General reply:
1) It is reasonably to assume that they are the same species (they can interbreed).
2) It is reasonable to assume that a and b are different alleles of the same gene (If you were wondering).
*As this is a hypothetical question there is no reason to argue over these points (they are arbitrary).
*As stated in the OP this is a question in
ecology, and when studying ecology you cannot take into account the whole population of the species - you must restrict yourself to researching a certain
population (meaning "population" is also arbitrary).
Population (as my
professor defines it): All of the creatures that can
potentially interbreed
and give fertile offspring, but...
1) Not all of the individuals breed in practice (
this also describes me
).
2)
They must be together for awhile (geographic isolation --> different populations).BTW: How would you define a population that "breeds" asexually.
Reply to RAZD:
The migration did change the frequency of alleles -- IN the specific population in question. However both populations existed before: thus in a larger context evolution did NOT occur.
The definition of population resolves this - so by this definition evolution did occur.
If we are talking about a variety population then the answer is still no, because there was no change within the aa variety population or the bb variety population, other than loss in numbers due to the storm - there was no interbreeding within the context of the question.
Forget the storm
- It was just an obvious diversion for those students who didn't do their homework. I always do my homework
.
I'd be interested in what your professor says to these criticisms.
I have a lecture Sunday, I'll ask him.
(BTW: thank you for your responses Crash, RAZD, NJ, Jar, CS, Phalanx, Modulous)