Sarah is in Piaget's substage of
"<span>
secondary circular reaction".</span>
In this
substage, the youngster turns out to be more centered on the world and starts
to deliberately rehash and repeat an activity with a specific end goal to
trigger a reaction in environment. For instance like in the given case hit it
to get a specific reaction.
Thank you for posting your question here. It can be considered to be consistent with the given facts. As you know, an hypothesis, much less a theory, is never proven. It can be shown to be consistent with given observations. As new observations are collected, the given hypothesis may have to be modified.
If the celery became crisp when it was soaked in ice water, then clearly that the water has rehydrated the celery is a reasonable hypothesis. But did it have to be ice cold water? Would room temperature water work? What about boiling water?
And thus most of the time, the success of an hypothesis leads to the design of new experiments to test and expand the original hypothesis.
Answer:
65
Explanation:
An autosomal dominant condition is one where one copy of the allele is sufficient to cause the condition. Penetrance refers to the degree to which that mutation causes the phenotype
Lets say the allele for sharp beak is S and for normal beak is s. If 2 heterozygous sharp-beaked terrapins mate, the cross is the following:
Ss x Ss
<u> S s </u>
S SS Ss
s Ss ss
The possible genotypes are SS, Ss and ss. 50% of their offspring will be heterozygous, and 25% homozygous each. Therefore, if the mutation was fully penetrant, it would be 75 out of 100 offspring would be affected.
However, the mutation is only 87% penetrant, which means only 87% of those 75 offspring would have the condition.
87% of 75 = 65.25
Therefore, we would expect 65 of their offspring to have sharp beaks
Answer:
They will come to hold more positive attitudes toward the product
Explanation:
hope i helped
