#extinction rates

MOLECULAR EVOLUTION

Van Valen’s law states:

Extinction probability remains constant reflects key principle in quiz on molecular evolution pyqs solved -sec d, where evolutionary mechanisms shape genetic variation and adaptation. In this context, Extinction probability remains constant aligns with experimental and theoretical evidence from population genetics, behavioral ecology and molecular phylogeny. Textbooks like Campbell Biology, Futuyma Evolution and Hartl Principles illustrate supporting data. Understanding why Extinction probability remains constant fits helps integrate natural selection, drift and species concepts essential for NEET, CSIR-NET and GATE examinations. This concept integrates genetics, ecology and molecular evidence, frequently tested in NEET, GATE and CSIR-NET, highlighting

Ref: Nei & Kumar, Molecular Evolution, Clocks and Purifying Selection.

View Details

Biogeography Complete

Larger islands tend to have lower extinction rates because they have:

“More available resources” for larger islands tend to have lower extinction rates because they have. This relationship follows from the ecological mechanism represented by the terms in the item, not merely from an association between their names. Larger islands usually support more habitats and larger populations, lowering extinction risk; less isolated islands receive colonists more readily and may experience rescue effects. These mechanisms also apply to habitat fragments that function as ecological islands. The remaining alternatives—“More competition”, “Higher immigration rates”, “Less species diversity”—refer to different states, processes, or scales and therefore do not express the same causal relationship. At equilibrium, species identities can continue to turn over even when richness is approximately stable. The model predicts a balance of rates, not an absence of colonization or extinction. Field observations could test this account by measuring the proposed driver and the demographic or ecosystem response while controlling plausible confounding factors.

Ref: Biogeography, Lomolino et al., 5th Ed., Ch. 5-8

View Details

Biogeography Complete

Why does a new, empty island initially have low extinction rates?

“Abundant resources and low competition” for why does a new, empty island initially have low extinction rates. This relationship follows from the ecological mechanism represented by the terms in the item, not merely from an association between their names. At equilibrium, species identities can continue to turn over even when richness is approximately stable. The model predicts a balance of rates, not an absence of colonization or extinction. The remaining alternatives—“High competition”, “High predation pressure”, “Small space”—refer to different states, processes, or scales and therefore do not express the same causal relationship. Island biogeography explains species richness as a dynamic balance between immigration and extinction. Immigration generally declines as an island fills with species, whereas extinction rises as more species divide finite area and maintain smaller populations. The cited framing is therefore most useful when treated as a conditional biological claim, with assumptions about scale and environmental context kept explicit.

Ref: Biogeography, Lomolino et al., 5th Ed., Ch. 5-8

View Details

Biogeography Complete

Which factor greatly influences extinction rates on islands?

“Island size” for which factor greatly influences extinction rates on islands. This relationship follows from the ecological mechanism represented by the terms in the item, not merely from an association between their names. At equilibrium, species identities can continue to turn over even when richness is approximately stable. The model predicts a balance of rates, not an absence of colonization or extinction. The remaining alternatives—“Island vegetation”, “Island shape”, “Island altitude”—refer to different states, processes, or scales and therefore do not express the same causal relationship. Island biogeography explains species richness as a dynamic balance between immigration and extinction. Immigration generally declines as an island fills with species, whereas extinction rises as more species divide finite area and maintain smaller populations. Linking the wording to measurable consequences for fitness, abundance, or flux gives the conclusion its scientific meaning and prevents a purely mnemonic interpretation. Field observations could test this account by measuring the proposed driver and the demographic or ecosystem response while controlling plausible confounding factors.

Ref: Biogeography, Lomolino et al., 5th Ed., Ch. 5-8

View Details

Island

Small islands typically have:

“Higher extinction rates” for small islands typically have. This relationship follows from the ecological mechanism represented by the terms in the item, not merely from an association between their names. Larger islands usually support more habitats and larger populations, lowering extinction risk; less isolated islands receive colonists more readily and may experience rescue effects. These mechanisms also apply to habitat fragments that function as ecological islands. The remaining alternatives—“Lower extinction rates”, “Higher immigration rates”, “Increased species richness”—refer to different states, processes, or scales and therefore do not express the same causal relationship. At equilibrium, species identities can continue to turn over even when richness is approximately stable. The model predicts a balance of rates, not an absence of colonization or extinction. Field observations could test this account by measuring the proposed driver and the demographic or ecosystem response while controlling plausible confounding factors. This distinction matters because similar surface patterns can arise through different mechanisms, whereas ecological prediction depends on identifying the mechanism that actually changes rates.

Ref: The Theory of Island Biogeography, MacArthur & Wilson, Ch. 2-4

View Details

Extinction Topic

Habitat destruction causes what percent of extinctions?

“0.36” for habitat destruction causes what percent of extinctions. This relationship follows from the ecological mechanism represented by the terms in the item, not merely from an association between their names. Extinction risk rises when abundance, geographic range, or genetic variation becomes small because demographic chance, environmental fluctuations, inbreeding, and rare catastrophes then have disproportionate effects. Correlated losses among subpopulations further weaken regional persistence. The remaining alternatives—“0.23”, “0.434”, “0.38”—refer to different states, processes, or scales and therefore do not express the same causal relationship. The mechanism should be evaluated across both local and global scales. Local disappearance can be reversed by recolonization, whereas global extinction is irreversible and requires the loss of every surviving population. This distinction matters because similar surface patterns can arise through different mechanisms, whereas ecological prediction depends on identifying the mechanism that actually changes rates. The cited framing is therefore most useful when treated as a conditional biological claim, with assumptions about scale and environmental context kept explicit.

Ref: Conservation Biology, Primack & Sher, 6th Ed., Ch. 7

View Details