<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>
Answer:
conclusion
Explanation:
A conclusion summarizes the report by drawing inferences from the entire project and the impact of the findings or decisions. In the conclusion, you restate the hypothesis and summarize your main points of evidence for the objectives.
The notable
hardness of bone is attributed to the presence of inorganic hydroxyapatites.
Due to the calcium salts deposited in it, resulting to the hardness. The
abnormal hardness of bone, which allows it
to resist the compression.
Answer:
All organic molecules are made up of carbon compounds so we can say that the main atom or molecule is carbon.
hope it helps!
