Two animals that can be found at the grand canyon include the abert’s and kaibab squirrels. the abert’s squirrel is found at the south rim of the canyon and in a few surrounding states. the kaibab squirrel, however, can only be found at the canyon’s north rim, mainly on the kaibab plateau. the kaibab squirrel is not found anywhere else in the world. scientists believe that the squirrels are actually closely related and have developed separately as a result of geographic isolation. it is possible that the squirrels were separated by plateau erosion that separated the forests and isolated the kaibab population. some scientists are studying if the squirrels are now two separate species or if the kaibab squirrel is simply a subspecies of the abert’s squirrel. separate species are unable to reproduce with each other. which evidence would be used to support the claim that the squirrels are two separate species?

The evidence used to show that squirrels belong to two separate species is to bring together males and females from each squirrel population and show that they are unable to produce offspring.

Explanation:

The question above shows two populations of squirrels, which may have been separated by a geographic barrier and may have originated two different species of squirrels. Knowing that separate species cannot reproduce and generate offspring, an experiment that would prove whether the two squirrel populations are of the same species or separate species would be: select only males from one population and select only females from the other population and expect them to reproduce . If they are able to generate offspring, it means that they are of the same species. If they are unable to generate offspring, it means that they are of separate species.

every el niño cycle is different. every year.

"1. it should be, it has been for about 20 years, and it's really not much different in the end than breeding animals to have particular traits. there are always concerns about genetically engineered animals/plants affecting the environment in unexpected negative ways, but i can't think of an example where the fears didn't turn out to be baseless.  

first, as you point out, it would be a great advance in pharmacology, to be able to tailor drugs and their doses to me. the pros involve better medical treatment. the cons involve privacy issues like insurance companies denying coverage to people with genetic risk factors. looking at dna markers wouldn't affect the frequency of genetic diseases, but it would allow detection of them earlier. and ok, actually i suppose that if people used this information to avoid having children with genetic diseases, some might decrease in frequency."