DAT Study Guide / Practice Test Errors

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

mochafreak

registered quaffer
15+ Year Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2003
Messages
926
Reaction score
0
OK guys, here's a thread just for reporting errors in the different study guides. I'm sure that this could help many people out right now and in the future. Unfortunately, I've been doing Examkrackers problems and they report their errata so I don't have much to contribute to the thread right now. I know several of us are getting pissed off at the quality of our study guides, so here's our chance to do something positive about it (since the companies probably won't). 👍 🙂
 
Here's my first one...Schaum's Biology 2nd edition, page 371 says that the archaebacteria are older than the eubacteria. That is the exact opposite of what I learned in class and what Raven and Johnson's Biology, 6th edition says on page 684. I believe it's now understood that the eubacteria are the older organisms and the archae are more similar to eukaryotes. Anyone know what Campbell's says?
 
mochafreak said:
Here's my first one...Schaum's Biology 2nd edition, page 371 says that the archaebacteria are older than the eubacteria. That is the exact opposite of what I learned in class and what Raven and Johnson's Biology, 6th edition says on page 684. I believe it's now understood that the eubacteria are the older organisms and the archae are more similar to eukaryotes. Anyone know what Campbell's says?

doesnt it also say in schaum's that cyanobacteria are within eubacteria.

arent they within archaebacteria?
 
mochafreak said:
Here's my first one...Schaum's Biology 2nd edition, page 371 says that the archaebacteria are older than the eubacteria. That is the exact opposite of what I learned in class and what Raven and Johnson's Biology, 6th edition says on page 684. I believe it's now understood that the eubacteria are the older organisms and the archae are more similar to eukaryotes. Anyone know what Campbell's says?

Tricky question. The Greek word "Archae" means old. Archaen means "of or relating to the oldest known rocks, those of the Precambrian era, that are predominantly igneous in composition." Based on these definitions it looks like Schaum is correct. In addition, Archaebacteria emerged at least 3.5 billion years ago and are the oldest life forms. You are also right. Archaebacteria are more similar to eukaryotes but I think most scientists believe eukaryotes evolved from eubacteria. It may seem counter-intuitive but that's what I have learned.
 
dentwannabe said:
doesnt it also say in schaum's that cyanobacteria are within eubacteria.

arent they within archaebacteria?

Cyanobacteria have been put in so many different groups but for now most scientists think cyanobacteria belong to Eubacteria (true bacteria).
 
dat_student said:
Tricky question. The Greek word "Archae" means old. Archaen means "of or relating to the oldest known rocks, those of the Precambrian era, that are predominantly igneous in composition." Based on these definitions it looks like Schaum is correct. In addition, Archaebacteria emerged at least 3.5 billion years ago and are the oldest life forms. You are also right. Archaebacteria are more similar to eukaryotes but I think most scientists believe eukaryotes evolved from eubacteria. It may seem counter-intuitive but that's what I have learned.

Did you learn that from another textbook?
 
Top