Question

question 2 (multiple choice worth 1 points)
a marine scientist observes that dissolved oxygen decreases with increasing ocean depth. he concludes that deep sea creatures must require less oxygen than those at shallower depths. why is this an invalid scientific conclusion?
he did not compare data in different oceans.
more research is needed to reach a conclusion, including related variables.
the data he collected was from a laboratory and not in natural conditions.
the data he collected was relative and not absolute.

Explanation:

In scientific research, to draw a valid conclusion about the oxygen - requirement of deep - sea creatures compared to shallow - water ones, multiple factors (related variables) need to be considered. Just observing the decrease of dissolved oxygen with depth is not sufficient. There could be other reasons for the survival of deep - sea creatures (e.g., different metabolic rates, alternative energy sources, etc.). More comprehensive research including these related variables is necessary. Comparing data in different oceans (\(1^{st}\) option) is not the core issue here as the problem is about the lack of considering all relevant factors in a single ocean context. The data source (laboratory vs natural, \(3^{rd}\) option) is not indicated to be an issue in the given problem. The nature of data (relative vs absolute, \(4^{th}\) option) is also not the main concern as the main flaw is the lack of considering related variables.

Answer:

More research is needed to reach a conclusion, including related variables.