Want this question answered?
The term "fittest" is not actually "fittest to survive" but rather "fittest to survive long enough to reproduce". If one animal lives 20 years, but has 15 offspring, and another lives on 5 years, but manages to have 50 offspring, the latter example would be considered fore "fit" by the standards of Darwin's statement.
they would probably die.or just not survive.
If you move an animal out of it's natural habitat then it might not survive because they have already adapted to their own environment. However, it depends where you put the animal make sure that it's needs are still being considered, so they can be well taken care of.
a zebra because when u look at it when its running, it turns gray
camouflage or mimicry
Animal Exploration with Jarod Miller - 2007 Survival of the Fittest 1-5 was released on: USA: 22 October 2007
So it can have a chance of survival and reproduce, this is called Survival of the Fittest. Fittest as in most adapted. Animals mix into their surroundings by being the same color or shape as their habitat because this allows them to survive. If they can't be spotted, they won't be eaten. This cycle goes on to the point where all the animals that don't mix to their habitat die off, and the ones that do mix, keep reproducing.
Survival of the fittest means that the healthiest, most fit, most powerful animals survive.Though the phrase "survival of the fittest" began from scientists studying animal behavior, it was quickly adopted to describe human behavior and obstacles humans face.Technically, applying the definition of survival of the fittest to human situations, it would mean no one disabled would 'survive'. However, this is a myth that disabled persons are less able or deserving to survive.Many powerful people, such as those with high incomes, often use the excuse "survival of the fittest" to defend how they treat other people unfairly in business transactions."Survival of the fittest" is merely a metaphor and theory, not necessarily fact, though many people have come to believe it is always a fact.
A more "fit" animal should be able to survive longer to reproduce more than it's competitors
yes any kind of adaptation changes over time, is to help the animal improve as well as survive. (survival of the fittest)
The natural production of variation within an animal species and the survival (and by implication breeding) of the fittest variants.
Most sense organs are adapted for survival. While some animals are blind, like bats, they use their sense of hearing as survival. For what an animal lacks, they adapt to another sense organ to help in survival and reproduction which helps continue the species.
The term "fittest" is not actually "fittest to survive" but rather "fittest to survive long enough to reproduce". If one animal lives 20 years, but has 15 offspring, and another lives on 5 years, but manages to have 50 offspring, the latter example would be considered fore "fit" by the standards of Darwin's statement.
The WHOLE of any animal is adapted for its survival, this will include the covering (skin fur), dentition, digestive system, bones structure, etc - EVERY BIT of the animal.
they would probably die.or just not survive.
In evolution theory, 'survival of the fittest' is a popular principle. However, this does not mean that the fastest or strongest organism always has better chances for survival. In desert areas for example, a slow animal which uses very little energy and requires little water may have better chances for survival than a big, strong and fast animal with high energy requirements. In this case, the slow animal has higher fitness for its purpose, which is survival in that given area.
The fittest animal is subjective and can vary depending on the environment and criteria being considered. Animals that are well adapted to their environment, have efficient energy use, and are able to survive and reproduce successfully could be considered among the fittest. Examples include cheetahs for speed, elephants for strength, and sharks for longevity.