Which best explains whether or not triangles RST and ACB are congruent? The figures are congruent. ΔRST can be mapped to ΔACB by a reflection over the x-axis and a translation 2 units to the left.

The figures are congruent. ΔRST can be mapped to ΔACB by a reflection over the y-axis and a translation 2 units down.

The figures are not congruent. Point R corresponds to point A, but S corresponds to B and T corresponds to C.

The figures are not congruent. Point R does not correspond with point A.

Correct option: first one

Step-by-step explanation:

If we reflect the triangle RST over the x-axis, the y-coordinate of each point will have the sign switched, so the point S would be in (1, -5), the point R would be in (1, -1) and the point T would be in (4, -1)

Then, if we translate the resulting points 2 units to the left, we would have:

S = (-1, -5) -> matches point C

R = (-1, -1) -> matches point A

T = (2, -1) -> matches point B

So the triangles are congruent, and we can map from triangle RST to triangle ACB with a reflection over the x-axis and a translation of 2 units to the left.

Correct option: first one

it would be:

c.parallelogram.