All categories

2 years ago

Escribe las partes de la célula: Doy corona

Biology

1 answer:

Anit [1.1K]2 years ago

4 0

Answer:

A. MEMBRANA PLASMATICA

B. NUCLEO

C. RETICULO ENDOPLASMATCO

D. APARATO DE GOLGI

E. LISOSOMA

F. MICROFILAMENTO

G. MITOCONDRIA

H. RIBOSOMA

I. CENTROSOMA

You might be interested in

What biome do we live in? Explain your answer.

dexar [7]

This depends... I live in Southern Michigan, which is deciduous forest because they cover most of the Northern US.

4 0

3 years ago

If cyanobacteria never evolved during earth's history, how would their absence affect the composition of earth's atmosphere?

Blababa [14]

Cyanobacteria, also known as blue-green algae, are found in vast quantities in fresh and salt water. Cyanobacteria are able to conduct photosynthesis. By utilising energy from the sun, they produce carbohydrates from water and carbon dioxide. As a byproduct, they produce oxygen. So cyanobacteria provided oxygen to the atmosphere that allowed other lifeforms to develop.

3 0

3 years ago

The leg muscles of a sprinter would differ from a marathon runner in that ________. The leg muscles of a sprinter would differ f

andrew11 [14]

Answer:

The correct answer is - per gram, the marathon runner's muscles would contain more myoglobin than the sprinter's muscles.

Explanation:

Marathon runners have smaller leg muscles and thinner quads and calves as marathon runners require slow-twitch muscles while in sprinters the fast-twitch muscle requires. Slow-twitch muscles of marathon runners have more amount of myoglobin, per gram than fast-twitch muscles.

Myoglobin acts as local oxygen storage that provides oxygen to the muscles in case of less oxygen supply than required temporarily and a marathon race is an intense exercise or activity that requires more oxygen.

6 0

3 years ago

Btw this is the pic of the last question

Westkost [7]

Because it shows the pull.
hope that helps i’m bad at explaining things

5 0

3 years ago

People who are tune deaf are unable to follow a rhythm. Scientists have evidence that tune deafness can be genetic. The pedigree

butalik [34]

Question

Pedigree attached

a. Provide evidence from the pedigree that conclusively shows that the tune deafness allele is autosomal dominant, not autosomal recessive. Explain your reasoning.

b. Identify the genotypes of individuals 5 and 6, and then draw the Punnett square for the cross of these two individuals.

c. Compare the expected percentage of each phenotype of the offspring from the cross in part (b) with the actual percentage of each phenotype observed in the children of individuals 5 and 6.

Answer/Explanation:

a. Autosomal dominant means that even having one copy of the allele T will produce a tune deaf individual. The evidence of this is that individuals II.3 and 4 have children (III. 8 and 9) with normal tune perception. This suggests that they have inherited the normal allele from both parents. That means II.3 and II4 must be heterozygous, in order to pass on the normal allele. This makes sense if tune deafness is dominant (because 3 and 4 will both be Tt and Tt, so can pass on the t alleles). However, if tune deafness was recessive, that would mean that individual II 3 and 4 both have to carry 2 copies, meaning there is no way their children would have normal tune perception.

b. Since individual 5 is unaffected and we know this is the recessive trait, they must be Tt. Since individual 6 is affected, they must be either Tt or tt. However, they have children who are unaffected (11, 12, 13) who must be tt. This means, individual 6 must have the t allele to pass on, and must be Tt. Therefore, the cross between individuals 5 and 6 is tt x Tt:

T t

t Tt tt

c) The punnet square shows the children from (b) have a 50:50 chance of being tune deaf vs normal tune perception (50% each). In contrast, the actual ratios are 25% tune deaf to 75% normal tune perception. (1:4). This deviates from the expected ratio, but since all of these are due to chance, it is not an unexpected occurrence. Perhaps if there were 10, 50 or 100 children (!) from this cross, the results would be more like the expected ratio

5 0

3 years ago