The statement saying, "<span>A demonstration speech typically revolves around a process or sequence of events</span>." is true. As the name suggests, a demonstration speech aims to inform the audience primarily through demonstrating the steps involved in accomplishing a certain task. It is then necessary that the process is done chronologically and in detail.
<span>The delineation of an aquatic ecosystem is the process of spatial identification, mapping and recording of the site; description documents the critical components and processes that underpin the ecosystem values of the site, and develops conceptual model(s) and identifies threats.
Delineating an aquatic ecosystem often starts with defining the main aquatic elements (core elements). The core elements will often be distinct landforms or features such as a waterhole, a swamp, a lake or a river. Ecotonal areas may be included as part of the core element or may be considered as a separate zone. For example, riparian vegetation is often considered to be an integral part of a river ecosystem, even if only inundated in big flood events.
The area around the core elements that has a critical influence on ecosystem function is referred to here as the Ecological Focal Zone. Beyond this, the landscape may be usefully differentiated as a Zone of Influence and a Catchment Zone.</span>
The energy of motion is called kinetic energy
C. All cells arise form previously existing cells. This is because the scraped knee's cells would be replaced by the exact same ones that were removed. Kind of like "Out with the old and in with the new... yet the exact same..!"
Hope this helps!
<span>Notice a couple of things
different between (A) and (B). It was NOT the first time a biologist
proposed that species changed through time (so it's not B). But it
finally *solidified* that idea by giving "change through time"
(evolution) a MECHANISM. It gave a plausible explanation for WHY
species change over time, in a testable way that made sense and had
evidence to support it.
So it finally dismissed the idea that species are constant.
It also emphasized that the simple presence of *variation* within a population was a key reason for evolution.
While we're at it ... (C) is wrong because it's not *individuals* that
acclimate (adapt) to their environment, but the population (the species)
as a whole.
And (D) is wrong because it had nothing to do with economics or the monarchy.</span>
