Explore BrainMass
Share

Study Question

This content was STOLEN from BrainMass.com - View the original, and get the already-completed solution here!

A minature end plate potential (MEPP) is :

Which of the following

A quantal depolarization that occurs at the specialized region of a muscle fiber (end plate) at a neuromuscular junction.

Is produced by the activation of post-synaptic receptors by the ligand acetylcholine (a neurotransmitter)

Causes hyperpolarization of the muscle cell membrane

is the result of sodium and potassium flux through post synaptic acetylcholine receptors

generates an action potential across the muscle fiber membrane

© BrainMass Inc. brainmass.com October 16, 2018, 5:04 pm ad1c9bdddf
https://brainmass.com/biology/human-biology/study-question-43499

Solution Preview

Of the five options given, more than one is correct. I'll go through each option and let you know why it is or is not correct.

A quantal depolarization that occurs at the specialized region of a muscle fiber (end plate) at a neuromuscular juntction. TRUE This is the definition of an MEPP. It means that a specific measurable response that depolarizes (like an action potential) and ...

$2.19
Similar Posting

Discussion Question: Use of hypotheses and hypothesis testing

See attached article.

Review the following articles given under your week 1 Articles - Electronic Reserve Readings link, and write a short synopsis (200 -300 words) of the main points and learning takeaways. In your response, refer to your Seward text readings for week 1, to support your analysis.

THE PURPOSE OF HYPOTHESES
Hypotheses are the central tool of scientific observation. Because the core method of scientific investigation is the comparison of expectations against observations of the world, scientists need to make clear statements about their expectations. A hypothesis is a concise, falsifiable statement that is subjected to observational testing as part of a scientific investigation.
Scientific research generally starts with a question about the observable world. In the social sciences research questions focus on human behavior—especially behavior related to groups (e.g., communities, countries, or societies). The scientific method says nothing about the origins of these research questions (just as it says nothing about the content of the areas of research). The scientific method simply requires that a scientist state an answer to this question (the hypothesis) that can be tested with observations (hypothesis testing).
There is a bewildering array of potential research questions—and thus hypotheses—in the domain of social science. Hypotheses can focus on expectations about voting behavior, the tendency of nations to go to war, or the factors that contribute to juvenile delinquency or to decisions about where to live (among many, many other hypotheses).
The purpose of the hypothesis is to ease the task of testing an expectation with observations of the world. A good hypothesis, then, is one that is easily tested. The ease of testing contributes to a second key aspect of the scientific method: reproducibility of testing. A clearly worded hypothesis can be tested repeatedly by a scientist and, maybe more important, by other scientists (King, Keohane, and Verba 1994, pp. 28-29).
Consider the following example. A social scientist may hypothesize that smaller class sizes in secondary schools will lead to higher performance on standardized tests. Because it is easy to observe the number of students in a class and the standardized tests scores are also easily observable (though there may be questions of the validity of the test as a measure of "intelligence" or even "academic achievement"), this hypothesis is easy to test. The test itself is also easy to replicate by the original social scientist or by other investigators. The hypothesis is sufficiently clear that any observer would be able to tell whether people in the smaller classes actually performed better on standardized tests. The judgment, then, is not a product of the specific observer but is instead independent of the identity of the scientist (a subject of some controversy that is discussed in a later section).

(see attached file for remainder of the article)

View Full Posting Details