I believe that the answer is biosphere<span />
What would most likely reduce the bias present in Elias' experimental design would be to not ask just the members of his high school team to be the subjects because they represent a very specific group of people. It would be much better to use a random group of people and have them do the same thing.
The answer is B., Natural Selection.
Weather certainly doesn't change populations, and genes only caused individuals in a population to be slightly ( genetically-wise ) different from the others. It does cause change, but not change in the whole population over time.
Natural disasters don't change the populations over time either. Natural disasters only caused change in their environment, at most.
So, the only answer left is natural selection, and it makes sense too!
Natural selection is the process where the individuals with better traits suited to survive in that specific environment live on and give those good traits to their offspring.
The individuals with less suited traits to survive will die out, and will not be given an opportunity to reproduce and pass on their less suited traits, so over time, the population will increase of individuals with better suited traits to survive and the individuals with less suited traits will eventually die out, therefore making the entire population change.
Hope I helped you!
The question here is, is glucose a protein? No, it's not; it's a carbohydrate.
So pepsin would not break it down: it would most probably not react with glucose at all, since pepsin breaks down proteins, not carbohydrates. <span />
