input question: Given the background: From the data he collected and documented, Aristotle inferred quite a number of rules relating the life-history features of the live-bearing tetrapods (terrestrial placental mammals) that he studied. Among these correct predictions are the following. Brood size decreases with (adult) body mass, so that an elephant has fewer young (usually just one) per brood than a mouse. Lifespan increases with gestation period, and also with body mass, so that elephants live longer than mice, have a longer period of gestation, and are heavier. As a final example, fecundity decreases with lifespan, so long-lived kinds like elephants have fewer young in total than short-lived kinds like mice. and the situation: Albert is a scientist who travels the planet looking for new species to discover and analyze. While on a safari in Australia, Albert discovered two new species of live-bearing tetrapods. In the first species, species C, the females had long gestational periods. In the second species, species D, the females had short gestational periods. Answer the following question: Which species will have longer living individuals????
output answer: species C

Given the background: However, the addition of a metal catalyst, such as platinum, provides a lower energy pathway. The energy requirements for breaking the H-H bond are offset somewhat if each hydrogen atom can form a new bond with the metal surface. Then, collisions between the alkene and the metal-hydrogen complex result in the formation of a product. The metal surface is regenerated after the hydrogen atoms are removed, so it is not used up by the reaction, but it increases the rate by stabilizing the high energy hydrogen atoms. and the situation: Michael and Robert are both performing a chemistry experiment. The reaction they are performing uses alkenes and hydrogen as reactants. Michael performs the experiment without any additional materials, while Robert performs the experiment while using a platinum catalyst. Answer the following question: Who will have a lower reaction rate in their experiments?
----
Answer: Michael

Q: Given the background: The stronger of two acids will have a higher Ka than the weaker acid; the ratio of hydrogen ions to acid will be higher for the stronger acid as the stronger acid has a greater tendency to lose its proton. Because the range of possible values for Ka spans many orders of magnitude, a more manageable constant, pKa is more frequently used, where pKa = log10 Ka. Stronger acids have a smaller pKa than weaker acids. Experimentally determined pKa at 25 C in aqueous solution are often quoted in textbooks and reference material. and the situation: Jacob and Thomas were conducting an experiment in a chemistry class. The goal of the experiment was to identify the strength of unknown acids by examining the products formed in a chemical reaction. After they completed the experiment, Jacob concluded that he was given a strong acid, while Thomas concluded that he was given a weak acid. Answer the following question: Which person's acid, Jacob's or Thomas's, will have a greater tendency to lose its protons?
A: Jacob's

Question: Given the background: A mycorrhiza (Greek for "fungus roots") is a symbiotic association between a fungus and the roots of a plant. In a mycorrhizal association, the fungus may colonize the roots of a host plant by either growing directly into the root cells, or by growing around the root cells. This association provides the fungus with relatively constant and direct access to glucose, which the plant produces by photosynthesis. The mycelia of the fungi increase the surface area of the plant's root system. The larger surface area improves water and mineral nutrient absorption from the soil. and the situation: Fox and Ken were two aspiring horticulturists. Ken studied more about plant pollination, while Fox studied about mycorrhizal fungi. Answer the following question: Which friend read more about the mycelia of the fungi increasing the surface area of the plant's root system?
Answer: Fox

[Q]: Given the background: In addition to insects, weeds have also been a menace to farmers - just ask anyone with a garden how much they hate weeds. They can quickly compete for water and nutrients needed by other plants. Sure, farmers can use herbicides to kill weeds, but do these chemicals also harm the crops? Can biotechnology help with this issue? Some crops have also been genetically engineered to acquire tolerance to the herbicides - allowing the crops to grow, but killing the weeds. But the lack of cost effective herbicides with a broad range of activity - that do not harm crops - is a problem in weed management. Multiple applications of numerous herbicides are routinely needed to control the wide range of weeds that are harmful to crops. And at times these herbicides are being used as a preventive measure that is, spraying to prevent weeds from developing rather than spraying after weeds form. So these chemicals are being added to crops. This practice is followed by mechanical and/or hand weeding to control weeds that are not controlled by the chemicals. Crops that are tolerant of herbicides would obviously be a tremendous benefit to farmers ( Figure above ). The introduction of herbicide tolerant crops has the potential to reduce the number of chemicals needed during a growing season, thereby increasing crop yield due to improved weed management and decreased harm to the crops. and the situation: Vince had a small rural farm. He needed to increase production and efficiency, so he started using herbicides. Danny was one of his farmer friends, he had a small acreage farm and he practiced permaculture, so no pesticides. Answer the following question: Which farmer didn't increase the crop yield?
****
[A]: Danny

Problem: Given the question: Given the background: Biodiversity loss is the extinction of species (plant or animal) worldwide, and also the local reduction or loss of species in a certain habitat. The latter phenomenon can be temporary or permanent, depending on whether the environmental degradation that leads to the loss is reversible through ecological restoration / ecological resilience or effectively permanent (e.g. through land loss). Global extinction has so far been proven to be irreversible. Even though permanent global species loss is a more dramatic phenomenon than regional changes in species composition, even minor changes from a healthy stable state can have dramatic influence on the food web and the food chain insofar as reductions in only one species can adversely affect the entire chain (coextinction), leading to an overall reduction in biodiversity, possible alternative stable states of an ecosystem notwithstanding. Ecological effects of biodiversity are usually counteracted by its loss. Reduced biodiversity in particular leads to reduced ecosystem services and eventually poses an immediate danger for food security, also for humankind.[1] and the situation: Two neighboring lands experienced different climates. In Iceland, the actions of its people lead to a loss of animal and plant species. Denmark tried to keep the environment untouched as they understood its importance and the climate was unaffected. Answer the following question: Which country has to do more ecological restoration?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The answer is:
Iceland