1. In the Hunger Games Lab, the class split into three different phenotypes: the Stumpys, who picked up food with their wrists, knucklers, who could only pick up food with their knuckles, and pinchers, who could only pick up food with their fingers. The goal was basically to get the most food in order to survive and reproduce with another individual. This essentially simulated a real-world population of organisms trying to survive and reproduce in the real world and evolution as a result of natural selection.
2. The phenotype that was the best for capturing food were the pinchers because they could pick up the corks, which were the "food", the best and were, as a result the most adapted. In addition, the pinchers were also tied with the knucklers if not more in population.
3. Yes, the population did evolve, which was proven by the change in allele frequency, as the "a" allele became more common and the "A" allele became less common. In the beginning of the lab, the allele frequencies were equal, and by the end of the lab, the "a" allele was about two-thirds of the total alleles.
4. In the lab, the things that were not random were the phenotypes of the individuals and their ability to get their food, but the dispersion of the food and the offspring of two individuals were random.
5. Yes, the results could be different if the food was larger or smaller. For example, if the food was too large for the knucklers to pick up, then disruptive selection would act upon the population and the pinchers and stumpys would become more common. But if the food was smaller, then the stumpys would have a harder time, and directional selection would occur, moving toward the extreme phenotype.
6. There would be a difference if there was no incomplete dominance because there woud be no knucklers and there would be a more likely chance to get a stumpy than a pincher if a stumpy and pincher mated. As a result, the results of the lab could have been altered.
7. Natural selection causes evolution, as natural selection weeds out the alleles that are not beneficial and leaves the best alleles, therefore causing a change in allele frequency and evolution.
8. In the course of the lab, some individuals "cheated" as they did not follow the phenotype they were assigned, giving them an advantage. In nature, there really is no "cheating", instead the behaviors and traits that the organisms have are used to survive and give them an advantage over other species so that they can survive and reproduce.
9. In evolution, the individual doesn't evolve, the population evolves because an individual is stuck with the traits it gets but as natural selection acts upon the population, it slowly causes evolution as every generation changes. In addition, natural selection acts on the phenotype, as it weeds out the traits or the phenotypes that don't benefit the population, not the alleles or the genotype.
10. One question that I still have after this lab, is why do organisms in the same area have different traits if only the best traits are left in population? Why don't species in the same environment evolve to have the same best traits, for example, if a big strong jaw with sharp teeth is such a successful trait in tigers, why don't gazelles or giraffes have big, sharp teeth?