The relationship between science and technology is that before technologies can exist, there has to be scientific understanding in order to create a technology (option D).
<h3>What is technology?</h3>
Technology is the organization and application of scientific knowledge for practical purposes.
On the other hand, science is the collective discipline of study or learning acquired through the scientific method i.e. the sum of knowledge gained from such methods and discipline.
Technology is the usage of the knowledge of science to create products for human benefit. This suggests that science must come before technology.
Therefore, the relationship between science and technology is that before technologies can exist, there has to be scientific understanding in order to create a technology.
Learn more about technology at: brainly.com/question/9171028
#SPJ1
Assuming dragon genetics follow the same rules as fruit flies, we would get the same possible genotype for all 16 offspring provided that the genes are not linked.
Considering dragon genetics, flame eyes (F) are dominant to blue eyes (f) and burbling (B) is dominant to whistling (b).
Now, a dihybrid cross between two homozygous blue-eyed, whistling dragons will yield 16 offspring all with the same possible genotype .i.e. homozygous blue-eyed, whistling type.
Morgan through experiments on fruit flies observed that when the two genes in a dihybrid cross were situated on the same chromosome, the proportion of parental gene combination were much higher than the non-parental type.
He attributed this due to the physical association or linkage of the two genes and coined the term 'linkage' to describe the physical association of genes on a chromosome. The term 'recombination' is to describe the generation of non-parental gene combination.
To learn more about dihybrid cross here
brainly.com/question/1185199
#SPJ4
<span> For a start, when you have a question that needs answering in science, you formulate a null hypothesis. That is a negative statement which you then set out to prove or disprove. This is just a convention. So if your initial question is for example, "Does sugar dissolve in water?"
Your null hypothesis will be "Sugar does not dissolve in water."
You then set up your experiment and get some data.
Now if your data doesn't support your null hypothesis then you reject it and make the statement ,"Sugar does dissolve in water." As you can see from this simple example, a non-result is still a result so the idea of formulating new tests as mentioned by another answerer isn't necessary and in some ways is the incorrect thing to do. In science, hypotheses are often not supported by data and i would argue that this is the case a lot of the time. A non-result is still a result and you will have plenty to write about whichever way it goes. </span>
False because many different species are going extinct within our lifetime
