Picking up sediment and moving it to another area is called
a.
abrasion
c.
deflation
b.
deposits
d.
sand blasting

c. deflation

Explanation:

Deflation can be defined as the erosion by wind in which the loose materials from typically flat, dry, uncemented areas are taken away or translocated by the winds to other locations. This phenomena can be seen in dry lake beds, glacial plains, deserts and floodplains.

Therefore, Picking up sediment and moving it to another area is called deflation.

Option (B)

Explanation:

Deflation is defined as an erosional process where the wind is the agent that picks up sediments from one particular place and are transported and deposited in a different place. This mostly carries fine-grained, loose materials such as silt and clay, up to about hundreds of kilometers, which are deposited in a different place, forming loess deposits. This deflation process generally takes place in areas such as desert, dry lake beds, floodplains, as well as glacial outwash plains.

Thus, the correct answer is option (B).

1. the question asks the most appropriate, which seems to rule out "all of the above." your choice appears to be the correct one.

2. the protocol described is good for identifying correlation, but not cause and effect. for cause/effect, you need to devise a protocol that will assign the treatment (or not) to groups that have essentially the same "demographics" with respect to all the other variables. your choice regarding control group seems appropriate. random assignment of treatment (choice d) may be appropriate also. (i think you can argue that b and d are just different descriptions of the same method.)

3. d will randomize the birds, but may not guarantee there are 10 in each group. e will do both, so seems the better choice.

comment on question 2

based on the problem statement, it seems clear that confident, attentive drivers are more likely to use daytime running lights. so, the protocol might need to be devised in such a way that the lights would be turned on or off without the driver's knowledge. (an attentive driver will figure it out.) assigning a confident, attentive driver to a group required to drive without running lights might mess with his/her confidence and attentiveness. you don't want your experiment to do that. (nor do you want the experiment to subject a driver to greater risk of accident as a consequence of driving without running lights.) experiments involving human safety are always problematic.

the answer for sodium is 0.186

the answer for rubidium is 0.251