Sentence examples for multiple phylogenetic representations from inspiring English sources

Interview 1 included a series of questions probing students' reasoning as expressed on the pretest in addition to assessing tree reading skills and how students compared multiple phylogenetic representations.

Throughout the course, he presented multiple styles of phylogenetic representations, used activities targeting alternative ideas about phylogenetic trees, and provided scaffolds for tree-thinking development (BioQUEST 2006; Halverson 2008, 2010b).

To elicit students' ideas about phylogenetic representations and challenges they face when developing tree-thinking, I collected data using multiple open-ended sources throughout the entire semester.

When he compared patterns across phylogenetic representations he focused on differences in patterns of branching or the style of representation.

Students who generated advanced phylogenetic representations consistently interpreted and compared trees accurately.

Often biologists generate phylogenetic representations to express their understandings of the evolutionary relationships they are investigating (Matuk 2007).

However, students who were poor tree readers and had not developed tree reading skills could not build phylogenetic representations accurately.

These approaches were not mutually exclusive students used one or more interpretation approaches to make sense of phylogenetic representations.

Scientists compare phylogenetic representations in search of similar patterns to provide support for hypothesized relationships among taxa.

For example, he interpreted relationships based on common ancestry and compared phylogenetic representations accurately based on clade patterns regardless of the representation style.

All of these skills influenced the rationales and criteria students used to make sense of phylogenetic representations as well as the styles of representations they generated.