You'll want to double check, but I think it's (a) cotyledon.
B is the answer. But the changes would take over time
None of the provided options are reasonable. <span>comparing nutrient concentrations between the photic zone and the benthic zone can not tell you whether differences in concentrations between the photic and benthic zone are due to uptake by phytoplankton or because nutrients are sinking to the sea bottom and ocean stratification is preventing mixing. The approach of c</span><span>ontrasting nutrient uptake by autotrophs at different locations under different temperatures would not provide useful information on limiting nutrients. but rather uptake rates at different temperatures. It is likely that e</span>xperimentally enriching some areas of the ocean and compare their productivity to that of untreated areas can provide an indication of limiting nutrients, but this is not advisable, as it would have to be done on a large scale, and one cannot be sure of the ecological consequences. Also, because it would not be a controlled experiment, other factors could create 'noise' in the data. The last option, <span>observe antarctic ocean productivity from year to year to see if it changes, also does not help, as there is no correlation between nutrient concentrations using this approach. The best approaches would be either the last approach, but with the additional monitoring of nutrient concentrations, or under a controlled laboratory experiment.</span>
I'd go with this one: b.) Meiosis I separates tetrads, and meiosis II separates sister chromatids. As it is correctly describes the difference between meiosis I and meiosis II.
