zoology vertebrae
Semester Systems Project Part 2 Rubric (40pts) During this semester, we will learn about a lot of different vertebrate adaptations that evolved because of changes in the environment and other mutations that allow vertebrates to diversify and occupy every niche on the planet. In lieu of exams, you will explore the adaptations in a system of your choice and understand how vertebrates evolved from extant vertebrates to mammals. You previously chose a system from this list (you MUST use the same one for part 2): • • • • • • Body plan/locomotion (limbs, movement, skeletal structures) Gas exchange/osmoregulation (regulation of oxygen, ions, and water) Cardiovascular system (development of heart) Digestive system (feeding structures through digestion) Nervous system/sensory organs (development of brain and other special senses) Reproduction (reproductive structures and strategies for birth and care of offspring) Adaptations happen at their own time, so in some modules, your system may not change much, while in other modules, it might undergo several changes. This is okay. We expect diversity in our projects. All of them are covered in Cogbooks, which should give you a starting point to your research. Focusing on one of these systems, you will map their development through the vertebrates covered in each unit (more information below) and focus on two different animal species that interest you and have unique adaptations in your system. You will find peer-reviewed articles that illustrate how these adaptations were discovered and how scientists believe they give that animal an advantage. You will write a 3-5 page paper (double-spaced) about your discoveries as you learn about your chosen system. Watch your Cogbooks materials for Modules 3 and 4. Take note of any time that your chosen system is mentioned. Write down any adaptations that Dr. Vanden Brooks discusses and notice examples that he selects to emphasize. Does that animal interest you? If so, choose that to study further. If not, find one of your own that interests you more. You must choose one organism from each module to discuss in greater detail. There are some interesting adaptations in Module 3 and Module 4. Feel free to discuss a traditional model of the species or pick one of the unique organisms. Whatever interests you is what we want to see! You may notice that there is a huge portion of Modules 3 and 4 where Dr. Vanden Brooks touches on adaptations that lie ahead. For example, he talks a lot about the cardiovascular system. However, the four-chambered heart doesn’t appear in an organism until Module 5. Take good notes, but please don’t introduce an adaptation until it appears in an organism. You should be discussing your system in early tetrapods, amphibians, and reptiles. If it hasn’t appeared yet, don’t discuss it, even if it was mentioned in an overview in Modules 3 or 4. Find peer-reviewed articles (not popular articles) that discuss your chosen organisms and their adaptations in your chosen system. For example, if you have chosen the locomotion system, you could find peer-reviewed articles on loss of limbs in snakes as one example. Learn how this trait benefits snakes and when researchers think it may have evolved. Please see the articles included with your assignment instructions on how to find and use peer-reviewed sources. Finally, you will put together your document. You must discuss every change to your system mentioned in the two modules. Please put them in chronological order so that we can easily see how it developed. Where appropriate, include the information you learned about your specific examples, using citations when necessary. For Project 2, your primary focus will be the transition to land. How did your system have to change for animals to come onto land? And you must address your system in each of these clades: • • • • • • • • Porolepiformes, Osteolepiformes, or Elpistostegids Tiktaalik Ichthyostega and Acanthostega Reptiliomorphs Tetropods Amphibians Amniotes One or two of the reptile groups, such as testidunes, squamata, or serpentes If there were few changes in your system between these certain clades, just lump them together or mention that the system remained unchanged and explain why, based on environmental conditions or success of that particular system. Your assignment will be submitted to Canvas under the assignment category Semester Systems Project 2 (Submit Here) in the form of a Word document or PDF. No other formats will be accepted. No late work will be accepted. This work must be your unique work. The work of other scientists and videos used for this assignment must be properly cited. Plagiarism will result in a grade of XE per the University’s policy on academic integrity. Work previously submitted to another course will also not be accepted. You will also receive a zero grade if you include offensive or insensitive content that does not fit within the University’s inclusivity policy. Thank you. Category Scoring Criteria Each topic listed above is mentioned and any adaptations History of Adaptations (15 points) Total Points 5 described during that time are done in good detail. All clades mentioned in this document are addressed, and 7 any adaptations to your system is discussed. Adaptations are described based on why they adapted in 3 certain environments so that we can see how form followed function in your system. You find and cite peer-reviewed articles that address how 8 that system benefited the animals in their current environment. You find and cite peer-reviewed articles that hypothesize Your Two Chosen 2 why this adaptation developed in these animals, or you Animals develop one of your own. (15 points) Choose two unique animals to discuss. 2 Use of proper grammar and sentence structure. 2 Sections are clearly labeled and easy to read. 2 All work is written in your own words rather than quoting 2 Presentation (10 points) Score long sections from papers. Proper citations are included in APA style. 2 Presentation falls within the page limit. 2 Total Points 40 Score
Excellent | Good | Fair | Poor | ||
Main Posting | 45 (45%) – 50 (50%)
Answers all parts of the discussion question(s) expectations with reflective critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.
Supported by at least three current, credible sources.
Written clearly and concisely with no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. |
40 (40%) – 44 (44%)
Responds to the discussion question(s) and is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.
At least 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth.
Supported by at least three credible sources.
Written clearly and concisely with one or no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. |
35 (35%) – 39 (39%)
Responds to some of the discussion question(s).
One or two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed.
Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.
Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.
Post is cited with two credible sources.
Written somewhat concisely; may contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors.
Contains some APA formatting errors. |
0 (0%) – 34 (34%)
Does not respond to the discussion question(s) adequately.
Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria.
Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.
Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.
Contains only one or no credible sources.
Not written clearly or concisely.
Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors.
Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style. |
|
Main Post: Timeliness | 10 (10%) – 10 (10%)
Posts main post by day 3. |
0 (0%) – 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not post by day 3. |
|
First Response | 17 (17%) – 18 (18%)
Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.
Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.
Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. |
15 (15%) – 16 (16%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. |
13 (13%) – 14 (14%)
Response is on topic and may have some depth.
Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.
Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited. |
0 (0%) – 12 (12%)
Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.
Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are missing.
No credible sources are cited. |
|
Second Response | 16 (16%) – 17 (17%)
Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.
Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.
Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. |
14 (14%) – 15 (15%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. |
12 (12%) – 13 (13%)
Response is on topic and may have some depth.
Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.
Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited. |
0 (0%) – 11 (11%)
Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.
Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are missing.
No credible sources are cited. |
|
Participation | 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Meets requirements for participation by posting on three different days. |
0 (0%) – 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not meet requirements for participation by posting on 3 different days. |
|
Total Points: 100 | |||||