<p>One of the questions on the 2011 AP test FRQ was related to listing and explaining different ways of analyzing phylogenetic relationships.</p>
<p>One of the answers I wrote during my mock prep was "comparative anatomy."
According to the question, I had to write one weakness or strength of the analytic method.
As the strength of comparative anatomy, I wrote that bone structures are slow to change, thereby reflecting all the historic evolutionary relationships bewteen organisms. To augment my argument, I further wrote that structures like vestigial structures exist in the anatomy of organisms due to this slow evolutionary response although these structures have lost their functions; yet, because of these still-existent structures, scientists are able to establish evolutionary relationships between different organisms.</p>
<p>The sample response and scoring guidelines posted by college board AP central website did not include this strength. </p>
<p>Can someone who's competent enough to be an AP reader/scorer tell me if this is enough of a strength or if this is either fallacious or too vague?</p>
<p>I would appreciate it :D !</p>