You successfully clone an organism and are excited to publish your feat in Nature. However, a skeptical reviewer is not convinced because your donor cell could have been a stem cell, therefore undifferentiated and more amenable to somatic cell nuclear transfer. Furthermore, given the inefficiency of the process, the reviewer questions whether you may have produced a parthenote, not a clone. What data do you show the reviewer to convince them that your donor cell was fully specialized and that its genes directed the development of the new organism

i believe the answer is c

i think that is new experiments yield untrustworthy data and should be carefully considered, because you don't know what will happen with the experiments.

1: most common garden plants prefer loam — soils with a balance of different-sized mineral particles (approximately 40% sand, 40% silt, and 20% clay) with ample organic matter and pore space. however, some plants grow better in sandy soils, while others are well-adapted to clay soils.

2: available water capacity is the maximum amount of plant available water a soil can provide. it is an indicator of a soil's ability to retain water and make it sufficiently available for plant use. available water capacity is the water held in soil between its field capacity and permanent wilting point.

3: it is the same for all living things (plants and animals). it also includes very tiny organisms that our eyes cannot see. they are known as microorganisms, and include viruses, bacteria and fungi.

multiply it by 5 in order for you to understand i cant give an exact answer.