Scientists tracking the populations of certain freshwater fish have found an increase in the female to male ratio of several smaller fish species over the last 10 years. one group of scientists have analyzed the data and hypothesized that medications in wastewater have contributed to this change in fish populations. another group of scientists have hypothesized that this population trend is part of a cycle related to climate and ecosystem changes. if these two groups of scientists have access to the same population data, why have they formed two very different hypotheses?

I believe that the answer to the question provided above is that they formed two very different hypotheses since it is what they saw according to what they knew. Also hypothesis is just an intelligent guess.
Hope my answer would be a great help for you.    If you have more questions feel free to ask here at .

For cyclohexane compounds drawn in a chair conformation:   -axial bonds are vertical  -equatorial bonds are parallel to two bonds within the ring.  thus, as i assume the chair conformation is drawn:   -the x group is in an axial position, as are the five other vertical bonds.  -three axial bonds are on the top face of the ring  -the other three axial bonds are on the bottom face  the position of the second substituent on each ring carbon is equatorial.  gauche groups must be on an adjacent carbon such as carbon 6 and carbon 2, and also gauche groups are rotated by 60 degrees relative to each other.  drawing the newman projections for c1–c2 and c1–c6 aids in visualizing the groups that are gauche to the y group on c1.  click this link and watch some academic videos that may you more understand the topic