Saving endangered species is considered to be important for the environment, but is it really worth it? Saving endangered species would cost billions of dollars and strict environmental regulations. There are plenty of reasons why we should save these animals, but also many for why we shouldn't. What is the point in saving animals if we could spend our time and money stopping the spread of starvation and disease? Also, some of these animals are threats to livestock and people. However, I believe that we should save these animals because its the right thing to do. I love the natural world, nature is beautiful. Walking through a forest or swimming in an ocean on a sunny day is one of the best things that can be experienced. For a lot of these environment, we need these species to keep them going.
Experiments are tests and exercises are discussions.
Both are different methods of gathering data and ideas: one through the use of testing, and the other through the use of communication.
Reabsorption of filtered glucose from the lumen in the pct is largely by means of: secondary active cotransport.
Nephron is the functional unit of the kidney associated with removing waste products from the blood. It achieves the function by performing filtration which results in formation of urine. A nephron is divided into two parts namely renal corpuscle and renal tubule. Renal corpuscle is associated with filtration and renal tubule mainly performs reabsorption.
Renal tubules are further divided into Proximal Convoluted Tubule (PCT), loop of Henle, Distal Convoluted Tubule (DCT) and collecting duct. PCT and DCT are mainly linked with reabsorption and secretion respectively. Reabsorption in PCT occurs via cotransport. Here, glucose is reabsorbed along with sodium ions via SGLT2 cotransporter. Specifically, the reabsorption method is termed as sodium-coupled secondary active transport.
Learn more about filtration and rebasorption here -
brainly.com/question/3145071
brainly.com/question/11008782
#SPJ4
True. Because its staying still
