<p>seems like im the worst one here…thats sad…</p>
<p>(wrong) 10char</p>
<p>@catcat18, i put same G and C too</p>
<p>What about the like molerat or something who lost his eyesight? i think i said it was bc they stopped using their sight or bc the sand irritated their eyes and degeneriated</p>
<p>dude…how can u have different amount of G and C? its DNA not RNA</p>
<p>yeah, i thought it meant the cells would have proportional amnts of G&C in comparison with each other… hmm.</p>
<p>catcat: Yup I put that for the answer</p>
<p>ericr: for the question you’re asking, did one of the answer choices have something about ice age?</p>
<p>ericr…i dont remember that one…but i remember one for mice’s fetus, using ECC or something…</p>
<p>did anyone put “simple dominance” for that one with inheritance patterns in … oh i forgot. but i was either simple dominance or multiple alleles and i was stuck between those two</p>
<p>And the mice fetus and DEC… i thought for literally 5 minutes that the “percent reabsorption” meant how much fetus was reabsorbed… lol. was 30micrograms the harmful amnt for fetuses?</p>
<p>Wow, huge brain fart. haha, I had the G and C one and changed it! Oops.</p>
<p>idrk i feel like i mightve just made that one up i dont remember if it was on it but ya the question about gaps in the fossil record…does that show that afterwards adaptive radiation occured due to geographic isolation?</p>
<p>I put simple dominance. </p>
<p>Ericr: yeah I put that one too.</p>
<p>i got 30micrograms are harmful too
also, the corn oil question…was that it reversed the effects of the des? couldn’t tell if the dashed line was actually a part of the graph</p>
<p>i said the corn oil was given to mice without DEC… like a control or something…?</p>
<p>ah yes i love you kim</p>
<p>I said that line showed the resorption with just corn oil.</p>
<p>hmm lol, i thought more percentige of reabsorb is better for the mouse…
so i put…i forgot…not that 30perc harmful one</p>
<p>Side note: what would -4 be around?</p>
<p>i siad oil is contorl too</p>