There is not enough information to calculate this.
<span>Knowing the weight ratio of the fox to coyote as 3:8 in no way allows you to know the respective ratio of the wolf. To know the weight of the wolf would require knowing its ratio value, then the weights of all 3 is an easy calculation. </span>
<span>Example - 3:8:15 (f:c:w) is a plausible ratio based upon real-world weight averages for certain species/subspecies of the three. </span>
<span>- knowing the values of the 3 terms as 3:8:15 gives a total of 3+8+15 = 26 ratio values </span>
<span>- you then simply divide the total weight by this ratio value total; 120/26 = 4.62 </span>
<span>- so each ratio value is 4.62 units of weight*** </span>
<span>- now, simply calculate the weight of each canid by multiplying its ratio value by the unit of weight... </span>
<span>fox; 3 x 4.62 = 13.86 </span>
<span>coyote; 8 x 4.62 = 36.96 </span>
<span>wolf; 15 x 4.62 = 69.3 </span>
<span>Validate the ratios by adding the weights together (we should get 120) 13.86 + 36.96 + 69.3 = 120.12 </span>
<span>The total is slightly out because that 4.62 figure was a rounding up. </span>
<span>Now, the thing is, there is nothing given that allows us to know exactly what ratio value the wolf should be, I chose 15 myself because that is a real-world plausible value when compared to 3:8 for the other 2. Changing it to 16, say, means that there are now 27 ratio values total giving a ratio value of 120/27 = 4.44 obviously changing the weights of all 3.</span>
The scientific mathematical language barrier.
Koi going goindnjrhdnejwjdjsj
Answer:
'
Step-by-step explanation:
Answer:B
Step-by-step explanation:
