If a clump of fescue grass lacked phosphorus, which of the following molecules could still be synthesized?\n\na) DNA\nb) ATP\nc) membrane lipids\nd) RNA\ne) None of the above could be synthesized without phosphorus
214085
DNA has phosphate sugars so no. ATP stands for adenotriphosphate so no. membranes consists of phospholipids. rna is the same as DNA in constituents with uracil base change and more oxygen.\n\nso none.\n\nin return for the answer can you let me know what you think of my essay...\n\nEvolutionary scientific discoveries unwittingly make the human creation in the book of Genesis feasible to the point of affirmation.\n\nIntroduction\n\nIn the beginning “male and female He created them.” (Genesis 1, 27) This statement has been contested ever since the Age of Enlightenment when human beings with their development of knowledge set about challenging God’s authority in the world around them. Immanuel Kant’s motto “Dare to know” really symbolises the dominant modernistic attitude that was and continues to be embraced by humanity. God has no problem with us gaining knowledge- he invented science and has got it to a perfect art seeing as he spoke all the necessary components into being. Indeed knowledge is God-given to the point that it is one of the fruits of the spirit. Besides, if God really wanted us to remain ignorant of the world he wouldn’t have given us the Word. I therefore want to emphasise that it is only when we think we got here on our own, without God that we come into dispute with God and the truth. But rejection is nothing new to God, who is neither surprised nor shocked by our choices or actions. Before God even created the world he had sent his son to die “it was the Lord’s good plan to crush him” (Isaiah 53, 10) and before he created the universe God knew we would “turn our backs on him and look(ed) the other way.” (Isaiah 53, 3). The fact that Charles Darwin’s Origin of Species caused some controversy and drove people to reject Jesus as the truth was not a ‘heavy blow’ for Him. For one thing, and I say this tongue-in-cheek, if God is anything like me he had probably gotten ‘bored’ of waiting. After all there’s quite a bit of waiting between before the Planck epoch (for those who are interested the Planck epoch is the time between zero and 10-43 seconds of the beginning of the universe) and 1859! Regardless of this publication and the later The Descent of Man (1871) His plan would still prevail over all His creation. The plan had already succeeded before we emerged on day six. Everything else had already been put in place: Jesus’ death and resurrection and all the animals and plants. EVERYTHING! God did NOT need our help or our approval and if he didn’t need it then, he certainly doesn’t need it NOW. What is interesting is that as God allows our knowledge to deepen and technology to improve evidence, particularly genetic and fossilised, appears to be pointing towards the feasibility if not the affirmation of the ‘story’ of Adam and Eve foretold in Genesis.\n\nAssumptions of the Author\n\nBefore I go any further I am making the following interpretations and/or assumptions:\n\n•Evolution (at least in humans) does occur but only within species. I believe that whilst other animals may evolve we wouldn’t as we are God’s chosen creation made in His image. He never changes and thus nor have (or will) we. Within our species implies that if women suddenly found blue-eyed men to be a turn-off generation after generation so that blue-eyed men could not pass on their seed, humans as a species would have less and eventually no blue eyed alleles but they would not in becoming predominately brown or green-eyed become a new species.\n•Evolution in definition is always ‘survival of the fittest’ where the most advantageous traits are passed on to the next generation. By dramatically becoming less hairy- so from having fur (ape) to being bare (Homo sapien)- the human race would have a severe disadvantage in that fur keeps you warm in a cold climate and cool in a hot one. Loss of fur is of course risky in a glacial-inter glacial planet cycle. The only reason for the fact we have no fu
413265
Maybe the tree of life is rooted to the 'nutrient soil?' What I mean is that organic compounds were thought to form before any cell. They provided the nutrients for these early cells, so my best guess is that they would be your roots.
220103
I wouldn't say that I'm anymore intelligent than someone else, but I did want to answer your question, so....\n\nYou are confusing the theory of evolution (diversification of species) with the theory of abiogenesis (life from natural compounds).  That's okay, many people confuse the two.\n\n1.  How did life get from soup to single-celled organisms?  From wikipedia, "J.B.S Haldane suggested that the earth's pre-biotic oceans - very different from their modern counterparts - would have formed a "hot dilute soup" in which organic compounds, the building blocks of life, could have formed.\nIn 1953, taking their cue from Oparin and Haldane, the chemists Stanley L. Miller and Harold C. Urey carried out an experiment on the "primeval soup". Within two weeks organic amino acids, the basic building blocks of life, had formed. While Miller and Urey did not actually create life; they demonstrated that a more complex molecule — the amino-acids — could emerge spontaneously from simpler chemicals, in the presence of an external energy source in an atmosphere largely devoid of oxygen (the experiment involved shooting a spark, representing lightning, into their flask of supposedly primitive earth-gases)."\n\n2.  How did the original cell eat and develop asexual reproduction?   You are putting the cart before the horse.  In order to get to the cell stage, self-replicating molecules had to exist first... i.e. reproduction & "nourishment"  was occurring well before the cell stage.  Also, what are you referring to with "nourishment"?  For a self-replicating molecule, nourishment would consist of other molecules that it could combine with to form more of itself.\n\n3.  In the "soup", how did primordial cells develop resistences?  Resistence to what?  I don't understand this question.  To the environment?  To viruses or bacteria?  You need to elaborate here, I'm sorry.  I think it ties into your next answer, but not sure.  Please read my answer to #4.\n\n4.  How did it evolve everything it needed if it wasn't in it's DNA?  Can you give an example?  Hmm.  I'm trying to understand how you are approaching this question.  Let's say you have 100 little cells, each a little different.  5 cells can withstand a higher water temperature than the others because of a mutation they have.  One day the temperature goes up and kills off the other 95 cells.  That only leaves the 5 with the mutation.  They scamper off and reproduce like crazy... the cell strain has just evolved a little.  Now repeat this a gazillion times with a dynamic interacting environment and there you go.
368868
A -produces two molecules of CO2\n\nnot C because it makes NADH, not NAD+\nnot D becaues the most ATP is produced during the electron transport chain
283425
Just going with what Jag said, there doesn't seem to be any correct answer.\n\nAnimalia are never photosynthetic.\n\nEubacteria are never eukaryotes.\n\nFungi are never photosynthetic.\n\nPlantae are never single celled.\n\nNone of the answer is correct. In point of fact most single-celled eukaryotes that are either heterotrophic or photosynthetic belong to the kingdom Protista. But Protista isn't one of the options given.\n\nI think your teacher stuffed up the question.
36397
atp is short for adenosinetriphosphate\nit IS a molecule of energy
172668
The answer is (D) simple sugars.  However, cells must break down glucose through cellular respiration (glycolysis or fermentation) to create ATP, which is the energy molecule used for cell processes.
465910
D is the correct answer, Light enables photosynthesis so a and c are wrong, and no reaction can increase exponentially as in B
497878
Hey cool I'm doing the same subject. \nOrder of the Nucleotides:\nCAUAUGGUCAGUAAACAG\nCodons:\nCAU-AUG-GUC-AGU-AAA-CAG\nAmino Acids:\nHistidine-Methionine-Valine-Serine-Lysine-Glutamine\nI really Hope that helps you,\n-Sean
635279
18. D. Oxygen and energy (ATP) are products of aerobic respiration, whcih takes place in the mitocondria.\n\n19. B. The cell membrane is called a LIPID BILAYER. which has 2 layers of phospholipds. the hydrphobic tails in the center. and the 2 heads facing out side the cell and inside the cell. the inner layer would have the head facing the inside of the cell.\n\n20. A. the bactera (monerans) were one of the earliest forms of life. The had the earliest form of sexual reproduction by exchanging DNA with another bacterium through their membranes. They were also mobile (getting around from place to place). For example, some bacteria have flagela, which whip around for them to move. an getting energy from the sun... hmm. well. im not sure if bacteria can photosynthesize. but im 100% sure they can get energy from the sun INDIRECTLY through cellular respiration.
545262
these are called the classical "work horses" of plant and aniamal cells respectivly.  Regardless chlorplast is reposnsible the energy conversionin photsysnthesis and mitochondia is used in cell metabolism to provide energy through ATP-ADP energy relationships. Any basic science book would do this and so would a Wikepedia or googlesearch. I woudl suggest you go there to get spsecifics, or try the library in your neighbourhood
383127
Mitochondia, because they transform glucose (sugar) to energy.\nChloroplast, because they transform sun energy to glucose.
338165
ATP is formed by adding a phosphate group to ADP along with some energy. The process by which ATP is generated from ADP is called phosphorylation.  There are three types of phosphorylations: substrate-level, oxidative phosphorylation, and photophosporylation. \n\nEnergy stored in ATP is used in nearly all of the endergonic reactions in cells. ATP is often reffered to as the energy currency of the cell.
299180
this is a difficult one. theres the initial 'soup' of early compounds that spawned life, theres the meteorite theory of cells from other planets gettin a start here, and theres a possible link between both. this may be that chemicals from the many rocks from outer space, the heat of the planet then, and the interaction of all the early substances may have harboured a good environment for a cell 2 form, with a membrane, enclosing some of these compounds within it.
614853
Origin of Life\nBacteria appeared on earth between 3.4 and 4 billion years ago. Precambrian evidence of filamentous bacteria-like structures, found making up fossilized sediments called stromalites, has been discovered in Australia and southern Africa. These fossils date back between 3.4 and 3.5 billion years old. Environmental conditions of earth 4 billion years ago were much different than those of today. It has been theorized that the atmosphere was a reducing atmosphere with intense lightning, tremendous volcanic activity, very little oxygen, intense ultraviolet radiation, and meteorite bombardment. These conditions made it impossible for any type of aerobic life to exist. The first cells may have originated by chemical evolution in an anaerobic environment.\n\nAbiotic Synthesis Theory of Life: A.I.Oparin postulated, in the 1920's, that primitive earth with its reducing atmosphere favored chemical reactions that produced simple monomers that eventually formed complex organic compounds necessary for life. Stanley Miller and Harold Urey tested this hypothesis by building an apparatus to simulate the conditions of the earth at that time.\n\n \n\n\n \n\nTheir experiments produced 20 amino acids and other organic compounds including: ATP, lipids, some sugars, and the bases of RNA and DNA. The main problem of organic synthesis is how did these molecules develop without the aid of enzymes to speed up the reactions? Sidney Fox, of the University of Miami, dripped a dilute solution of organic monomers onto hot sand, clay , and rock. The water vaporized and left behind polypeptides he called proteinoids. Clay was abundant in prebiotic earth. Clay has the ability to act as a substrate for this type of chemical reaction. The charged sites on the clay attracted monomers in such concentrations to bring them into close proximity for chemical binding. Once these organic compounds were produced, aggregates of these proteinoids self-assembled into small spheres called protobionts. These small spheres were capable of osmotic swelling and shrinking and even able to produce a membrane potential.\n\nRNA the first Genetic Material: Evidence to support the idea that RNA was the first genetic material includes: short polymers of self-replicating RNA have been abiotically produced in a test tube without enzymes. RNA has the ability to act as a catalyst to help make mRNA, tRNA or rRNA. The RNA folding is unique depending on its sequence. This along with mutations, creates a variety of closely related molecules. Through chance this self-replicating material was captured by the protobionts and the entire structure developed under the guide of natural selection.\n\nOther Origin Theories:\n\nPanspermia. Extraterrestrial organic compounds located on the surface of meteorites could well have contributed to the pool of material found on prebiotic earth. Modern meteorites have given up specimens of simple organic compounds such as amino acids.\n\nSome researchers believe that life began on the sea floor away from the harsh surface environments. The discovery of deep sea vents showed the scientific community that the materials needed for life to begin were present away from the harsh surface.\n\nJulius Rebek produced a simple organic molecule in 1991 that served as a template for self-replication. This discovery suggests that RNA was too complex to have come first and a much simpler self-replicating molecule preceded it.
438164
AB + CD ---> AD + CB\nlogic doesn't work here as Si doesn't react/bond with Ca or Phosphorus.and Ca(PO) should be Ca3(PO4)2\nand SiO should be in the form of SiO2. \nso unless you want hypothetical compounds SiO2 won't form with either of the two other reactants.\nbased on the forumlae from an SI data book, the above reaction would not balance.\ngood luck solving this one. :-)
392222
1. glycolysis\n2. lactic acid\n3. I'm not sure what the question is asking. 4 ATP molecules are produced by glycolysis but 2 are used up so there is only a net of 2 ATP.\n4.Fermentation\n5. NADH and FADH2 (2 is subscript)