You are investigating a murder that occurred in a cornfield. You have evidence from two suspects who each claim they walked through the soybean field instead. Cross-sections of green plant material from the shoes of Suspect A show a pattern of vascular bundles scattered throughout the ground tissue, while material from Suspect B show the vascular bundles in a peripheral ring. Who should you call in for further questioning?

Question

Isaias Gomez

Biology

14 February, 16:03

You are investigating a murder that occurred in a cornfield. You have evidence from two suspects who each claim they walked through the soybean field instead. Cross-sections of green plant material from the shoes of Suspect A show a pattern of vascular bundles scattered throughout the ground tissue, while material from Suspect B show the vascular bundles in a peripheral ring. Who should you call in for further questioning?

+5

Answers (1)

Know the Answer?

Julissa Hanson · Answer 1

Suspect A

Explanation:

Suspect A should be called in for further questioning because the pattern of vascular bundles of plant materials from his/her shoe coincides with the arrangement pattern of vascular bundles in monocot plants.

In monocots, the vascular bundles are scattered within the ground tissues while in dicot, the vascular bundles are arranged in the form of a ring.

Since corn belongs to the monocot family, then its vascular bundles are scattered within the ground tissues. Hence, the suspect whose cross sections of the plant material from his/her shoes indicates the vascular arrangement belonging to a monocot will be called for further questioning.

The correct answer is suspect A.