diffuse through the membrane, the material must go through the membrane using this kind of transport. ACTIVE 3. ADAPTATION – A characteristic that helps an organism survive in its environment or reproduce -Camouflage, body fur, bird beak shape are called ADATATIONS because they are all traits an organism may have as part of its physical makeup to help it survive and reproduce. 4. ADDICTION – A physical dependence on a substance; an intense need by the body for a substance -Alcoholism, smoking) is called this rather than a dependence because it has a physical effect on the body. ADDICTION 5. AIDS (ACQUIRED IMMUNODEFICIENCY SYNDROME) – A disease caused by a virus that attacks the immune system -A person is found to not be able to fight disease in their body through their own immune system. A doctor investigating the cause might first test the patient for this disease. AIDS 6. ALGAE – A plant like protist -A organism is found that does not have all the characteristics of a plant yet it makes its own food.
    [Show full text]
  • The Evolution of Cooperation a White Paper Prepared for the John Templeton Foundation
    The evolution of cooperation A white paper prepared for the John Templeton foundation Contents Introduction - Darwin’s theory of design - The puzzle of cooperation - This review Cooperation across the tree of life - What is cooperation? - Explanations for Cooperation - The success of inclusive fitness - The debate over inclusive fitness - Alternative ways to measure cooperation - Cooperation between species - The social amoeba: the perfect test case for cooperation Cooperation in Humans - What’s special about humans? - Explanations for cooperation in humans - Cooperative games - Inter-personal and cross-cultural differences in cooperation - Psychological systems designed for cooperation - The origins of cooperation in humans - The How: The mechanism of cooperation Conclusion - The puzzle of cooperation revisited - Open questions in cooperation research 1 Introduction You probably take cooperation for granted. You’d be excused for doing so – cooperation is all around us. Children team up to complete a project on time. Neighbours help each other mend fences. Colleagues share ideas and resources. The very fabric of our society is cooperative. We divide up tasks, with farmers producing food, policemen upholding laws, teachers teaching, so that we may all share the benefits of a functioning society without any one person having to master all domains. What’s more, cooperation is logical, at least to you and me. Two hands are better than one, as the saying goes. If you want something another person has, it makes sense that you might share something of your own. Division of labour efficient. If you have a reputation as a cooperative person, others will likely help you down the line. Cooperation is a straightforward way to achieve more than you ever could on your own.
    [Show full text]
  • The Systemic–Evolutionary Theory of the Origin of Cancer (SETOC): a New Interpretative Model of Cancer As a Complex Biological System
    International Journal of Molecular Sciences Hypothesis The Systemic–Evolutionary Theory of the Origin of Cancer (SETOC): A New Interpretative Model of Cancer as a Complex Biological System Antonio Mazzocca Interdisciplinary Department of Medicine, University of Bari School of Medicine, Piazza G. Cesare, 11, 70124 Bari, Italy; [email protected]; Tel.: +39-080-5593-593 Received: 15 September 2019; Accepted: 30 September 2019; Published: 2 October 2019 Abstract: The Systemic–Evolutionary Theory of Cancer (SETOC) is a recently proposed theory based on two important concepts: (i) Evolution, understood as a process of cooperation and symbiosis (Margulian-like), and (ii) The system, in terms of the integration of the various cellular components, so that the whole is greater than the sum of the parts, as in any complex system. The SETOC posits that cancer is generated by the de-emergence of the “eukaryotic cell system” and by the re-emergence of cellular subsystems such as archaea-like (genetic information) and/or prokaryotic-like (mitochondria) subsystems, featuring uncoordinated behaviors. One of the consequences is a sort of “cellular regression” towards ancestral or atavistic biological functions or behaviors similar to those of protists or unicellular organisms in general. This de-emergence is caused by the progressive breakdown of the endosymbiotic cellular subsystem integration (mainly, information = nucleus and energy = mitochondria) as a consequence of long-term injuries. Known cancer-promoting factors, including inflammation, chronic fibrosis, and chronic degenerative processes, cause prolonged damage that leads to the breakdown or failure of this form of integration/endosymbiosis. In normal cells, the cellular “subsystems” must be fully integrated in order to maintain the differentiated state, and this integration is ensured by a constant energy intake.
    [Show full text]
  • Genetic Basis Underlying De Novo Origins of Multicellularity in Response to Predation
    Astrobiology Science Conference 2017 (LPI Contrib. No. 1965) 3331.pdf Genetic Basis Underlying De Novo Origins of Multicellularity in Response to Predation. Kimberly Chen, Frank Rosenzweig and Matthew Herron. Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA 30332 ([email protected]). Background: The evolution of multicellularity is ulations were derived from different recombinant cells a Major Transition that sets the stage for subsequent in the starting outcrossed population based on the pat- increases in biological complexity [1]. However, the terning of the ancestral variants across chromosomes genetic mechanisms underlying this major transition from the two parental strains. Within each population, remain poorly understood. The volvocine algae serve the multicellular isolates share a number of mutations as a key model system to study such evolutionary tran- together, but not with the multicellular isolates from sitions, as this group of algae contains unicellular and the other experimental population, or with the unicellu- fully differentiated multicellular species, as well as lar isolates from the control population. Each isolate diverse extant species with intermediate complexity. also accumulated mutations not found in other isolates. Comparative approaches using the three sequenced In addition, the results from BSA suggest instances of volvocine genomes of unicellular Chlamydomonas epistatic interactions among ancestral variants and de- reinhardtii, colonial Gonium pectorale and fully dif- rived mutations, and we are currently
    [Show full text]
  • How the Evolution of Multicellularity Set the Stage for Cancer’
    www.nature.com/bjc CORRESPONDENCE Comment on ‘How the evolution of multicellularity set the stage for cancer’ British Journal of Cancer (2018) 119:133–134; https://doi.org/ multicellular and multicellular evolutionary origins rather than 10.1038/s41416-018-0091-0 pure unicellular evolutionary origin. Ceaseless proliferation is the most characteristic feature of cancer. But, this behaviour is rarely adopted by unicellular organisms in nature. In addition to cell communication, cell-to- We read the paper “How the evolution of multicellularity set the substrate and cell-to-cell adhesions, earlier unicellular organisms stage for cancer” with interest, which was published in a recent (prokaryotes and protists) acquired a variety of anti-proliferative issue of the British Journal of Cancer.1 In this paper, the authors capabilities (cell cycle negative regulation, programmed cell underlined that disruption of gene regulatory networks, which death, contact-dependent inhibition, toxin-antitoxin, etc.) through maintain the multicellular state, induces cancer. The atavistic the pseudo-multicellular mode of life and responses to selective model of cancer is undoubtedly effective in integrating many pressure.6,7 Indeed, exponential growth may lead to species parameters in a performing heuristic framework. It hypothesises extinction due to starvation or destruction of the protective that cancer results from a transition from multicellularity to biofilm. Earlier prokaryotes inevitably faced this problem and unicellularity, through an active constrained process. In this natural evolution proposed different solutions to circumvent schema, dysregulation of a set of fundamental points of them, which were thereafter fixed by heredity. vulnerability, which govern multicellularity maintenance, is Trigos et al.1 underlined that many hallmarks of the malignant sufficient to model carcinogenesis.
    [Show full text]
  • Unit 3 Cells Lesson 6 - Cell Theory What Do Living Things Have in Common?
    Unit 3 Cells Lesson 6 - Cell Theory What do living things have in common? Explore and question spontaneous generation, an early belief on the properties of life. Observing Phenomena In the 1600s, this was a recipe for creating mice: Place a dirty shirt in an open container of wheat for 21 days and the wheat will transform into mice. 1) Discuss what you think of this recipe. People may have believed that it worked because they did not notice the mice that were living in and reproducing in the wheat containers and maybe hiding beneath the dirty shirts. Observing Phenomena Another belief of spontaneous generation was that fish formed from the mud of dry river beds. 2) What do you think about the recipe for making fish from the mud of a dried up river bed? Observing Phenomena People believed that these recipes would work because they believed in “spontaneous generation.” 3) Why do you think it is called spontaneous generation? Because a living thing spontaneously came into existence from a mixture of nonliving things. What beliefs about natural phenomena did you have as a young child? For example, some young children might think that clouds are fluffy like cotton balls or the moon is made of cheese. As you have gotten older, how have these beliefs changed as you acquired more knowledge? 4) Discuss why they might have believed these and what has changed people's understanding of living things today. Investigation 1: Categorizing Substances In your notebook, write a list of what you think all living things have in common.
    [Show full text]
  • Cooperation and Conflict During the Unicellular–Multicellular and Prokaryotic–Eukaryotic Transitions
    Font-Ch17 8/1/03 6:43 PM Page 195 CHAPTER 17 Cooperation and conflict during the unicellular–multicellular and prokaryotic–eukaryotic transitions Richard E. Michod and Aurora M. Nedelcu Individuals often associate in groups that, under group. Initially, group fitness is taken to be the aver- certain conditions, may evolve into higher-level age of the lower-level fitnesses of its members, but, individuals. It is these conditions and this process as the evolutionary transition proceeds, group fit- of individuation of groups that we wish to under- ness becomes decoupled from the fitness of lower- stand. These groups may involve members of the level components. Witness, for example, colonies of same species or different species. For example, eusocial insects or the cell groups that form organ- under certain conditions bacteria associate to form isms; in these cases, some group members have no a fruiting body, amoebae associate to form a slug- individual fitness (sterile castes, somatic cells) yet like slime mold, solitary cells form a colonial group, this does not detract from the fitness of the group, normally solitary wasps breed cooperatively, birds indeed it is presumed to enhance it. associate to form a colony, and mammals form soci- The essence of an evolutionary transition in indi- eties. Likewise, individuals of different species viduality is that the lower-level individuals must as associate and form symbiotic associations; about it were “relinquish” their “claim” to fitness, that is 2000 million years ago, such an association evolved to flourish and multiply, in favor of the new higher- into the first mitochondriate eukaryotic cell.
    [Show full text]
  • Biological Atomism and Cell Theory
    Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 41 (2010) 202–211 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/shpsc Biological atomism and cell theory Daniel J. Nicholson ESRC Research Centre for Genomics in Society (Egenis), University of Exeter, Byrne House, St. Germans Road, Exeter EX4 4PJ, UK article info abstract Keywords: Biological atomism postulates that all life is composed of elementary and indivisible vital units. The activ- Biological atomism ity of a living organism is thus conceived as the result of the activities and interactions of its elementary Cell theory constituents, each of which individually already exhibits all the attributes proper to life. This paper sur- Organismal theory veys some of the key episodes in the history of biological atomism, and situates cell theory within this Reductionism tradition. The atomistic foundations of cell theory are subsequently dissected and discussed, together with the theory’s conceptual development and eventual consolidation. This paper then examines the major criticisms that have been waged against cell theory, and argues that these too can be interpreted through the prism of biological atomism as attempts to relocate the true biological atom away from the cell to a level of organization above or below it. Overall, biological atomism provides a useful perspective through which to examine the history and philosophy of cell theory, and it also opens up a new way of thinking about the epistemic decomposition of living organisms that significantly departs from the phys- icochemical reductionism of mechanistic biology.
    [Show full text]
  • Selection for Synchronized Cell Division in Simple Multicellular Organisms
    Journal of Theoretical Biology 457 (2018) 170–179 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Journal of Theoretical Biology journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jtb Selection for synchronized cell division in simple multicellular organisms ∗ Jason Olejarz a, , Kamran Kaveh a, Carl Veller a,b, Martin A. Nowak a,b,c a Program for Evolutionary Dynamics, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA b Department of Organismic and Evolutionary Biology, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA c Department of Mathematics, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t Article history: The evolution of multicellularity was a major transition in the history of life on earth. Conditions un- Received 15 March 2018 der which multicellularity is favored have been studied theoretically and experimentally. But since the Revised 30 July 2018 construction of a multicellular organism requires multiple rounds of cell division, a natural question is Accepted 29 August 2018 whether these cell divisions should be synchronous or not. We study a population model in which there Available online 30 August 2018 compete simple multicellular organisms that grow by either synchronous or asynchronous cell divisions. Keywords: We demonstrate that natural selection can act differently on synchronous and asynchronous cell division, Evolutionary dynamics and we offer intuition for why these phenotypes are generally not neutral variants of each other. Multicellularity ©2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. Synchronization Cell division This is an open access article under the CC BY license. (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Symbiogenesis: the New Principle of Evolution
    Symbiogenesis: The New Principle of Evolution Boris Mikhailovich KOZO-POLYANSKY 1924 Translated from Russian and edited by Victor Fet, Marshall University, West Virginia Originally published as Novyi printsip biologii: ocherk teorii simbiogeneza [The New Principle of Biology: An Essay of the Theory of Symbiogenesis], Puchina, Leningrad- Moscow, 147 pp. We have changed the title and taken other liberties with the text with one goal in mind: to communicate Kozo-Polyansky’s brilliant work and to show its relevance to modern biology. Table of Contents Introduction Foreword A few words about Kozo-Polyansky Victor Fet Preface I. Non-cellular organisms (cytodes) and the bioblast 1. Bioblast of bacteria 2. Bioblast of Cyanophyceae, or blue-green “algae” 3. Symbiosis among cytodes 4. Symbiosis of cytodes with unicellular organisms 5. Symbiosis of cytodes with multicellular organisms 6. Cytodes as the ancestral organisms II. Cell and its organelles 1. Chlorophyll granules and other plastids, or trophoplasts (a) Chlorophyll granules in animals [and protists] (b) Chlorophyll granules in plants [and protists] 2. Centrosome 3. Cell nuclei 4. Mitochondria 5. Ergastoplasm 6. Reticular apparatus of Golgi 7. Nerve fibrils of N_mecs 8. Physodes 9. Myofibrils (contractile fibers) 10. Blepharoplast 11. Elaioplasts 12. Aleurone 13. Cytoplasm III. Multicellular organism A. First series of examples Lichens Unions of higher plants Unions of animals Sponge-algae B. Second series of examples Mucous glands in aquatic ferns (Azolla) and hornworts Stem glands of Gunnera Protein leaf glands in plants Coralloid organs of cycads Mycorrhiza (fungus root) in various plants Roots, tubers and flowers of orchids Heather in general, and its root in particular Toxic glands of Lolium temulentum C.
    [Show full text]
  • Intercellular Competition and the Inevitability of Multicellular Aging
    Intercellular competition and the inevitability of multicellular aging Paul Nelsona,1 and Joanna Masela aDepartment of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721 Edited by Raghavendra Gadagkar, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, India, and approved October 6, 2017 (received for review November 14, 2016) Current theories attribute aging to a failure of selection, due to Aging in multicellular organisms occurs at both the cellular either pleiotropic constraints or declining strength of selection and intercellular levels (17). Multicellular organisms, by definition, after the onset of reproduction. These theories implicitly leave require a high degree of intercellular cooperation to maintain open the possibility that if senescence-causing alleles could be homeostasis. Often, cellular traits required for producing a viable identified, or if antagonistic pleiotropy could be broken, the multicellular phenotype come at a steep cost to individual cells effects of aging might be ameliorated or delayed indefinitely. (14, 18, 19). Conversely, many mutant cells that do not invest in These theories are built on models of selection between multicel- holistic organismal fitness have a selective advantage over cells lular organisms, but a full understanding of aging also requires that do. If intercellular competition occurs, such “cheater” or examining the role of somatic selection within an organism. “defector” cells may proliferate and displace “cooperating” cells, Selection between somatic cells (i.e., intercellular competition) with detrimental consequences for the multicellular organism can delay aging by purging nonfunctioning cells. However, the (20, 21). Cancer, a leading cause of death in humans at rates that fitness of a multicellular organism depends not just on how increase with age, is one obvious manifestation of cheater pro- functional its individual cells are but also on how well cells work liferation (22–24).
    [Show full text]
  • The Origins of Multicellular Organisms
    EVOLUTION & DEVELOPMENT 15:1, 41–52 (2013) DOI: 10.1111/ede.12013 The origins of multicellular organisms Karl J. Niklasa,* and Stuart A. Newmanb,* a Department of Plant Biology, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, 14853, USA b Department of Cell Biology and Anatomy, New York Medical College, Valhalla, NY 10595, USA *Author for correspondence (e‐mail: [email protected], [email protected]) SUMMARY Multicellularity has evolved in several eukary- consistent with trends observed within each of the three major otic lineages leading to plants, fungi, and animals. Theoreti- plant clades. In contrast, a more direct “unicellular ) colonial cally, in each case, this involved (1) cell‐to‐cell adhesion with or siphonous ) parenchymatous” series is observed in fungal an alignment‐of‐fitness among cells, (2) cell‐to‐cell communi- and animal lineages. In these contexts, we discuss the roles cation, cooperation, and specialization with an export‐of‐ played by the cooptation, expansion, and subsequent diversi- fitness to a multicellular organism, and (3) in some cases, fication of ancestral genomic toolkits and patterning modules a transition from “simple” to “complex” multicellularity. during the evolution of multicellularity. We conclude that the When mapped onto a matrix of morphologies based on extent to which multicellularity is achieved using the same developmental and physical rules for plants, these three toolkits and modules (and thus the extent to which multicellu- phases help to identify a “unicellular ) colonial ) filamentous larity is homologous among
    [Show full text]