A mammoth is more likely to fossilize than a caterpillar because a caterpillar has no hard tissue. Bones and cartilage are much more likely to fossilize.
Because it is more resistant to biological and environmental destruction.
A clam is more likely. Jellies have no bones.
Yes, but it is more likely that the cobra's poison would injure the woolly mammoth than killing it.
A caterpillar is more likely to be 3 inches long than 3 feet.
Mud is more likely than sand to fossilize an organism because mud has finer particles that can fill in cavities and preserve details of the organism's structure. In contrast, the looser nature of sand may not provide the same level of protection and support for fossilization.
A clam is more likely to fossilize than a jellyfish.
A fox would be the most likely. A moth is smaller, and therefore would take less time to decompose. However, for anything to(technically) fossilize takes a very long time
A mammoth i believe had more hair than a mastadon
Yes, a caterpillar has 6 legs.
hard parts on the outside of the organism means that the potential fossil is more likely to survive as increasing pressures are placed on the potential fossil when sediments are placed on top.
I have a swallow tail butterfly caterpillar.
Calcium, and bones(be more specific).