The plants would ultimately die.
Although the plants won't need oxygen to make photosynthesis occur, it would be unable to perform cellular respiration. They will be unable to respire and produce the product of cellular respiration which is CO2 + H2O + Energy. These are necessary reactants for photosynthesis. Eventually, photosynthesis will consume more CO2 than it produces with cellular respiration. They won't have a sufficient food source and eventually die off.
<span>The symptoms of xeroderma pigmentosum, or XP, usually appear in infancy. They can range from extreme sunburn after a few minutes of exposure to UV rays, to the reddening of the white of the eyes if no sun protection is worn. Most patients with XP develop skin or eye cancer multiple times in their lifetime. Around half of the children diagnosed with XP will develop skin cancer by their 10th birthday.</span>
From the markings that you had written and erased on your graph, it seems that you already have an idea of what you're supposed to do. Is it that you're having trouble scaling your graph on the provided sheet given the particular data? Or do you have a conceptual question with respect to the instructions?
I've provided the image of the graph according to my understanding of the instructions as stated in 1 and 2, and I've also attached the corresponding Excel spreadsheet that I used to create the graph. While the blank grid that you've attached doesn't scale identically to my graph, it should be possible to transpose the necessary elements into your grid to an acceptable approximation.
That said, please feel free to let me know if you have any clarifications, comments, or questions.
<span class="sg-text sg-text--link sg-text--bold sg-text--link-disabled sg-text--blue-dark">
xls
</span>
Answer:
shsydhshsj
Explanation:
xgxhemekdgfndjdvdxgdhhddhdijdjshhgghg ft fjfjjt5njycjf7k n in gjxydjydjydydjydkyjjjjjjjkkooiujjy7v:fď v"dgggfgdjdhdhddhjdhjdjddjjdhddhhffhhdhdjdhdhdhfhdjdjdhddcbxjxbvxbxbdbdbdbxbxvdvdvfvfvfvvvddvdfbbfbbfhbdbdbdbdbdhddhdfuudduuddjudhdfhfhfhfhfhfhfhfhfhfhfhfh hfhfhfhdhdhf hdhdhdhdhddhdh fhhfdhhdhdfhfy ydydydy. yeyeyeyey
Answer:
Phylogenetic trees reconstructed from molecular sequences are often considered more reliable than those reconstructed from morphological characters, in part because convergent evolution, which confounds phylogenetic reconstruction, is believed to be rarer for molecular sequences than for morphologies
Explanation:
