MC
306f_fb34
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 87 | (87-90)²⁄ 87 | 0.103 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 23 | (23-30)²⁄ 23 | 2.130 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 35 | (35-30)²⁄ 35 | 0.714 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 15 | (15-10)²⁄ 15 | 1.667 |
| (sum) χ² = | 4.615 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 87 | (87-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.100 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 23 | (23-30)²⁄ 30 | 1.633 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 35 | (35-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.833 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 15 | (15-10)²⁄ 10 | 2.500 |
| (sum) χ² = | 5.067 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 87 | (87-90)⁄ 90 | -0.033 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 23 | (23-30)⁄ 30 | -0.233 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 35 | (35-30)⁄ 30 | 0.167 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 15 | (15-10)⁄ 10 | 0.500 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.400 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 4.615 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 5.067 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.400 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 4.615 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 5.067 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 3 with χ² = 0.400 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MCc375_7e88
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 79 | (79-90)²⁄ 90 | 1.344 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 23 | (23-30)²⁄ 30 | 1.633 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 39 | (39-30)²⁄ 30 | 2.700 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 10 | 8.100 |
| (sum) χ² = | 13.778 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 79 | (79-90)⁄ 90 | -0.122 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 23 | (23-30)⁄ 30 | -0.233 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 39 | (39-30)⁄ 30 | 0.300 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)⁄ 10 | 0.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.844 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 79 | (79-90)²⁄ 79² | 0.019 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 23 | (23-30)²⁄ 23² | 0.093 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 39 | (39-30)²⁄ 39² | 0.053 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 19² | 0.224 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.390 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 13.778 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 0.844 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.390 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 13.778 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.844 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.390 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MCb274_68d9
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 97 | (97-90)⁄ 90 | 0.078 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 30 | (30-30)⁄ 30 | 0.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 26 | (26-30)⁄ 30 | -0.133 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 7 | (7-10)⁄ 10 | -0.300 |
| (sum) χ² = | -0.356 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 97 | (97-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.544 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 30 | (30-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 26 | (26-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.533 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 7 | (7-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 1.978 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 97 | (97-90)²⁄ 97 | 0.505 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 30 | (30-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 26 | (26-30)²⁄ 26 | 0.615 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 7 | (7-10)²⁄ 7 | 1.286 |
| (sum) χ² = | 2.406 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = -0.356 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 1.978 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 2.406 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = -0.356 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 1.978 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 3 with χ² = 2.406 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MCd9d7_3815
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 82 | (82-90)²⁄ 82 | 0.780 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 29 | (29-30)²⁄ 29 | 0.034 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 36 | (36-30)²⁄ 36 | 1.000 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 13 | (13-10)²⁄ 13 | 0.692 |
| (sum) χ² = | 2.507 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 82 | (82-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.711 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 29 | (29-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.033 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 36 | (36-30)²⁄ 30 | 1.200 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 13 | (13-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 2.844 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 82 | (82-90)⁄ 90 | -0.089 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 29 | (29-30)⁄ 30 | -0.033 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 36 | (36-30)⁄ 30 | 0.200 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 13 | (13-10)⁄ 10 | 0.300 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.378 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 2.507 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 2.844 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.378 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 2.507 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 2.844 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 3 with χ² = 0.378 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC8aae_af1d
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 97 | (97-90)⁄ 90 | 0.078 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 27 | (27-30)⁄ 30 | -0.100 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 23 | (23-30)⁄ 30 | -0.233 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 13 | (13-10)⁄ 10 | 0.300 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.044 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 97 | (97-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.544 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 27 | (27-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.300 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 23 | (23-30)²⁄ 30 | 1.633 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 13 | (13-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 3.378 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 97 | (97-90)²⁄ 97² | 0.005 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 27 | (27-30)²⁄ 27² | 0.012 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 23 | (23-30)²⁄ 23² | 0.093 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 13 | (13-10)²⁄ 13² | 0.053 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.163 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.044 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 3.378 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.163 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 0.044 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 3.378 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 3 with χ² = 0.163 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC3d6f_5458
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 79 | (79-90)²⁄ 79 | 1.532 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 23 | (23-30)²⁄ 23 | 2.130 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 41 | (41-30)²⁄ 41 | 2.951 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 17 | (17-10)²⁄ 17 | 2.882 |
| (sum) χ² = | 9.496 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 79 | (79-90)⁄ 90 | -0.122 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 23 | (23-30)⁄ 30 | -0.233 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 41 | (41-30)⁄ 30 | 0.367 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 17 | (17-10)⁄ 10 | 0.700 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.711 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 79 | (79-90)²⁄ 90 | 1.344 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 23 | (23-30)²⁄ 30 | 1.633 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 41 | (41-30)²⁄ 30 | 4.033 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 17 | (17-10)²⁄ 10 | 4.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 11.911 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 9.496 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.711 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 11.911 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 1 with χ² = 9.496 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.711 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 11.911 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC0ef4_b001
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.400 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 31 | (31-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.033 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 30 | (30-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.000 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 15 | (15-10)²⁄ 10 | 2.500 |
| (sum) χ² = | 2.933 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)⁄ 90 | -0.067 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 31 | (31-30)⁄ 30 | 0.033 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 30 | (30-30)⁄ 30 | 0.000 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 15 | (15-10)⁄ 10 | 0.500 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.467 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)²⁄ 84² | 0.005 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 31 | (31-30)²⁄ 31² | 0.001 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 30 | (30-30)²⁄ 30² | 0.000 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 15 | (15-10)²⁄ 15² | 0.111 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.117 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 2.933 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.467 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.117 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 2.933 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 0.467 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.117 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC3b14_d7a9
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 74 | (74-90)²⁄ 74² | 0.047 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 21 | (21-30)²⁄ 21² | 0.184 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 49 | (49-30)²⁄ 49² | 0.150 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 16 | (16-10)²⁄ 16² | 0.141 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.521 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 74 | (74-90)²⁄ 90 | 2.844 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 21 | (21-30)²⁄ 30 | 2.700 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 49 | (49-30)²⁄ 30 | 12.033 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 16 | (16-10)²⁄ 10 | 3.600 |
| (sum) χ² = | 21.178 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 74 | (74-90)⁄ 90 | -0.178 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 21 | (21-30)⁄ 30 | -0.300 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 49 | (49-30)⁄ 30 | 0.633 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 16 | (16-10)⁄ 10 | 0.600 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.756 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.521 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 21.178 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 3 with χ² = 0.756 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 0.521 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 21.178 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.756 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC89a9_795e
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 76 | (76-90)²⁄ 76² | 0.034 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 23 | (23-30)²⁄ 23² | 0.093 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 43 | (43-30)²⁄ 43² | 0.091 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 18 | (18-10)²⁄ 18² | 0.198 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.415 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 76 | (76-90)⁄ 90 | -0.156 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 23 | (23-30)⁄ 30 | -0.233 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 43 | (43-30)⁄ 30 | 0.433 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 18 | (18-10)⁄ 10 | 0.800 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.844 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 76 | (76-90)²⁄ 90 | 2.178 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 23 | (23-30)²⁄ 30 | 1.633 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 43 | (43-30)²⁄ 30 | 5.633 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 18 | (18-10)²⁄ 10 | 6.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 15.844 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.415 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.844 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 15.844 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 1 with χ² = 0.415 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.844 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 15.844 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC2697_918f
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 87 | (87-90)²⁄ 87 | 0.103 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 37 | (37-30)²⁄ 37 | 1.324 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 29 | (29-30)²⁄ 29 | 0.034 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 7 | (7-10)²⁄ 7 | 1.286 |
| (sum) χ² = | 2.748 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 87 | (87-90)²⁄ 87² | 0.001 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 37 | (37-30)²⁄ 37² | 0.036 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 29 | (29-30)²⁄ 29² | 0.001 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 7 | (7-10)²⁄ 7² | 0.184 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.222 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 87 | (87-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.100 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 37 | (37-30)²⁄ 30 | 1.633 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 29 | (29-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.033 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 7 | (7-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 2.667 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 2.748 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.222 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 2.667 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 2.748 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.222 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 2.667 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct MC3fa2_8d06
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 98 | (98-90)²⁄ 98² | 0.007 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 31 | (31-30)²⁄ 31² | 0.001 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 23 | (23-30)²⁄ 23² | 0.093 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)²⁄ 8² | 0.062 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.163 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 98 | (98-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.711 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 31 | (31-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.033 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 23 | (23-30)²⁄ 30 | 1.633 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 2.778 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 98 | (98-90)⁄ 90 | 0.089 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 31 | (31-30)⁄ 30 | 0.033 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 23 | (23-30)⁄ 30 | -0.233 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)⁄ 10 | -0.200 |
| (sum) χ² = | -0.311 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.163 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 2.778 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = -0.311 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 0.163 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 2.778 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 3 with χ² = -0.311 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC9c80_e2a5
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 72 | (72-90)²⁄ 90 | 3.600 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 24 | (24-30)²⁄ 30 | 1.200 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 45 | (45-30)²⁄ 30 | 7.500 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 10 | 8.100 |
| (sum) χ² = | 20.400 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 72 | (72-90)²⁄ 72 | 4.500 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 24 | (24-30)²⁄ 24 | 1.500 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 45 | (45-30)²⁄ 45 | 5.000 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 19 | 4.263 |
| (sum) χ² = | 15.263 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 72 | (72-90)⁄ 90 | -0.200 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 24 | (24-30)⁄ 30 | -0.200 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 45 | (45-30)⁄ 30 | 0.500 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)⁄ 10 | 0.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 1.000 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 20.400 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 15.263 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 1.000 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 20.400 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 15.263 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 1.000 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC8033_5ac9
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 96 | (96-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.400 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.833 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 33 | (33-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.300 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 6 | (6-10)²⁄ 10 | 1.600 |
| (sum) χ² = | 3.133 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 96 | (96-90)²⁄ 96² | 0.004 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)²⁄ 25² | 0.040 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 33 | (33-30)²⁄ 33² | 0.008 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 6 | (6-10)²⁄ 6² | 0.444 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.497 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 96 | (96-90)²⁄ 96 | 0.375 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)²⁄ 25 | 1.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 33 | (33-30)²⁄ 33 | 0.273 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 6 | (6-10)²⁄ 6 | 2.667 |
| (sum) χ² = | 4.314 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 3.133 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.497 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 4.314 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 3.133 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 0.497 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 4.314 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MCfe15_176f
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 81 | (81-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.900 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 14 | (14-30)²⁄ 30 | 8.533 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 48 | (48-30)²⁄ 30 | 10.800 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 17 | (17-10)²⁄ 10 | 4.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 25.133 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 81 | (81-90)⁄ 90 | -0.100 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 14 | (14-30)⁄ 30 | -0.533 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 48 | (48-30)⁄ 30 | 0.600 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 17 | (17-10)⁄ 10 | 0.700 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.667 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 81 | (81-90)²⁄ 81 | 1.000 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 14 | (14-30)²⁄ 14 | 18.286 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 48 | (48-30)²⁄ 48 | 6.750 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 17 | (17-10)²⁄ 17 | 2.882 |
| (sum) χ² = | 28.918 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 25.133 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 0.667 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 28.918 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 25.133 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.667 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 28.918 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC0c63_deeb
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 83 | (83-90)⁄ 90 | -0.078 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 15 | (15-30)⁄ 30 | -0.500 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 43 | (43-30)⁄ 30 | 0.433 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)⁄ 10 | 0.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.756 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 83 | (83-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.544 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 15 | (15-30)²⁄ 30 | 7.500 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 43 | (43-30)²⁄ 30 | 5.633 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 10 | 8.100 |
| (sum) χ² = | 21.778 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 83 | (83-90)²⁄ 83 | 0.590 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 15 | (15-30)²⁄ 15 | 15.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 43 | (43-30)²⁄ 43 | 3.930 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 19 | 4.263 |
| (sum) χ² = | 23.784 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.756 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 21.778 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 3 with χ² = 23.784 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 0.756 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 21.778 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 23.784 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MCdb12_69bb
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 96 | (96-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.400 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 26 | (26-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.533 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 26 | (26-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.533 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 12 | (12-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 1.867 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 96 | (96-90)²⁄ 96 | 0.375 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 26 | (26-30)²⁄ 26 | 0.615 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 26 | (26-30)²⁄ 26 | 0.615 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 12 | (12-10)²⁄ 12 | 0.333 |
| (sum) χ² = | 1.939 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 96 | (96-90)⁄ 90 | 0.067 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 26 | (26-30)⁄ 30 | -0.133 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 26 | (26-30)⁄ 30 | -0.133 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 12 | (12-10)⁄ 10 | 0.200 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.000 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 1.867 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 1.939 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.000 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 1.867 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 1.939 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.000 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MCbf1f_e32c
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 80 | (80-90)²⁄ 80² | 0.016 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 20 | (20-30)²⁄ 20² | 0.250 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 43 | (43-30)²⁄ 43² | 0.091 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 17 | (17-10)²⁄ 17² | 0.170 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.527 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 80 | (80-90)⁄ 90 | -0.111 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 20 | (20-30)⁄ 30 | -0.333 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 43 | (43-30)⁄ 30 | 0.433 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 17 | (17-10)⁄ 10 | 0.700 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.689 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 80 | (80-90)²⁄ 90 | 1.111 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 20 | (20-30)²⁄ 30 | 3.333 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 43 | (43-30)²⁄ 30 | 5.633 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 17 | (17-10)²⁄ 10 | 4.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 14.978 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.527 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.689 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 14.978 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 1 with χ² = 0.527 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.689 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 14.978 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC6960_8b39
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 82 | (82-90)⁄ 90 | -0.089 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 32 | (32-30)⁄ 30 | 0.067 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 33 | (33-30)⁄ 30 | 0.100 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 13 | (13-10)⁄ 10 | 0.300 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.378 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 82 | (82-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.711 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 32 | (32-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.133 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 33 | (33-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.300 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 13 | (13-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 2.044 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 82 | (82-90)²⁄ 82 | 0.780 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 32 | (32-30)²⁄ 32 | 0.125 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 33 | (33-30)²⁄ 33 | 0.273 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 13 | (13-10)²⁄ 13 | 0.692 |
| (sum) χ² = | 1.871 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.378 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 2.044 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 1.871 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 0.378 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 2.044 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 3 with χ² = 1.871 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MCa896_bae6
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 78 | (78-90)²⁄ 78² | 0.024 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 26 | (26-30)²⁄ 26² | 0.024 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 41 | (41-30)²⁄ 41² | 0.072 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 15 | (15-10)²⁄ 15² | 0.111 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.230 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 78 | (78-90)²⁄ 78 | 1.846 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 26 | (26-30)²⁄ 26 | 0.615 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 41 | (41-30)²⁄ 41 | 2.951 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 15 | (15-10)²⁄ 15 | 1.667 |
| (sum) χ² = | 7.079 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 78 | (78-90)²⁄ 90 | 1.600 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 26 | (26-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.533 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 41 | (41-30)²⁄ 30 | 4.033 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 15 | (15-10)²⁄ 10 | 2.500 |
| (sum) χ² = | 8.667 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.230 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 7.079 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 8.667 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 1 with χ² = 0.230 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 7.079 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 8.667 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MCac67_c8da
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 103 | (103-90)²⁄ 90 | 1.878 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 26 | (26-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.533 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.833 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 6 | (6-10)²⁄ 10 | 1.600 |
| (sum) χ² = | 4.844 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 103 | (103-90)²⁄ 103² | 0.016 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 26 | (26-30)²⁄ 26² | 0.024 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)²⁄ 25² | 0.040 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 6 | (6-10)²⁄ 6² | 0.444 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.524 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 103 | (103-90)²⁄ 103 | 1.641 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 26 | (26-30)²⁄ 26 | 0.615 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)²⁄ 25 | 1.000 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 6 | (6-10)²⁄ 6 | 2.667 |
| (sum) χ² = | 5.923 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 4.844 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.524 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 5.923 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 4.844 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 0.524 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 5.923 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MCda57_e51a
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 100 | (100-90)⁄ 90 | 0.111 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 26 | (26-30)⁄ 30 | -0.133 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 29 | (29-30)⁄ 30 | -0.033 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 5 | (5-10)⁄ 10 | -0.500 |
| (sum) χ² = | -0.556 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 100 | (100-90)²⁄ 100 | 1.000 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 26 | (26-30)²⁄ 26 | 0.615 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 29 | (29-30)²⁄ 29 | 0.034 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 5 | (5-10)²⁄ 5 | 5.000 |
| (sum) χ² = | 6.650 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 100 | (100-90)²⁄ 90 | 1.111 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 26 | (26-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.533 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 29 | (29-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.033 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 5 | (5-10)²⁄ 10 | 2.500 |
| (sum) χ² = | 4.178 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = -0.556 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 6.650 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 4.178 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = -0.556 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 6.650 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 4.178 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct MCc5f4_09ff
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 97 | (97-90)²⁄ 97² | 0.005 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 30 | (30-30)²⁄ 30² | 0.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)²⁄ 25² | 0.040 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)²⁄ 8² | 0.062 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.108 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 97 | (97-90)⁄ 90 | 0.078 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 30 | (30-30)⁄ 30 | 0.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)⁄ 30 | -0.167 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)⁄ 10 | -0.200 |
| (sum) χ² = | -0.289 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 97 | (97-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.544 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 30 | (30-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.833 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 1.778 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.108 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = -0.289 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 1.778 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 0.108 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = -0.289 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 1.778 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct MCfbd9_fc35
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 85 | (85-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.278 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 13 | (13-30)²⁄ 30 | 9.633 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 44 | (44-30)²⁄ 30 | 6.533 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 18 | (18-10)²⁄ 10 | 6.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 22.844 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 85 | (85-90)⁄ 90 | -0.056 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 13 | (13-30)⁄ 30 | -0.567 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 44 | (44-30)⁄ 30 | 0.467 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 18 | (18-10)⁄ 10 | 0.800 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.644 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 85 | (85-90)²⁄ 85 | 0.294 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 13 | (13-30)²⁄ 13 | 22.231 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 44 | (44-30)²⁄ 44 | 4.455 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 18 | (18-10)²⁄ 18 | 3.556 |
| (sum) χ² = | 30.535 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 22.844 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 0.644 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 30.535 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 22.844 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.644 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 30.535 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC5174_761c
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 87 | (87-90)²⁄ 87 | 0.103 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 29 | (29-30)²⁄ 29 | 0.034 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 31 | (31-30)²⁄ 31 | 0.032 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 13 | (13-10)²⁄ 13 | 0.692 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.862 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 87 | (87-90)²⁄ 87² | 0.001 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 29 | (29-30)²⁄ 29² | 0.001 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 31 | (31-30)²⁄ 31² | 0.001 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 13 | (13-10)²⁄ 13² | 0.053 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.057 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 87 | (87-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.100 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 29 | (29-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.033 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 31 | (31-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.033 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 13 | (13-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 1.067 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.862 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.057 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 1.067 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 0.862 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.057 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 1.067 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct MCd063_c7f8
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 99 | (99-90)²⁄ 99² | 0.008 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 24 | (24-30)²⁄ 24² | 0.062 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 32 | (32-30)²⁄ 32² | 0.004 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 5 | (5-10)²⁄ 5² | 1.000 |
| (sum) χ² = | 1.075 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 99 | (99-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.900 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 24 | (24-30)²⁄ 30 | 1.200 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 32 | (32-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.133 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 5 | (5-10)²⁄ 10 | 2.500 |
| (sum) χ² = | 4.733 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 99 | (99-90)⁄ 90 | 0.100 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 24 | (24-30)⁄ 30 | -0.200 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 32 | (32-30)⁄ 30 | 0.067 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 5 | (5-10)⁄ 10 | -0.500 |
| (sum) χ² = | -0.533 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 1.075 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 4.733 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = -0.533 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 1.075 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 4.733 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 3 with χ² = -0.533 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC3ba9_a699
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 73 | (73-90)²⁄ 73 | 3.959 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 17 | (17-30)²⁄ 17 | 9.941 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 56 | (56-30)²⁄ 56 | 12.071 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 14 | (14-10)²⁄ 14 | 1.143 |
| (sum) χ² = | 27.114 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 73 | (73-90)²⁄ 90 | 3.211 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 17 | (17-30)²⁄ 30 | 5.633 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 56 | (56-30)²⁄ 30 | 22.533 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 14 | (14-10)²⁄ 10 | 1.600 |
| (sum) χ² = | 32.978 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 73 | (73-90)⁄ 90 | -0.189 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 17 | (17-30)⁄ 30 | -0.433 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 56 | (56-30)⁄ 30 | 0.867 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 14 | (14-10)⁄ 10 | 0.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.644 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 27.114 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 32.978 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 3 with χ² = 0.644 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 27.114 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 32.978 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.644 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC7329_88c3
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 75 | (75-90)²⁄ 75² | 0.040 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 22 | (22-30)²⁄ 22² | 0.132 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 46 | (46-30)²⁄ 46² | 0.121 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 17 | (17-10)²⁄ 17² | 0.170 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.463 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 75 | (75-90)²⁄ 90 | 2.500 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 22 | (22-30)²⁄ 30 | 2.133 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 46 | (46-30)²⁄ 30 | 8.533 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 17 | (17-10)²⁄ 10 | 4.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 18.067 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 75 | (75-90)⁄ 90 | -0.167 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 22 | (22-30)⁄ 30 | -0.267 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 46 | (46-30)⁄ 30 | 0.533 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 17 | (17-10)⁄ 10 | 0.700 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.800 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.463 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 18.067 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 3 with χ² = 0.800 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 0.463 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 18.067 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.800 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC6ba3_85ef
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 104 | (104-90)²⁄ 104² | 0.018 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 30 | (30-30)²⁄ 30² | 0.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 20 | (20-30)²⁄ 20² | 0.250 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 6 | (6-10)²⁄ 6² | 0.444 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.713 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 104 | (104-90)⁄ 90 | 0.156 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 30 | (30-30)⁄ 30 | 0.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 20 | (20-30)⁄ 30 | -0.333 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 6 | (6-10)⁄ 10 | -0.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | -0.578 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 104 | (104-90)²⁄ 90 | 2.178 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 30 | (30-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 20 | (20-30)²⁄ 30 | 3.333 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 6 | (6-10)²⁄ 10 | 1.600 |
| (sum) χ² = | 7.111 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.713 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = -0.578 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 7.111 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 0.713 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = -0.578 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 7.111 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct MCbf2b_26ae
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 103 | (103-90)⁄ 90 | 0.144 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)⁄ 30 | -0.167 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 24 | (24-30)⁄ 30 | -0.200 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)⁄ 10 | -0.200 |
| (sum) χ² = | -0.422 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 103 | (103-90)²⁄ 103 | 1.641 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)²⁄ 25 | 1.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 24 | (24-30)²⁄ 24 | 1.500 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)²⁄ 8 | 0.500 |
| (sum) χ² = | 4.641 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 103 | (103-90)²⁄ 90 | 1.878 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.833 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 24 | (24-30)²⁄ 30 | 1.200 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 4.311 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = -0.422 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 4.641 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 4.311 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = -0.422 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 4.641 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 4.311 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct MC1e1b_92e5
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 85 | (85-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.278 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 17 | (17-30)²⁄ 30 | 5.633 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 41 | (41-30)²⁄ 30 | 4.033 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 17 | (17-10)²⁄ 10 | 4.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 14.844 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 85 | (85-90)⁄ 90 | -0.056 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 17 | (17-30)⁄ 30 | -0.433 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 41 | (41-30)⁄ 30 | 0.367 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 17 | (17-10)⁄ 10 | 0.700 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.578 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 85 | (85-90)²⁄ 85 | 0.294 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 17 | (17-30)²⁄ 17 | 9.941 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 41 | (41-30)²⁄ 41 | 2.951 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 17 | (17-10)²⁄ 17 | 2.882 |
| (sum) χ² = | 16.069 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 14.844 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 0.578 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 16.069 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 14.844 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.578 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 16.069 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC45f7_2d00
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 83 | (83-90)²⁄ 83 | 0.590 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 32 | (32-30)²⁄ 32 | 0.125 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 33 | (33-30)²⁄ 33 | 0.273 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 12 | (12-10)²⁄ 12 | 0.333 |
| (sum) χ² = | 1.321 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 83 | (83-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.544 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 32 | (32-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.133 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 33 | (33-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.300 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 12 | (12-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 1.378 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 83 | (83-90)⁄ 90 | -0.078 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 32 | (32-30)⁄ 30 | 0.067 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 33 | (33-30)⁄ 30 | 0.100 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 12 | (12-10)⁄ 10 | 0.200 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.289 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 1.321 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 1.378 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.289 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 1.321 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 1.378 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 3 with χ² = 0.289 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC8125_3d3d
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.400 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 18 | (18-30)²⁄ 30 | 4.800 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 43 | (43-30)²⁄ 30 | 5.633 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 15 | (15-10)²⁄ 10 | 2.500 |
| (sum) χ² = | 13.333 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)²⁄ 84² | 0.005 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 18 | (18-30)²⁄ 18² | 0.444 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 43 | (43-30)²⁄ 43² | 0.091 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 15 | (15-10)²⁄ 15² | 0.111 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.652 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)⁄ 90 | -0.067 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 18 | (18-30)⁄ 30 | -0.400 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 43 | (43-30)⁄ 30 | 0.433 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 15 | (15-10)⁄ 10 | 0.500 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.467 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 13.333 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 0.652 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.467 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 13.333 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.652 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.467 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC3ef7_a922
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 80 | (80-90)²⁄ 90 | 1.111 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 24 | (24-30)²⁄ 30 | 1.200 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 40 | (40-30)²⁄ 30 | 3.333 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 16 | (16-10)²⁄ 10 | 3.600 |
| (sum) χ² = | 9.244 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 80 | (80-90)²⁄ 80 | 1.250 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 24 | (24-30)²⁄ 24 | 1.500 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 40 | (40-30)²⁄ 40 | 2.500 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 16 | (16-10)²⁄ 16 | 2.250 |
| (sum) χ² = | 7.500 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 80 | (80-90)⁄ 90 | -0.111 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 24 | (24-30)⁄ 30 | -0.200 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 40 | (40-30)⁄ 30 | 0.333 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 16 | (16-10)⁄ 10 | 0.600 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.622 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 9.244 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 7.500 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.622 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 9.244 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 7.500 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.622 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MCe45a_85b5
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 102 | (102-90)²⁄ 90 | 1.600 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.833 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 27 | (27-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.300 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 6 | (6-10)²⁄ 10 | 1.600 |
| (sum) χ² = | 4.333 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 102 | (102-90)²⁄ 102 | 1.412 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)²⁄ 25 | 1.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 27 | (27-30)²⁄ 27 | 0.333 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 6 | (6-10)²⁄ 6 | 2.667 |
| (sum) χ² = | 5.412 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 102 | (102-90)²⁄ 102² | 0.014 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)²⁄ 25² | 0.040 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 27 | (27-30)²⁄ 27² | 0.012 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 6 | (6-10)²⁄ 6² | 0.444 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.511 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 4.333 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 5.412 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.511 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 4.333 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 5.412 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.511 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC78ce_5cdd
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 76 | (76-90)⁄ 90 | -0.156 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 20 | (20-30)⁄ 30 | -0.333 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 46 | (46-30)⁄ 30 | 0.533 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 18 | (18-10)⁄ 10 | 0.800 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.844 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 76 | (76-90)²⁄ 90 | 2.178 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 20 | (20-30)²⁄ 30 | 3.333 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 46 | (46-30)²⁄ 30 | 8.533 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 18 | (18-10)²⁄ 10 | 6.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 20.444 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 76 | (76-90)²⁄ 76 | 2.579 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 20 | (20-30)²⁄ 20 | 5.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 46 | (46-30)²⁄ 46 | 5.565 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 18 | (18-10)²⁄ 18 | 3.556 |
| (sum) χ² = | 16.700 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.844 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 20.444 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 3 with χ² = 16.700 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 0.844 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 20.444 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 16.700 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC29a1_61f2
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.400 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 39 | (39-30)²⁄ 30 | 2.700 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 29 | (29-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.033 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 3.533 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)⁄ 90 | -0.067 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 39 | (39-30)⁄ 30 | 0.300 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 29 | (29-30)⁄ 30 | -0.033 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)⁄ 10 | -0.200 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.000 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)²⁄ 84² | 0.005 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 39 | (39-30)²⁄ 39² | 0.053 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 29 | (29-30)²⁄ 29² | 0.001 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)²⁄ 8² | 0.062 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.122 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 3.533 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.000 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.122 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 3.533 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 0.000 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.122 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MCe4b2_d35d
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 77 | (77-90)²⁄ 90 | 1.878 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 39 | (39-30)²⁄ 30 | 2.700 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 37 | (37-30)²⁄ 30 | 1.633 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 7 | (7-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 7.111 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 77 | (77-90)²⁄ 77 | 2.195 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 39 | (39-30)²⁄ 39 | 2.077 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 37 | (37-30)²⁄ 37 | 1.324 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 7 | (7-10)²⁄ 7 | 1.286 |
| (sum) χ² = | 6.882 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 77 | (77-90)²⁄ 77² | 0.029 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 39 | (39-30)²⁄ 39² | 0.053 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 37 | (37-30)²⁄ 37² | 0.036 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 7 | (7-10)²⁄ 7² | 0.184 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.301 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 7.111 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 6.882 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.301 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 7.111 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 6.882 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.301 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MCceba_59e4
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 94 | (94-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.178 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 16 | (16-30)²⁄ 30 | 6.533 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 34 | (34-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.533 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 16 | (16-10)²⁄ 10 | 3.600 |
| (sum) χ² = | 10.844 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 94 | (94-90)²⁄ 94² | 0.002 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 16 | (16-30)²⁄ 16² | 0.766 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 34 | (34-30)²⁄ 34² | 0.014 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 16 | (16-10)²⁄ 16² | 0.141 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.922 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 94 | (94-90)²⁄ 94 | 0.170 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 16 | (16-30)²⁄ 16 | 12.250 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 34 | (34-30)²⁄ 34 | 0.471 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 16 | (16-10)²⁄ 16 | 2.250 |
| (sum) χ² = | 15.141 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 10.844 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 0.922 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 15.141 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 10.844 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.922 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 15.141 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC32c6_ed3f
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 104 | (104-90)²⁄ 104 | 1.885 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)²⁄ 25 | 1.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)²⁄ 25 | 1.000 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 6 | (6-10)²⁄ 6 | 2.667 |
| (sum) χ² = | 6.551 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 104 | (104-90)⁄ 90 | 0.156 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)⁄ 30 | -0.167 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)⁄ 30 | -0.167 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 6 | (6-10)⁄ 10 | -0.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | -0.578 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 104 | (104-90)²⁄ 90 | 2.178 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.833 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.833 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 6 | (6-10)²⁄ 10 | 1.600 |
| (sum) χ² = | 5.444 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 6.551 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = -0.578 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 5.444 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 6.551 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = -0.578 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 5.444 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct MC5776_9572
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 103 | (103-90)²⁄ 103² | 0.016 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 28 | (28-30)²⁄ 28² | 0.005 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 23 | (23-30)²⁄ 23² | 0.093 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 6 | (6-10)²⁄ 6² | 0.444 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.558 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 103 | (103-90)²⁄ 90 | 1.878 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 28 | (28-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.133 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 23 | (23-30)²⁄ 30 | 1.633 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 6 | (6-10)²⁄ 10 | 1.600 |
| (sum) χ² = | 5.244 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 103 | (103-90)⁄ 90 | 0.144 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 28 | (28-30)⁄ 30 | -0.067 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 23 | (23-30)⁄ 30 | -0.233 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 6 | (6-10)⁄ 10 | -0.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | -0.556 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.558 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 5.244 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = -0.556 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 0.558 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 5.244 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 3 with χ² = -0.556 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC375e_9876
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 87 | (87-90)²⁄ 87² | 0.001 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 19 | (19-30)²⁄ 19² | 0.335 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 40 | (40-30)²⁄ 40² | 0.062 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 14 | (14-10)²⁄ 14² | 0.082 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.481 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 87 | (87-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.100 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 19 | (19-30)²⁄ 30 | 4.033 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 40 | (40-30)²⁄ 30 | 3.333 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 14 | (14-10)²⁄ 10 | 1.600 |
| (sum) χ² = | 9.067 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 87 | (87-90)⁄ 90 | -0.033 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 19 | (19-30)⁄ 30 | -0.367 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 40 | (40-30)⁄ 30 | 0.333 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 14 | (14-10)⁄ 10 | 0.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.333 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.481 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 9.067 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 3 with χ² = 0.333 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 0.481 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 9.067 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.333 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC8e99_398b
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)⁄ 90 | -0.067 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 32 | (32-30)⁄ 30 | 0.067 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 32 | (32-30)⁄ 30 | 0.067 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 12 | (12-10)⁄ 10 | 0.200 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.267 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.400 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 32 | (32-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.133 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 32 | (32-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.133 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 12 | (12-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 1.067 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)²⁄ 84 | 0.429 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 32 | (32-30)²⁄ 32 | 0.125 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 32 | (32-30)²⁄ 32 | 0.125 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 12 | (12-10)²⁄ 12 | 0.333 |
| (sum) χ² = | 1.012 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.267 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 1.067 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 1.012 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 0.267 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 1.067 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 3 with χ² = 1.012 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC12e1_b058
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 93 | (93-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.100 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 29 | (29-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.033 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 30 | (30-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.000 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.533 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 93 | (93-90)⁄ 90 | 0.033 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 29 | (29-30)⁄ 30 | -0.033 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 30 | (30-30)⁄ 30 | 0.000 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)⁄ 10 | -0.200 |
| (sum) χ² = | -0.200 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 93 | (93-90)²⁄ 93 | 0.097 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 29 | (29-30)²⁄ 29 | 0.034 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 30 | (30-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.000 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)²⁄ 8 | 0.500 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.631 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.533 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = -0.200 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.631 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 0.533 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = -0.200 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.631 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC027f_6c53
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 79 | (79-90)²⁄ 79 | 1.532 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 33 | (33-30)²⁄ 33 | 0.273 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 41 | (41-30)²⁄ 41 | 2.951 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 7 | (7-10)²⁄ 7 | 1.286 |
| (sum) χ² = | 6.041 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 79 | (79-90)²⁄ 90 | 1.344 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 33 | (33-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.300 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 41 | (41-30)²⁄ 30 | 4.033 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 7 | (7-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 6.578 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 79 | (79-90)²⁄ 79² | 0.019 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 33 | (33-30)²⁄ 33² | 0.008 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 41 | (41-30)²⁄ 41² | 0.072 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 7 | (7-10)²⁄ 7² | 0.184 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.283 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 6.041 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 6.578 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.283 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 6.041 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 6.578 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 3 with χ² = 0.283 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC55a9_f1ef
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 105 | (105-90)²⁄ 105² | 0.020 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)²⁄ 25² | 0.040 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)²⁄ 25² | 0.040 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 5 | (5-10)²⁄ 5² | 1.000 |
| (sum) χ² = | 1.100 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 105 | (105-90)⁄ 90 | 0.167 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)⁄ 30 | -0.167 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)⁄ 30 | -0.167 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 5 | (5-10)⁄ 10 | -0.500 |
| (sum) χ² = | -0.667 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 105 | (105-90)²⁄ 90 | 2.500 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.833 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.833 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 5 | (5-10)²⁄ 10 | 2.500 |
| (sum) χ² = | 6.667 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 1.100 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = -0.667 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 6.667 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 1.100 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = -0.667 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 6.667 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct MC37d3_0229
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 99 | (99-90)²⁄ 99² | 0.008 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 29 | (29-30)²⁄ 29² | 0.001 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 26 | (26-30)²⁄ 26² | 0.024 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 6 | (6-10)²⁄ 6² | 0.444 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.478 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 99 | (99-90)⁄ 90 | 0.100 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 29 | (29-30)⁄ 30 | -0.033 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 26 | (26-30)⁄ 30 | -0.133 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 6 | (6-10)⁄ 10 | -0.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | -0.467 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 99 | (99-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.900 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 29 | (29-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.033 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 26 | (26-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.533 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 6 | (6-10)²⁄ 10 | 1.600 |
| (sum) χ² = | 3.067 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.478 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = -0.467 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 3.067 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 0.478 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = -0.467 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 3.067 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct MC91d5_8085
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.400 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 31 | (31-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.033 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 33 | (33-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.300 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 12 | (12-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 1.133 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)²⁄ 84 | 0.429 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 31 | (31-30)²⁄ 31 | 0.032 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 33 | (33-30)²⁄ 33 | 0.273 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 12 | (12-10)²⁄ 12 | 0.333 |
| (sum) χ² = | 1.067 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)⁄ 90 | -0.067 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 31 | (31-30)⁄ 30 | 0.033 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 33 | (33-30)⁄ 30 | 0.100 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 12 | (12-10)⁄ 10 | 0.200 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.267 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 1.133 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 1.067 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.267 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 1.133 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 1.067 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.267 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MCb239_0f88
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 95 | (95-90)²⁄ 95 | 0.263 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 28 | (28-30)²⁄ 28 | 0.143 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 30 | (30-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.000 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 7 | (7-10)²⁄ 7 | 1.286 |
| (sum) χ² = | 1.692 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 95 | (95-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.278 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 28 | (28-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.133 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 30 | (30-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.000 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 7 | (7-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 1.311 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 95 | (95-90)²⁄ 95² | 0.003 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 28 | (28-30)²⁄ 28² | 0.005 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 30 | (30-30)²⁄ 30² | 0.000 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 7 | (7-10)²⁄ 7² | 0.184 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.192 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 1.692 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 1.311 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.192 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 1.692 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 1.311 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 3 with χ² = 0.192 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC7296_cc8e
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 100 | (100-90)⁄ 90 | 0.111 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 28 | (28-30)⁄ 30 | -0.067 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)⁄ 30 | -0.167 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 7 | (7-10)⁄ 10 | -0.300 |
| (sum) χ² = | -0.422 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 100 | (100-90)²⁄ 90 | 1.111 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 28 | (28-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.133 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.833 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 7 | (7-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 2.978 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 100 | (100-90)²⁄ 100² | 0.010 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 28 | (28-30)²⁄ 28² | 0.005 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)²⁄ 25² | 0.040 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 7 | (7-10)²⁄ 7² | 0.184 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.239 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = -0.422 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 2.978 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.239 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = -0.422 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 2.978 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 3 with χ² = 0.239 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MCee9b_bf9b
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)⁄ 90 | -0.067 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 19 | (19-30)⁄ 30 | -0.367 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 38 | (38-30)⁄ 30 | 0.267 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)⁄ 10 | 0.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.733 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)²⁄ 84 | 0.429 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 19 | (19-30)²⁄ 19 | 6.368 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 38 | (38-30)²⁄ 38 | 1.684 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 19 | 4.263 |
| (sum) χ² = | 12.744 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.400 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 19 | (19-30)²⁄ 30 | 4.033 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 38 | (38-30)²⁄ 30 | 2.133 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 10 | 8.100 |
| (sum) χ² = | 14.667 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.733 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 12.744 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 14.667 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 1 with χ² = 0.733 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 12.744 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 14.667 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MCb0f4_78fc
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 80 | (80-90)²⁄ 80 | 1.250 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 30 | (30-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 42 | (42-30)²⁄ 42 | 3.429 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)²⁄ 8 | 0.500 |
| (sum) χ² = | 5.179 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 80 | (80-90)²⁄ 80² | 0.016 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 30 | (30-30)²⁄ 30² | 0.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 42 | (42-30)²⁄ 42² | 0.082 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)²⁄ 8² | 0.062 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.160 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 80 | (80-90)²⁄ 90 | 1.111 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 30 | (30-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 42 | (42-30)²⁄ 30 | 4.800 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 6.311 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 5.179 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.160 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 6.311 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 5.179 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.160 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 6.311 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct MC20df_4ce9
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 104 | (104-90)²⁄ 90 | 2.178 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.833 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.833 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 6 | (6-10)²⁄ 10 | 1.600 |
| (sum) χ² = | 5.444 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 104 | (104-90)²⁄ 104² | 0.018 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)²⁄ 25² | 0.040 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)²⁄ 25² | 0.040 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 6 | (6-10)²⁄ 6² | 0.444 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.543 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 104 | (104-90)²⁄ 104 | 1.885 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)²⁄ 25 | 1.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)²⁄ 25 | 1.000 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 6 | (6-10)²⁄ 6 | 2.667 |
| (sum) χ² = | 6.551 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 5.444 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.543 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 6.551 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 5.444 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 0.543 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 6.551 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MCfe61_6a48
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 85 | (85-90)⁄ 90 | -0.056 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 20 | (20-30)⁄ 30 | -0.333 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 39 | (39-30)⁄ 30 | 0.300 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 16 | (16-10)⁄ 10 | 0.600 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.511 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 85 | (85-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.278 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 20 | (20-30)²⁄ 30 | 3.333 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 39 | (39-30)²⁄ 30 | 2.700 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 16 | (16-10)²⁄ 10 | 3.600 |
| (sum) χ² = | 9.911 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 85 | (85-90)²⁄ 85² | 0.003 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 20 | (20-30)²⁄ 20² | 0.250 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 39 | (39-30)²⁄ 39² | 0.053 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 16 | (16-10)²⁄ 16² | 0.141 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.447 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.511 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 9.911 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 3 with χ² = 0.447 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 0.511 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 9.911 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.447 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MCe4b3_821b
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 86 | (86-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.178 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 37 | (37-30)²⁄ 30 | 1.633 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 31 | (31-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.033 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 6 | (6-10)²⁄ 10 | 1.600 |
| (sum) χ² = | 3.444 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 86 | (86-90)⁄ 90 | -0.044 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 37 | (37-30)⁄ 30 | 0.233 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 31 | (31-30)⁄ 30 | 0.033 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 6 | (6-10)⁄ 10 | -0.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | -0.178 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 86 | (86-90)²⁄ 86 | 0.186 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 37 | (37-30)²⁄ 37 | 1.324 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 31 | (31-30)²⁄ 31 | 0.032 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 6 | (6-10)²⁄ 6 | 2.667 |
| (sum) χ² = | 4.209 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 3.444 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = -0.178 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 4.209 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 3.444 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = -0.178 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 4.209 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC20ca_f7b5
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 87 | (87-90)²⁄ 87² | 0.001 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 35 | (35-30)²⁄ 35² | 0.020 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 33 | (33-30)²⁄ 33² | 0.008 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 5 | (5-10)²⁄ 5² | 1.000 |
| (sum) χ² = | 1.030 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 87 | (87-90)⁄ 90 | -0.033 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 35 | (35-30)⁄ 30 | 0.167 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 33 | (33-30)⁄ 30 | 0.100 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 5 | (5-10)⁄ 10 | -0.500 |
| (sum) χ² = | -0.267 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 87 | (87-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.100 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 35 | (35-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.833 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 33 | (33-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.300 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 5 | (5-10)²⁄ 10 | 2.500 |
| (sum) χ² = | 3.733 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 1.030 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = -0.267 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 3.733 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 1.030 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = -0.267 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 3.733 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct MCfda5_e7f9
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 85 | (85-90)²⁄ 85 | 0.294 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 33 | (33-30)²⁄ 33 | 0.273 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 28 | (28-30)²⁄ 28 | 0.143 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 14 | (14-10)²⁄ 14 | 1.143 |
| (sum) χ² = | 1.853 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 85 | (85-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.278 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 33 | (33-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.300 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 28 | (28-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.133 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 14 | (14-10)²⁄ 10 | 1.600 |
| (sum) χ² = | 2.311 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 85 | (85-90)²⁄ 85² | 0.003 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 33 | (33-30)²⁄ 33² | 0.008 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 28 | (28-30)²⁄ 28² | 0.005 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 14 | (14-10)²⁄ 14² | 0.082 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.098 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 1.853 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 2.311 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.098 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 1.853 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 2.311 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 3 with χ² = 0.098 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC2597_789f
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 87 | (87-90)⁄ 90 | -0.033 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 40 | (40-30)⁄ 30 | 0.333 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)⁄ 30 | -0.167 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)⁄ 10 | -0.200 |
| (sum) χ² = | -0.067 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 87 | (87-90)²⁄ 87 | 0.103 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 40 | (40-30)²⁄ 40 | 2.500 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)²⁄ 25 | 1.000 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)²⁄ 8 | 0.500 |
| (sum) χ² = | 4.103 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 87 | (87-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.100 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 40 | (40-30)²⁄ 30 | 3.333 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.833 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 4.667 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = -0.067 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 4.103 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 4.667 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = -0.067 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 4.103 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 4.667 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct MCcb8d_011f
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 85 | (85-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.278 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 19 | (19-30)²⁄ 30 | 4.033 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 39 | (39-30)²⁄ 30 | 2.700 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 17 | (17-10)²⁄ 10 | 4.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 11.911 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 85 | (85-90)²⁄ 85² | 0.003 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 19 | (19-30)²⁄ 19² | 0.335 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 39 | (39-30)²⁄ 39² | 0.053 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 17 | (17-10)²⁄ 17² | 0.170 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.561 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 85 | (85-90)⁄ 90 | -0.056 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 19 | (19-30)⁄ 30 | -0.367 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 39 | (39-30)⁄ 30 | 0.300 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 17 | (17-10)⁄ 10 | 0.700 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.578 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 11.911 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 0.561 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.578 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 11.911 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.561 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.578 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MCa4f2_f158
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 78 | (78-90)²⁄ 90 | 1.600 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 29 | (29-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.033 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 41 | (41-30)²⁄ 30 | 4.033 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 12 | (12-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 6.067 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 78 | (78-90)²⁄ 78² | 0.024 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 29 | (29-30)²⁄ 29² | 0.001 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 41 | (41-30)²⁄ 41² | 0.072 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 12 | (12-10)²⁄ 12² | 0.028 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.125 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 78 | (78-90)²⁄ 78 | 1.846 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 29 | (29-30)²⁄ 29 | 0.034 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 41 | (41-30)²⁄ 41 | 2.951 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 12 | (12-10)²⁄ 12 | 0.333 |
| (sum) χ² = | 5.165 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 6.067 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.125 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 5.165 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 6.067 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 0.125 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 5.165 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MCac87_218e
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 82 | (82-90)²⁄ 82 | 0.780 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 18 | (18-30)²⁄ 18 | 8.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 41 | (41-30)²⁄ 41 | 2.951 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 19 | 4.263 |
| (sum) χ² = | 15.995 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 82 | (82-90)⁄ 90 | -0.089 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 18 | (18-30)⁄ 30 | -0.400 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 41 | (41-30)⁄ 30 | 0.367 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)⁄ 10 | 0.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.778 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 82 | (82-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.711 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 18 | (18-30)²⁄ 30 | 4.800 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 41 | (41-30)²⁄ 30 | 4.033 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 10 | 8.100 |
| (sum) χ² = | 17.644 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 15.995 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.778 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 17.644 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 1 with χ² = 15.995 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.778 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 17.644 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC4168_a7ec
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 74 | (74-90)²⁄ 74² | 0.047 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 21 | (21-30)²⁄ 21² | 0.184 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 47 | (47-30)²⁄ 47² | 0.131 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 18 | (18-10)²⁄ 18² | 0.198 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.559 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 74 | (74-90)²⁄ 90 | 2.844 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 21 | (21-30)²⁄ 30 | 2.700 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 47 | (47-30)²⁄ 30 | 9.633 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 18 | (18-10)²⁄ 10 | 6.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 21.578 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 74 | (74-90)²⁄ 74 | 3.459 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 21 | (21-30)²⁄ 21 | 3.857 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 47 | (47-30)²⁄ 47 | 6.149 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 18 | (18-10)²⁄ 18 | 3.556 |
| (sum) χ² = | 17.021 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.559 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 21.578 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 3 with χ² = 17.021 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 0.559 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 21.578 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 17.021 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC4f6c_1d4b
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 85 | (85-90)²⁄ 85² | 0.003 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 12 | (12-30)²⁄ 12² | 2.250 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 45 | (45-30)²⁄ 45² | 0.111 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 18 | (18-10)²⁄ 18² | 0.198 |
| (sum) χ² = | 2.562 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 85 | (85-90)²⁄ 85 | 0.294 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 12 | (12-30)²⁄ 12 | 27.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 45 | (45-30)²⁄ 45 | 5.000 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 18 | (18-10)²⁄ 18 | 3.556 |
| (sum) χ² = | 35.850 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 85 | (85-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.278 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 12 | (12-30)²⁄ 30 | 10.800 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 45 | (45-30)²⁄ 30 | 7.500 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 18 | (18-10)²⁄ 10 | 6.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 24.978 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 2.562 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 35.850 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 24.978 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 1 with χ² = 2.562 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 35.850 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 24.978 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MCff91_af8e
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 78 | (78-90)²⁄ 90 | 1.600 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 14 | (14-30)²⁄ 30 | 8.533 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 50 | (50-30)²⁄ 30 | 13.333 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 18 | (18-10)²⁄ 10 | 6.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 29.867 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 78 | (78-90)²⁄ 78 | 1.846 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 14 | (14-30)²⁄ 14 | 18.286 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 50 | (50-30)²⁄ 50 | 8.000 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 18 | (18-10)²⁄ 18 | 3.556 |
| (sum) χ² = | 31.687 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 78 | (78-90)²⁄ 78² | 0.024 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 14 | (14-30)²⁄ 14² | 1.306 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 50 | (50-30)²⁄ 50² | 0.160 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 18 | (18-10)²⁄ 18² | 0.198 |
| (sum) χ² = | 1.687 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 29.867 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 31.687 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 1.687 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 29.867 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 31.687 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 1.687 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC39da_df1f
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 83 | (83-90)²⁄ 83 | 0.590 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 22 | (22-30)²⁄ 22 | 2.909 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 39 | (39-30)²⁄ 39 | 2.077 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 16 | (16-10)²⁄ 16 | 2.250 |
| (sum) χ² = | 7.826 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 83 | (83-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.544 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 22 | (22-30)²⁄ 30 | 2.133 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 39 | (39-30)²⁄ 30 | 2.700 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 16 | (16-10)²⁄ 10 | 3.600 |
| (sum) χ² = | 8.978 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 83 | (83-90)⁄ 90 | -0.078 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 22 | (22-30)⁄ 30 | -0.267 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 39 | (39-30)⁄ 30 | 0.300 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 16 | (16-10)⁄ 10 | 0.600 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.556 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 7.826 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 8.978 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 3 with χ² = 0.556 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 7.826 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 8.978 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.556 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC7059_1602
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 87 | (87-90)⁄ 90 | -0.033 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 30 | (30-30)⁄ 30 | 0.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 31 | (31-30)⁄ 30 | 0.033 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 12 | (12-10)⁄ 10 | 0.200 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.200 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 87 | (87-90)²⁄ 87 | 0.103 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 30 | (30-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 31 | (31-30)²⁄ 31 | 0.032 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 12 | (12-10)²⁄ 12 | 0.333 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.469 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 87 | (87-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.100 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 30 | (30-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 31 | (31-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.033 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 12 | (12-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.533 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.200 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.469 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.533 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 0.200 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.469 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.533 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct MCc5a1_d135
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)²⁄ 84 | 0.429 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 21 | (21-30)²⁄ 21 | 3.857 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 36 | (36-30)²⁄ 36 | 1.000 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 19 | 4.263 |
| (sum) χ² = | 9.549 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)⁄ 90 | -0.067 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 21 | (21-30)⁄ 30 | -0.300 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 36 | (36-30)⁄ 30 | 0.200 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)⁄ 10 | 0.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.733 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.400 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 21 | (21-30)²⁄ 30 | 2.700 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 36 | (36-30)²⁄ 30 | 1.200 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 10 | 8.100 |
| (sum) χ² = | 12.400 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 9.549 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.733 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 12.400 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 1 with χ² = 9.549 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.733 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 12.400 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MCebaa_8a26
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 93 | (93-90)²⁄ 93 | 0.097 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 29 | (29-30)²⁄ 29 | 0.034 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 31 | (31-30)²⁄ 31 | 0.032 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 7 | (7-10)²⁄ 7 | 1.286 |
| (sum) χ² = | 1.449 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 93 | (93-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.100 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 29 | (29-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.033 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 31 | (31-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.033 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 7 | (7-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 1.067 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 93 | (93-90)⁄ 90 | 0.033 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 29 | (29-30)⁄ 30 | -0.033 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 31 | (31-30)⁄ 30 | 0.033 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 7 | (7-10)⁄ 10 | -0.300 |
| (sum) χ² = | -0.267 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 1.449 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 1.067 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = -0.267 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 1.449 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 1.067 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 3 with χ² = -0.267 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC445d_88d4
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 76 | (76-90)²⁄ 76² | 0.034 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 20 | (20-30)²⁄ 20² | 0.250 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 45 | (45-30)²⁄ 45² | 0.111 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 19² | 0.224 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.619 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 76 | (76-90)²⁄ 90 | 2.178 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 20 | (20-30)²⁄ 30 | 3.333 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 45 | (45-30)²⁄ 30 | 7.500 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 10 | 8.100 |
| (sum) χ² = | 21.111 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 76 | (76-90)⁄ 90 | -0.156 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 20 | (20-30)⁄ 30 | -0.333 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 45 | (45-30)⁄ 30 | 0.500 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)⁄ 10 | 0.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.911 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.619 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 21.111 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 3 with χ² = 0.911 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 0.619 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 21.111 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.911 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC4dd6_3d73
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 71 | (71-90)²⁄ 90 | 4.011 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 28 | (28-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.133 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 45 | (45-30)²⁄ 30 | 7.500 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 16 | (16-10)²⁄ 10 | 3.600 |
| (sum) χ² = | 15.244 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 71 | (71-90)²⁄ 71 | 5.085 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 28 | (28-30)²⁄ 28 | 0.143 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 45 | (45-30)²⁄ 45 | 5.000 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 16 | (16-10)²⁄ 16 | 2.250 |
| (sum) χ² = | 12.477 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 71 | (71-90)²⁄ 71² | 0.072 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 28 | (28-30)²⁄ 28² | 0.005 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 45 | (45-30)²⁄ 45² | 0.111 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 16 | (16-10)²⁄ 16² | 0.141 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.328 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 15.244 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 12.477 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.328 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 15.244 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 12.477 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.328 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MCc0f6_8fe6
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 96 | (96-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.400 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 30 | (30-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 20 | (20-30)²⁄ 30 | 3.333 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 14 | (14-10)²⁄ 10 | 1.600 |
| (sum) χ² = | 5.333 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 96 | (96-90)²⁄ 96 | 0.375 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 30 | (30-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 20 | (20-30)²⁄ 20 | 5.000 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 14 | (14-10)²⁄ 14 | 1.143 |
| (sum) χ² = | 6.518 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 96 | (96-90)²⁄ 96² | 0.004 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 30 | (30-30)²⁄ 30² | 0.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 20 | (20-30)²⁄ 20² | 0.250 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 14 | (14-10)²⁄ 14² | 0.082 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.336 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 5.333 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 6.518 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.336 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 5.333 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 6.518 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.336 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MCdfce_d515
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 96 | (96-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.400 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 22 | (22-30)²⁄ 30 | 2.133 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 37 | (37-30)²⁄ 30 | 1.633 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 5 | (5-10)²⁄ 10 | 2.500 |
| (sum) χ² = | 6.667 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 96 | (96-90)²⁄ 96² | 0.004 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 22 | (22-30)²⁄ 22² | 0.132 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 37 | (37-30)²⁄ 37² | 0.036 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 5 | (5-10)²⁄ 5² | 1.000 |
| (sum) χ² = | 1.172 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 96 | (96-90)⁄ 90 | 0.067 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 22 | (22-30)⁄ 30 | -0.267 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 37 | (37-30)⁄ 30 | 0.233 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 5 | (5-10)⁄ 10 | -0.500 |
| (sum) χ² = | -0.467 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 6.667 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 1.172 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = -0.467 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 6.667 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 1.172 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = -0.467 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MCabf6_cd7f
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 87 | (87-90)²⁄ 87² | 0.001 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 23 | (23-30)²⁄ 23² | 0.093 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 32 | (32-30)²⁄ 32² | 0.004 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 18 | (18-10)²⁄ 18² | 0.198 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.295 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 87 | (87-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.100 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 23 | (23-30)²⁄ 30 | 1.633 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 32 | (32-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.133 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 18 | (18-10)²⁄ 10 | 6.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 8.267 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 87 | (87-90)²⁄ 87 | 0.103 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 23 | (23-30)²⁄ 23 | 2.130 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 32 | (32-30)²⁄ 32 | 0.125 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 18 | (18-10)²⁄ 18 | 3.556 |
| (sum) χ² = | 5.914 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.295 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 8.267 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 3 with χ² = 5.914 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 0.295 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 8.267 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 5.914 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC8510_87dd
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 85 | (85-90)²⁄ 85² | 0.003 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 19 | (19-30)²⁄ 19² | 0.335 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 37 | (37-30)²⁄ 37² | 0.036 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 19² | 0.224 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.599 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 85 | (85-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.278 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 19 | (19-30)²⁄ 30 | 4.033 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 37 | (37-30)²⁄ 30 | 1.633 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 10 | 8.100 |
| (sum) χ² = | 14.044 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 85 | (85-90)⁄ 90 | -0.056 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 19 | (19-30)⁄ 30 | -0.367 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 37 | (37-30)⁄ 30 | 0.233 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)⁄ 10 | 0.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.711 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.599 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 14.044 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 3 with χ² = 0.711 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 0.599 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 14.044 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.711 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MCac95_1ae5
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 95 | (95-90)⁄ 90 | 0.056 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 32 | (32-30)⁄ 30 | 0.067 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)⁄ 30 | -0.167 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)⁄ 10 | -0.200 |
| (sum) χ² = | -0.244 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 95 | (95-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.278 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 32 | (32-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.133 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.833 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 1.644 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 95 | (95-90)²⁄ 95 | 0.263 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 32 | (32-30)²⁄ 32 | 0.125 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)²⁄ 25 | 1.000 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)²⁄ 8 | 0.500 |
| (sum) χ² = | 1.888 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = -0.244 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 1.644 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 1.888 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = -0.244 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 1.644 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 3 with χ² = 1.888 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC9137_1932
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)²⁄ 84 | 0.429 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 12 | (12-30)²⁄ 12 | 27.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 46 | (46-30)²⁄ 46 | 5.565 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 18 | (18-10)²⁄ 18 | 3.556 |
| (sum) χ² = | 36.549 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)²⁄ 84² | 0.005 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 12 | (12-30)²⁄ 12² | 2.250 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 46 | (46-30)²⁄ 46² | 0.121 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 18 | (18-10)²⁄ 18² | 0.198 |
| (sum) χ² = | 2.574 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.400 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 12 | (12-30)²⁄ 30 | 10.800 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 46 | (46-30)²⁄ 30 | 8.533 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 18 | (18-10)²⁄ 10 | 6.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 26.133 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 36.549 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 2.574 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 26.133 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 1 with χ² = 36.549 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 2.574 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 26.133 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC9a50_b8a3
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 76 | (76-90)²⁄ 76² | 0.034 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 20 | (20-30)²⁄ 20² | 0.250 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 46 | (46-30)²⁄ 46² | 0.121 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 18 | (18-10)²⁄ 18² | 0.198 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.602 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 76 | (76-90)²⁄ 76 | 2.579 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 20 | (20-30)²⁄ 20 | 5.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 46 | (46-30)²⁄ 46 | 5.565 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 18 | (18-10)²⁄ 18 | 3.556 |
| (sum) χ² = | 16.700 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 76 | (76-90)²⁄ 90 | 2.178 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 20 | (20-30)²⁄ 30 | 3.333 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 46 | (46-30)²⁄ 30 | 8.533 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 18 | (18-10)²⁄ 10 | 6.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 20.444 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.602 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 16.700 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 20.444 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 1 with χ² = 0.602 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 16.700 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 20.444 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC3d3d_0f18
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 86 | (86-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.178 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 33 | (33-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.300 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 28 | (28-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.133 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 13 | (13-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 1.511 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 86 | (86-90)²⁄ 86² | 0.002 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 33 | (33-30)²⁄ 33² | 0.008 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 28 | (28-30)²⁄ 28² | 0.005 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 13 | (13-10)²⁄ 13² | 0.053 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.069 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 86 | (86-90)⁄ 90 | -0.044 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 33 | (33-30)⁄ 30 | 0.100 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 28 | (28-30)⁄ 30 | -0.067 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 13 | (13-10)⁄ 10 | 0.300 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.289 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 1.511 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.069 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.289 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 1.511 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 0.069 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.289 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC912d_8e7d
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 93 | (93-90)⁄ 90 | 0.033 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 13 | (13-30)⁄ 30 | -0.567 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 39 | (39-30)⁄ 30 | 0.300 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 15 | (15-10)⁄ 10 | 0.500 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.267 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 93 | (93-90)²⁄ 93 | 0.097 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 13 | (13-30)²⁄ 13 | 22.231 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 39 | (39-30)²⁄ 39 | 2.077 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 15 | (15-10)²⁄ 15 | 1.667 |
| (sum) χ² = | 26.071 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 93 | (93-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.100 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 13 | (13-30)²⁄ 30 | 9.633 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 39 | (39-30)²⁄ 30 | 2.700 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 15 | (15-10)²⁄ 10 | 2.500 |
| (sum) χ² = | 14.933 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.267 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 26.071 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 14.933 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 1 with χ² = 0.267 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 26.071 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 14.933 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MCfed9_28e4
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 85 | (85-90)⁄ 90 | -0.056 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 28 | (28-30)⁄ 30 | -0.067 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 39 | (39-30)⁄ 30 | 0.300 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)⁄ 10 | -0.200 |
| (sum) χ² = | -0.022 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 85 | (85-90)²⁄ 85² | 0.003 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 28 | (28-30)²⁄ 28² | 0.005 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 39 | (39-30)²⁄ 39² | 0.053 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)²⁄ 8² | 0.062 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.124 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 85 | (85-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.278 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 28 | (28-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.133 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 39 | (39-30)²⁄ 30 | 2.700 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 3.511 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = -0.022 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.124 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 3.511 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = -0.022 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.124 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 3.511 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct MCe607_7409
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 83 | (83-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.544 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 24 | (24-30)²⁄ 30 | 1.200 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 34 | (34-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.533 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 10 | 8.100 |
| (sum) χ² = | 10.378 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 83 | (83-90)²⁄ 83² | 0.007 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 24 | (24-30)²⁄ 24² | 0.062 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 34 | (34-30)²⁄ 34² | 0.014 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 19² | 0.224 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.308 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 83 | (83-90)⁄ 90 | -0.078 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 24 | (24-30)⁄ 30 | -0.200 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 34 | (34-30)⁄ 30 | 0.133 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)⁄ 10 | 0.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.756 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 10.378 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 0.308 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.756 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 10.378 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.308 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.756 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MCac86_6457
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 77 | (77-90)²⁄ 77² | 0.029 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 16 | (16-30)²⁄ 16² | 0.766 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 49 | (49-30)²⁄ 49² | 0.150 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 18 | (18-10)²⁄ 18² | 0.198 |
| (sum) χ² = | 1.142 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 77 | (77-90)²⁄ 90 | 1.878 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 16 | (16-30)²⁄ 30 | 6.533 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 49 | (49-30)²⁄ 30 | 12.033 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 18 | (18-10)²⁄ 10 | 6.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 26.844 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 77 | (77-90)²⁄ 77 | 2.195 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 16 | (16-30)²⁄ 16 | 12.250 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 49 | (49-30)²⁄ 49 | 7.367 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 18 | (18-10)²⁄ 18 | 3.556 |
| (sum) χ² = | 25.368 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 1.142 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 26.844 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 3 with χ² = 25.368 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 1.142 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 26.844 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 25.368 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC80a5_898f
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.400 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 19 | (19-30)²⁄ 30 | 4.033 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 38 | (38-30)²⁄ 30 | 2.133 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 10 | 8.100 |
| (sum) χ² = | 14.667 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)²⁄ 84² | 0.005 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 19 | (19-30)²⁄ 19² | 0.335 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 38 | (38-30)²⁄ 38² | 0.044 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 19² | 0.224 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.609 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)⁄ 90 | -0.067 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 19 | (19-30)⁄ 30 | -0.367 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 38 | (38-30)⁄ 30 | 0.267 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)⁄ 10 | 0.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.733 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 14.667 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 0.609 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.733 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 14.667 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.609 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.733 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MCf346_46da
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 94 | (94-90)²⁄ 94² | 0.002 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 26 | (26-30)²⁄ 26² | 0.024 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 27 | (27-30)²⁄ 27² | 0.012 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 13 | (13-10)²⁄ 13² | 0.053 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.091 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 94 | (94-90)⁄ 90 | 0.044 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 26 | (26-30)⁄ 30 | -0.133 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 27 | (27-30)⁄ 30 | -0.100 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 13 | (13-10)⁄ 10 | 0.300 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.111 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 94 | (94-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.178 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 26 | (26-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.533 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 27 | (27-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.300 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 13 | (13-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 1.911 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.091 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.111 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 1.911 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 0.091 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.111 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 1.911 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct MC52ff_99d1
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 102 | (102-90)⁄ 90 | 0.133 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 24 | (24-30)⁄ 30 | -0.200 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 22 | (22-30)⁄ 30 | -0.267 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 12 | (12-10)⁄ 10 | 0.200 |
| (sum) χ² = | -0.133 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 102 | (102-90)²⁄ 102 | 1.412 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 24 | (24-30)²⁄ 24 | 1.500 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 22 | (22-30)²⁄ 22 | 2.909 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 12 | (12-10)²⁄ 12 | 0.333 |
| (sum) χ² = | 6.154 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 102 | (102-90)²⁄ 90 | 1.600 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 24 | (24-30)²⁄ 30 | 1.200 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 22 | (22-30)²⁄ 30 | 2.133 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 12 | (12-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 5.333 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = -0.133 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 6.154 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 5.333 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = -0.133 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 6.154 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 5.333 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct MC00f6_a2d5
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 79 | (79-90)²⁄ 90 | 1.344 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 22 | (22-30)²⁄ 30 | 2.133 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 40 | (40-30)²⁄ 30 | 3.333 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 10 | 8.100 |
| (sum) χ² = | 14.911 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 79 | (79-90)²⁄ 79² | 0.019 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 22 | (22-30)²⁄ 22² | 0.132 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 40 | (40-30)²⁄ 40² | 0.062 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 19² | 0.224 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.438 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 79 | (79-90)⁄ 90 | -0.122 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 22 | (22-30)⁄ 30 | -0.267 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 40 | (40-30)⁄ 30 | 0.333 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)⁄ 10 | 0.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.844 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 14.911 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 0.438 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.844 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 14.911 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.438 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.844 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MCa706_c906
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 94 | (94-90)²⁄ 94 | 0.170 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 28 | (28-30)²⁄ 28 | 0.143 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 24 | (24-30)²⁄ 24 | 1.500 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 14 | (14-10)²⁄ 14 | 1.143 |
| (sum) χ² = | 2.956 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 94 | (94-90)⁄ 90 | 0.044 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 28 | (28-30)⁄ 30 | -0.067 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 24 | (24-30)⁄ 30 | -0.200 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 14 | (14-10)⁄ 10 | 0.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.178 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 94 | (94-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.178 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 28 | (28-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.133 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 24 | (24-30)²⁄ 30 | 1.200 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 14 | (14-10)²⁄ 10 | 1.600 |
| (sum) χ² = | 3.111 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 2.956 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.178 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 3.111 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 2.956 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.178 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 3.111 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct MCcd05_bcd0
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 83 | (83-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.544 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 18 | (18-30)²⁄ 30 | 4.800 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 44 | (44-30)²⁄ 30 | 6.533 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 15 | (15-10)²⁄ 10 | 2.500 |
| (sum) χ² = | 14.378 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 83 | (83-90)²⁄ 83² | 0.007 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 18 | (18-30)²⁄ 18² | 0.444 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 44 | (44-30)²⁄ 44² | 0.101 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 15 | (15-10)²⁄ 15² | 0.111 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.664 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 83 | (83-90)²⁄ 83 | 0.590 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 18 | (18-30)²⁄ 18 | 8.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 44 | (44-30)²⁄ 44 | 4.455 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 15 | (15-10)²⁄ 15 | 1.667 |
| (sum) χ² = | 14.712 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 14.378 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 0.664 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 14.712 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 14.378 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.664 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 14.712 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC6614_e744
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 77 | (77-90)²⁄ 77² | 0.029 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 22 | (22-30)²⁄ 22² | 0.132 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 45 | (45-30)²⁄ 45² | 0.111 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 16 | (16-10)²⁄ 16² | 0.141 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.412 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 77 | (77-90)⁄ 90 | -0.144 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 22 | (22-30)⁄ 30 | -0.267 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 45 | (45-30)⁄ 30 | 0.500 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 16 | (16-10)⁄ 10 | 0.600 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.689 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 77 | (77-90)²⁄ 90 | 1.878 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 22 | (22-30)²⁄ 30 | 2.133 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 45 | (45-30)²⁄ 30 | 7.500 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 16 | (16-10)²⁄ 10 | 3.600 |
| (sum) χ² = | 15.111 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.412 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.689 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 15.111 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 1 with χ² = 0.412 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.689 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 15.111 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC58c1_0ad8
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 82 | (82-90)²⁄ 82² | 0.010 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 36 | (36-30)²⁄ 36² | 0.028 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 34 | (34-30)²⁄ 34² | 0.014 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)²⁄ 8² | 0.062 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.114 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 82 | (82-90)²⁄ 82 | 0.780 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 36 | (36-30)²⁄ 36 | 1.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 34 | (34-30)²⁄ 34 | 0.471 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)²⁄ 8 | 0.500 |
| (sum) χ² = | 2.751 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 82 | (82-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.711 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 36 | (36-30)²⁄ 30 | 1.200 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 34 | (34-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.533 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 2.844 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.114 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 2.751 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 2.844 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 0.114 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 2.751 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 2.844 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct MC5c9a_b822
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 81 | (81-90)⁄ 90 | -0.100 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 18 | (18-30)⁄ 30 | -0.400 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 42 | (42-30)⁄ 30 | 0.400 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)⁄ 10 | 0.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.800 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 81 | (81-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.900 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 18 | (18-30)²⁄ 30 | 4.800 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 42 | (42-30)²⁄ 30 | 4.800 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 10 | 8.100 |
| (sum) χ² = | 18.600 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 81 | (81-90)²⁄ 81 | 1.000 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 18 | (18-30)²⁄ 18 | 8.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 42 | (42-30)²⁄ 42 | 3.429 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 19 | 4.263 |
| (sum) χ² = | 16.692 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.800 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 18.600 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 3 with χ² = 16.692 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 0.800 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 18.600 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 16.692 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC549b_9ca6
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 79 | (79-90)²⁄ 79² | 0.019 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 18 | (18-30)²⁄ 18² | 0.444 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 46 | (46-30)²⁄ 46² | 0.121 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 17 | (17-10)²⁄ 17² | 0.170 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.754 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 79 | (79-90)⁄ 90 | -0.122 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 18 | (18-30)⁄ 30 | -0.400 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 46 | (46-30)⁄ 30 | 0.533 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 17 | (17-10)⁄ 10 | 0.700 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.711 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 79 | (79-90)²⁄ 90 | 1.344 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 18 | (18-30)²⁄ 30 | 4.800 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 46 | (46-30)²⁄ 30 | 8.533 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 17 | (17-10)²⁄ 10 | 4.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 19.578 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.754 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.711 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 19.578 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 1 with χ² = 0.754 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.711 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 19.578 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MCb46a_154c
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 83 | (83-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.544 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 35 | (35-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.833 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 30 | (30-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.000 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 12 | (12-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 1.778 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 83 | (83-90)²⁄ 83 | 0.590 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 35 | (35-30)²⁄ 35 | 0.714 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 30 | (30-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.000 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 12 | (12-10)²⁄ 12 | 0.333 |
| (sum) χ² = | 1.638 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 83 | (83-90)⁄ 90 | -0.078 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 35 | (35-30)⁄ 30 | 0.167 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 30 | (30-30)⁄ 30 | 0.000 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 12 | (12-10)⁄ 10 | 0.200 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.289 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 1.778 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 1.638 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.289 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 1.778 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 1.638 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.289 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC22c8_ca44
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 77 | (77-90)²⁄ 90 | 1.878 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 20 | (20-30)²⁄ 30 | 3.333 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 48 | (48-30)²⁄ 30 | 10.800 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 15 | (15-10)²⁄ 10 | 2.500 |
| (sum) χ² = | 18.511 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 77 | (77-90)⁄ 90 | -0.144 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 20 | (20-30)⁄ 30 | -0.333 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 48 | (48-30)⁄ 30 | 0.600 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 15 | (15-10)⁄ 10 | 0.500 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.622 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 77 | (77-90)²⁄ 77² | 0.029 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 20 | (20-30)²⁄ 20² | 0.250 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 48 | (48-30)²⁄ 48² | 0.141 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 15 | (15-10)²⁄ 15² | 0.111 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.530 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 18.511 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 0.622 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.530 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 18.511 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.622 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.530 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC430f_b01f
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 93 | (93-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.100 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.833 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 29 | (29-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.033 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 13 | (13-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 1.867 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 93 | (93-90)⁄ 90 | 0.033 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)⁄ 30 | -0.167 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 29 | (29-30)⁄ 30 | -0.033 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 13 | (13-10)⁄ 10 | 0.300 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.133 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 93 | (93-90)²⁄ 93² | 0.001 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)²⁄ 25² | 0.040 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 29 | (29-30)²⁄ 29² | 0.001 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 13 | (13-10)²⁄ 13² | 0.053 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.095 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 1.867 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.133 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.095 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 1.867 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 0.133 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.095 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC2a63_2a75
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 100 | (100-90)²⁄ 100² | 0.010 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 28 | (28-30)²⁄ 28² | 0.005 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 26 | (26-30)²⁄ 26² | 0.024 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 6 | (6-10)²⁄ 6² | 0.444 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.483 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 100 | (100-90)²⁄ 90 | 1.111 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 28 | (28-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.133 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 26 | (26-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.533 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 6 | (6-10)²⁄ 10 | 1.600 |
| (sum) χ² = | 3.378 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 100 | (100-90)²⁄ 100 | 1.000 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 28 | (28-30)²⁄ 28 | 0.143 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 26 | (26-30)²⁄ 26 | 0.615 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 6 | (6-10)²⁄ 6 | 2.667 |
| (sum) χ² = | 4.425 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.483 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 3.378 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 4.425 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 0.483 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 3.378 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 3 with χ² = 4.425 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MCf462_6cc3
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 78 | (78-90)²⁄ 90 | 1.600 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 33 | (33-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.300 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 41 | (41-30)²⁄ 30 | 4.033 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 6.333 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 78 | (78-90)²⁄ 78 | 1.846 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 33 | (33-30)²⁄ 33 | 0.273 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 41 | (41-30)²⁄ 41 | 2.951 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)²⁄ 8 | 0.500 |
| (sum) χ² = | 5.570 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 78 | (78-90)²⁄ 78² | 0.024 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 33 | (33-30)²⁄ 33² | 0.008 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 41 | (41-30)²⁄ 41² | 0.072 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)²⁄ 8² | 0.062 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.166 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 6.333 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 5.570 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.166 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 6.333 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 5.570 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.166 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC8e18_9e29
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 93 | (93-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.100 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 19 | (19-30)²⁄ 30 | 4.033 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 34 | (34-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.533 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 14 | (14-10)²⁄ 10 | 1.600 |
| (sum) χ² = | 6.267 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 93 | (93-90)²⁄ 93² | 0.001 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 19 | (19-30)²⁄ 19² | 0.335 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 34 | (34-30)²⁄ 34² | 0.014 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 14 | (14-10)²⁄ 14² | 0.082 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.432 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 93 | (93-90)²⁄ 93 | 0.097 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 19 | (19-30)²⁄ 19 | 6.368 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 34 | (34-30)²⁄ 34 | 0.471 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 14 | (14-10)²⁄ 14 | 1.143 |
| (sum) χ² = | 8.079 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 6.267 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.432 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 8.079 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 6.267 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 0.432 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 8.079 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC82dc_1221
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 83 | (83-90)²⁄ 83 | 0.590 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 21 | (21-30)²⁄ 21 | 3.857 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 39 | (39-30)²⁄ 39 | 2.077 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 17 | (17-10)²⁄ 17 | 2.882 |
| (sum) χ² = | 9.407 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 83 | (83-90)²⁄ 83² | 0.007 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 21 | (21-30)²⁄ 21² | 0.184 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 39 | (39-30)²⁄ 39² | 0.053 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 17 | (17-10)²⁄ 17² | 0.170 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.414 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 83 | (83-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.544 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 21 | (21-30)²⁄ 30 | 2.700 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 39 | (39-30)²⁄ 30 | 2.700 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 17 | (17-10)²⁄ 10 | 4.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 10.844 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 9.407 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.414 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 10.844 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 1 with χ² = 9.407 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.414 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 10.844 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MCc818_2114
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 76 | (76-90)²⁄ 76 | 2.579 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 18 | (18-30)²⁄ 18 | 8.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 50 | (50-30)²⁄ 50 | 8.000 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 16 | (16-10)²⁄ 16 | 2.250 |
| (sum) χ² = | 20.829 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 76 | (76-90)²⁄ 90 | 2.178 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 18 | (18-30)²⁄ 30 | 4.800 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 50 | (50-30)²⁄ 30 | 13.333 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 16 | (16-10)²⁄ 10 | 3.600 |
| (sum) χ² = | 23.911 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 76 | (76-90)²⁄ 76² | 0.034 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 18 | (18-30)²⁄ 18² | 0.444 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 50 | (50-30)²⁄ 50² | 0.160 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 16 | (16-10)²⁄ 16² | 0.141 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.779 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 20.829 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 23.911 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 3 with χ² = 0.779 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 20.829 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 23.911 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.779 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC865a_4a0e
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 86 | (86-90)⁄ 90 | -0.044 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 26 | (26-30)⁄ 30 | -0.133 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 34 | (34-30)⁄ 30 | 0.133 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 14 | (14-10)⁄ 10 | 0.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.356 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 86 | (86-90)²⁄ 86² | 0.002 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 26 | (26-30)²⁄ 26² | 0.024 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 34 | (34-30)²⁄ 34² | 0.014 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 14 | (14-10)²⁄ 14² | 0.082 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.121 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 86 | (86-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.178 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 26 | (26-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.533 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 34 | (34-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.533 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 14 | (14-10)²⁄ 10 | 1.600 |
| (sum) χ² = | 2.844 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.356 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.121 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 2.844 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 0.356 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.121 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 2.844 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct MCe2ef_1242
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 81 | (81-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.900 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 20 | (20-30)²⁄ 30 | 3.333 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 40 | (40-30)²⁄ 30 | 3.333 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 10 | 8.100 |
| (sum) χ² = | 15.667 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 81 | (81-90)⁄ 90 | -0.100 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 20 | (20-30)⁄ 30 | -0.333 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 40 | (40-30)⁄ 30 | 0.333 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)⁄ 10 | 0.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.800 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 81 | (81-90)²⁄ 81 | 1.000 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 20 | (20-30)²⁄ 20 | 5.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 40 | (40-30)²⁄ 40 | 2.500 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 19 | 4.263 |
| (sum) χ² = | 12.763 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 15.667 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 0.800 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 12.763 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 15.667 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.800 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 12.763 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MCc62b_4199
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 82 | (82-90)²⁄ 82² | 0.010 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 16 | (16-30)²⁄ 16² | 0.766 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 43 | (43-30)²⁄ 43² | 0.091 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 19² | 0.224 |
| (sum) χ² = | 1.091 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 82 | (82-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.711 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 16 | (16-30)²⁄ 30 | 6.533 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 43 | (43-30)²⁄ 30 | 5.633 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 10 | 8.100 |
| (sum) χ² = | 20.978 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 82 | (82-90)²⁄ 82 | 0.780 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 16 | (16-30)²⁄ 16 | 12.250 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 43 | (43-30)²⁄ 43 | 3.930 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 19 | 4.263 |
| (sum) χ² = | 21.224 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 1.091 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 20.978 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 3 with χ² = 21.224 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 1.091 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 20.978 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 21.224 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MCb81e_3e1a
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 96 | (96-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.400 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 32 | (32-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.133 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.833 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 7 | (7-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 2.267 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 96 | (96-90)²⁄ 96 | 0.375 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 32 | (32-30)²⁄ 32 | 0.125 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)²⁄ 25 | 1.000 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 7 | (7-10)²⁄ 7 | 1.286 |
| (sum) χ² = | 2.786 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 96 | (96-90)²⁄ 96² | 0.004 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 32 | (32-30)²⁄ 32² | 0.004 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)²⁄ 25² | 0.040 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 7 | (7-10)²⁄ 7² | 0.184 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.231 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 2.267 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 2.786 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.231 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 2.267 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 2.786 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.231 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC0800_aa5a
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 78 | (78-90)⁄ 90 | -0.133 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 21 | (21-30)⁄ 30 | -0.300 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 44 | (44-30)⁄ 30 | 0.467 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 17 | (17-10)⁄ 10 | 0.700 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.733 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 78 | (78-90)²⁄ 78 | 1.846 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 21 | (21-30)²⁄ 21 | 3.857 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 44 | (44-30)²⁄ 44 | 4.455 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 17 | (17-10)²⁄ 17 | 2.882 |
| (sum) χ² = | 13.040 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 78 | (78-90)²⁄ 90 | 1.600 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 21 | (21-30)²⁄ 30 | 2.700 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 44 | (44-30)²⁄ 30 | 6.533 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 17 | (17-10)²⁄ 10 | 4.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 15.733 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.733 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 13.040 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 15.733 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 1 with χ² = 0.733 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 13.040 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 15.733 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC2505_17c6
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 87 | (87-90)²⁄ 87² | 0.001 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 30 | (30-30)²⁄ 30² | 0.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 35 | (35-30)²⁄ 35² | 0.020 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)²⁄ 8² | 0.062 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.084 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 87 | (87-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.100 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 30 | (30-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 35 | (35-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.833 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 1.333 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 87 | (87-90)⁄ 90 | -0.033 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 30 | (30-30)⁄ 30 | 0.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 35 | (35-30)⁄ 30 | 0.167 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)⁄ 10 | -0.200 |
| (sum) χ² = | -0.067 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.084 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 1.333 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = -0.067 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 0.084 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 1.333 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 3 with χ² = -0.067 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC6c49_6bc1
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 79 | (79-90)²⁄ 90 | 1.344 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 26 | (26-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.533 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 36 | (36-30)²⁄ 30 | 1.200 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 10 | 8.100 |
| (sum) χ² = | 11.178 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 79 | (79-90)⁄ 90 | -0.122 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 26 | (26-30)⁄ 30 | -0.133 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 36 | (36-30)⁄ 30 | 0.200 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)⁄ 10 | 0.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.844 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 79 | (79-90)²⁄ 79 | 1.532 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 26 | (26-30)²⁄ 26 | 0.615 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 36 | (36-30)²⁄ 36 | 1.000 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 19 | 4.263 |
| (sum) χ² = | 7.410 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 11.178 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 0.844 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 7.410 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 11.178 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.844 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 7.410 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC7bfc_d172
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)⁄ 90 | -0.067 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 29 | (29-30)⁄ 30 | -0.033 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 39 | (39-30)⁄ 30 | 0.300 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)⁄ 10 | -0.200 |
| (sum) χ² = | -0.000 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.400 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 29 | (29-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.033 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 39 | (39-30)²⁄ 30 | 2.700 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 3.533 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)²⁄ 84 | 0.429 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 29 | (29-30)²⁄ 29 | 0.034 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 39 | (39-30)²⁄ 39 | 2.077 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)²⁄ 8 | 0.500 |
| (sum) χ² = | 3.040 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = -0.000 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 3.533 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 3.040 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = -0.000 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 3.533 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 3 with χ² = 3.040 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC990b_01f2
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 87 | (87-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.100 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 15 | (15-30)²⁄ 30 | 7.500 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 39 | (39-30)²⁄ 30 | 2.700 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 10 | 8.100 |
| (sum) χ² = | 18.400 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 87 | (87-90)²⁄ 87 | 0.103 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 15 | (15-30)²⁄ 15 | 15.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 39 | (39-30)²⁄ 39 | 2.077 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 19 | 4.263 |
| (sum) χ² = | 21.444 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 87 | (87-90)²⁄ 87² | 0.001 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 15 | (15-30)²⁄ 15² | 1.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 39 | (39-30)²⁄ 39² | 0.053 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 19² | 0.224 |
| (sum) χ² = | 1.279 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 18.400 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 21.444 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 1.279 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 18.400 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 21.444 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 1.279 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC642c_c05f
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 77 | (77-90)²⁄ 90 | 1.878 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.833 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 40 | (40-30)²⁄ 30 | 3.333 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 18 | (18-10)²⁄ 10 | 6.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 12.444 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 77 | (77-90)⁄ 90 | -0.144 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)⁄ 30 | -0.167 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 40 | (40-30)⁄ 30 | 0.333 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 18 | (18-10)⁄ 10 | 0.800 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.822 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 77 | (77-90)²⁄ 77 | 2.195 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)²⁄ 25 | 1.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 40 | (40-30)²⁄ 40 | 2.500 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 18 | (18-10)²⁄ 18 | 3.556 |
| (sum) χ² = | 9.250 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 12.444 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 0.822 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 9.250 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 12.444 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.822 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 9.250 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC6555_5a93
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 72 | (72-90)²⁄ 72 | 4.500 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 21 | (21-30)²⁄ 21 | 3.857 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 51 | (51-30)²⁄ 51 | 8.647 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 16 | (16-10)²⁄ 16 | 2.250 |
| (sum) χ² = | 19.254 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 72 | (72-90)⁄ 90 | -0.200 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 21 | (21-30)⁄ 30 | -0.300 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 51 | (51-30)⁄ 30 | 0.700 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 16 | (16-10)⁄ 10 | 0.600 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.800 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 72 | (72-90)²⁄ 90 | 3.600 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 21 | (21-30)²⁄ 30 | 2.700 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 51 | (51-30)²⁄ 30 | 14.700 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 16 | (16-10)²⁄ 10 | 3.600 |
| (sum) χ² = | 24.600 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 19.254 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.800 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 24.600 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 1 with χ² = 19.254 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.800 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 24.600 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MCf113_a077
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 95 | (95-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.278 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 32 | (32-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.133 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 29 | (29-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.033 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 4 | (4-10)²⁄ 10 | 3.600 |
| (sum) χ² = | 4.044 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 95 | (95-90)²⁄ 95 | 0.263 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 32 | (32-30)²⁄ 32 | 0.125 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 29 | (29-30)²⁄ 29 | 0.034 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 4 | (4-10)²⁄ 4 | 9.000 |
| (sum) χ² = | 9.423 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 95 | (95-90)²⁄ 95² | 0.003 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 32 | (32-30)²⁄ 32² | 0.004 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 29 | (29-30)²⁄ 29² | 0.001 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 4 | (4-10)²⁄ 4² | 2.250 |
| (sum) χ² = | 2.258 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 4.044 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 9.423 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 2.258 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 4.044 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 9.423 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 2.258 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MCc926_e133
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 85 | (85-90)²⁄ 85² | 0.003 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 27 | (27-30)²⁄ 27² | 0.012 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 35 | (35-30)²⁄ 35² | 0.020 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 13 | (13-10)²⁄ 13² | 0.053 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.089 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 85 | (85-90)²⁄ 85 | 0.294 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 27 | (27-30)²⁄ 27 | 0.333 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 35 | (35-30)²⁄ 35 | 0.714 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 13 | (13-10)²⁄ 13 | 0.692 |
| (sum) χ² = | 2.034 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 85 | (85-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.278 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 27 | (27-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.300 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 35 | (35-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.833 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 13 | (13-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 2.311 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.089 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 2.034 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 2.311 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 0.089 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 2.034 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 2.311 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct MCad02_ea85
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)²⁄ 84 | 0.429 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 22 | (22-30)²⁄ 22 | 2.909 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 37 | (37-30)²⁄ 37 | 1.324 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 17 | (17-10)²⁄ 17 | 2.882 |
| (sum) χ² = | 7.544 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)⁄ 90 | -0.067 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 22 | (22-30)⁄ 30 | -0.267 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 37 | (37-30)⁄ 30 | 0.233 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 17 | (17-10)⁄ 10 | 0.700 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.600 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.400 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 22 | (22-30)²⁄ 30 | 2.133 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 37 | (37-30)²⁄ 30 | 1.633 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 17 | (17-10)²⁄ 10 | 4.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 9.067 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 7.544 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.600 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 9.067 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 1 with χ² = 7.544 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.600 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 9.067 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC173b_3982
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)⁄ 90 | -0.067 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 43 | (43-30)⁄ 30 | 0.433 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 26 | (26-30)⁄ 30 | -0.133 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 7 | (7-10)⁄ 10 | -0.300 |
| (sum) χ² = | -0.067 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.400 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 43 | (43-30)²⁄ 30 | 5.633 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 26 | (26-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.533 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 7 | (7-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 7.467 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)²⁄ 84² | 0.005 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 43 | (43-30)²⁄ 43² | 0.091 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 26 | (26-30)²⁄ 26² | 0.024 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 7 | (7-10)²⁄ 7² | 0.184 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.304 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = -0.067 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 7.467 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.304 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = -0.067 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 7.467 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 3 with χ² = 0.304 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC628d_ceba
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 78 | (78-90)⁄ 90 | -0.133 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 21 | (21-30)⁄ 30 | -0.300 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 42 | (42-30)⁄ 30 | 0.400 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)⁄ 10 | 0.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.867 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 78 | (78-90)²⁄ 90 | 1.600 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 21 | (21-30)²⁄ 30 | 2.700 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 42 | (42-30)²⁄ 30 | 4.800 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 10 | 8.100 |
| (sum) χ² = | 17.200 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 78 | (78-90)²⁄ 78² | 0.024 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 21 | (21-30)²⁄ 21² | 0.184 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 42 | (42-30)²⁄ 42² | 0.082 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 19² | 0.224 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.513 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.867 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 17.200 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 3 with χ² = 0.513 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 0.867 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 17.200 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.513 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MCdc4f_4800
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 68 | (68-90)²⁄ 90 | 5.378 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 36 | (36-30)²⁄ 30 | 1.200 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 37 | (37-30)²⁄ 30 | 1.633 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 10 | 8.100 |
| (sum) χ² = | 16.311 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 68 | (68-90)²⁄ 68² | 0.105 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 36 | (36-30)²⁄ 36² | 0.028 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 37 | (37-30)²⁄ 37² | 0.036 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 19² | 0.224 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.393 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 68 | (68-90)²⁄ 68 | 7.118 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 36 | (36-30)²⁄ 36 | 1.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 37 | (37-30)²⁄ 37 | 1.324 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 19 | 4.263 |
| (sum) χ² = | 13.705 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 16.311 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 0.393 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 13.705 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 16.311 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.393 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 13.705 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC09a7_dab6
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 78 | (78-90)²⁄ 78 | 1.846 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)²⁄ 25 | 1.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 40 | (40-30)²⁄ 40 | 2.500 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 17 | (17-10)²⁄ 17 | 2.882 |
| (sum) χ² = | 8.229 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 78 | (78-90)⁄ 90 | -0.133 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)⁄ 30 | -0.167 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 40 | (40-30)⁄ 30 | 0.333 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 17 | (17-10)⁄ 10 | 0.700 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.733 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 78 | (78-90)²⁄ 90 | 1.600 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.833 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 40 | (40-30)²⁄ 30 | 3.333 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 17 | (17-10)²⁄ 10 | 4.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 10.667 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 8.229 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.733 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 10.667 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 1 with χ² = 8.229 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.733 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 10.667 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC9b8a_0f00
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.400 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 21 | (21-30)²⁄ 30 | 2.700 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 36 | (36-30)²⁄ 30 | 1.200 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 10 | 8.100 |
| (sum) χ² = | 12.400 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)⁄ 90 | -0.067 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 21 | (21-30)⁄ 30 | -0.300 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 36 | (36-30)⁄ 30 | 0.200 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)⁄ 10 | 0.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.733 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)²⁄ 84² | 0.005 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 21 | (21-30)²⁄ 21² | 0.184 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 36 | (36-30)²⁄ 36² | 0.028 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 19² | 0.224 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.441 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 12.400 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 0.733 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.441 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 12.400 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.733 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.441 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC1776_12e4
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)²⁄ 84² | 0.005 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 22 | (22-30)²⁄ 22² | 0.132 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 36 | (36-30)²⁄ 36² | 0.028 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 18 | (18-10)²⁄ 18² | 0.198 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.363 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)⁄ 90 | -0.067 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 22 | (22-30)⁄ 30 | -0.267 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 36 | (36-30)⁄ 30 | 0.200 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 18 | (18-10)⁄ 10 | 0.800 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.667 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.400 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 22 | (22-30)²⁄ 30 | 2.133 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 36 | (36-30)²⁄ 30 | 1.200 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 18 | (18-10)²⁄ 10 | 6.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 10.133 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.363 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.667 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 10.133 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 1 with χ² = 0.363 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.667 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 10.133 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MCca20_cd49
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.400 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 20 | (20-30)²⁄ 30 | 3.333 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 41 | (41-30)²⁄ 30 | 4.033 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 15 | (15-10)²⁄ 10 | 2.500 |
| (sum) χ² = | 10.267 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)⁄ 90 | -0.067 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 20 | (20-30)⁄ 30 | -0.333 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 41 | (41-30)⁄ 30 | 0.367 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 15 | (15-10)⁄ 10 | 0.500 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.467 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)²⁄ 84² | 0.005 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 20 | (20-30)²⁄ 20² | 0.250 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 41 | (41-30)²⁄ 41² | 0.072 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 15 | (15-10)²⁄ 15² | 0.111 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.438 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 10.267 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 0.467 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.438 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 10.267 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.467 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.438 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC88f4_0a72
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 94 | (94-90)²⁄ 94 | 0.170 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 29 | (29-30)²⁄ 29 | 0.034 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 24 | (24-30)²⁄ 24 | 1.500 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 13 | (13-10)²⁄ 13 | 0.692 |
| (sum) χ² = | 2.397 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 94 | (94-90)⁄ 90 | 0.044 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 29 | (29-30)⁄ 30 | -0.033 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 24 | (24-30)⁄ 30 | -0.200 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 13 | (13-10)⁄ 10 | 0.300 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.111 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 94 | (94-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.178 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 29 | (29-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.033 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 24 | (24-30)²⁄ 30 | 1.200 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 13 | (13-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 2.311 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 2.397 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.111 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 2.311 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 2.397 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.111 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 2.311 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct MCba3a_b24d
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 81 | (81-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.900 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 15 | (15-30)²⁄ 30 | 7.500 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 47 | (47-30)²⁄ 30 | 9.633 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 17 | (17-10)²⁄ 10 | 4.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 22.933 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 81 | (81-90)²⁄ 81² | 0.012 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 15 | (15-30)²⁄ 15² | 1.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 47 | (47-30)²⁄ 47² | 0.131 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 17 | (17-10)²⁄ 17² | 0.170 |
| (sum) χ² = | 1.313 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 81 | (81-90)⁄ 90 | -0.100 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 15 | (15-30)⁄ 30 | -0.500 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 47 | (47-30)⁄ 30 | 0.567 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 17 | (17-10)⁄ 10 | 0.700 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.667 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 22.933 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 1.313 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.667 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 22.933 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 1.313 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.667 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC9438_b4ca
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 93 | (93-90)²⁄ 93² | 0.001 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 16 | (16-30)²⁄ 16² | 0.766 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 35 | (35-30)²⁄ 35² | 0.020 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 16 | (16-10)²⁄ 16² | 0.141 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.928 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 93 | (93-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.100 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 16 | (16-30)²⁄ 30 | 6.533 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 35 | (35-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.833 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 16 | (16-10)²⁄ 10 | 3.600 |
| (sum) χ² = | 11.067 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 93 | (93-90)⁄ 90 | 0.033 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 16 | (16-30)⁄ 30 | -0.467 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 35 | (35-30)⁄ 30 | 0.167 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 16 | (16-10)⁄ 10 | 0.600 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.333 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.928 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 11.067 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 3 with χ² = 0.333 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 0.928 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 11.067 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.333 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC08df_07d5
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 81 | (81-90)²⁄ 81 | 1.000 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 31 | (31-30)²⁄ 31 | 0.032 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 34 | (34-30)²⁄ 34 | 0.471 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 14 | (14-10)²⁄ 14 | 1.143 |
| (sum) χ² = | 2.646 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 81 | (81-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.900 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 31 | (31-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.033 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 34 | (34-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.533 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 14 | (14-10)²⁄ 10 | 1.600 |
| (sum) χ² = | 3.067 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 81 | (81-90)²⁄ 81² | 0.012 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 31 | (31-30)²⁄ 31² | 0.001 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 34 | (34-30)²⁄ 34² | 0.014 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 14 | (14-10)²⁄ 14² | 0.082 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.109 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 2.646 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 3.067 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.109 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 2.646 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 3.067 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 3 with χ² = 0.109 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC088a_1029
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 83 | (83-90)⁄ 90 | -0.078 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 38 | (38-30)⁄ 30 | 0.267 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 27 | (27-30)⁄ 30 | -0.100 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 12 | (12-10)⁄ 10 | 0.200 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.289 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 83 | (83-90)²⁄ 83² | 0.007 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 38 | (38-30)²⁄ 38² | 0.044 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 27 | (27-30)²⁄ 27² | 0.012 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 12 | (12-10)²⁄ 12² | 0.028 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.092 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 83 | (83-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.544 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 38 | (38-30)²⁄ 30 | 2.133 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 27 | (27-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.300 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 12 | (12-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 3.378 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.289 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.092 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 3.378 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 0.289 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.092 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 3.378 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct MC8eff_b613
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 82 | (82-90)²⁄ 82 | 0.780 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 20 | (20-30)²⁄ 20 | 5.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 41 | (41-30)²⁄ 41 | 2.951 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 17 | (17-10)²⁄ 17 | 2.882 |
| (sum) χ² = | 11.614 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 82 | (82-90)⁄ 90 | -0.089 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 20 | (20-30)⁄ 30 | -0.333 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 41 | (41-30)⁄ 30 | 0.367 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 17 | (17-10)⁄ 10 | 0.700 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.644 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 82 | (82-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.711 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 20 | (20-30)²⁄ 30 | 3.333 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 41 | (41-30)²⁄ 30 | 4.033 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 17 | (17-10)²⁄ 10 | 4.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 12.978 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 11.614 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.644 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 12.978 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 1 with χ² = 11.614 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.644 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 12.978 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC2a78_47c9
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 93 | (93-90)²⁄ 93 | 0.097 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 28 | (28-30)²⁄ 28 | 0.143 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 31 | (31-30)²⁄ 31 | 0.032 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)²⁄ 8 | 0.500 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.772 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 93 | (93-90)²⁄ 93² | 0.001 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 28 | (28-30)²⁄ 28² | 0.005 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 31 | (31-30)²⁄ 31² | 0.001 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)²⁄ 8² | 0.062 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.070 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 93 | (93-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.100 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 28 | (28-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.133 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 31 | (31-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.033 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.667 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.772 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.070 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.667 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 0.772 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.070 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.667 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct MCf89a_5b9d
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 78 | (78-90)²⁄ 78² | 0.024 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 17 | (17-30)²⁄ 17² | 0.585 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 46 | (46-30)²⁄ 46² | 0.121 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 19² | 0.224 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.954 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 78 | (78-90)²⁄ 78 | 1.846 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 17 | (17-30)²⁄ 17 | 9.941 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 46 | (46-30)²⁄ 46 | 5.565 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 19 | 4.263 |
| (sum) χ² = | 21.616 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 78 | (78-90)²⁄ 90 | 1.600 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 17 | (17-30)²⁄ 30 | 5.633 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 46 | (46-30)²⁄ 30 | 8.533 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 10 | 8.100 |
| (sum) χ² = | 23.867 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.954 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 21.616 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 23.867 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 1 with χ² = 0.954 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 21.616 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 23.867 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MCd01a_b2ac
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 83 | (83-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.544 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 32 | (32-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.133 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 33 | (33-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.300 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 12 | (12-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 1.378 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 83 | (83-90)²⁄ 83² | 0.007 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 32 | (32-30)²⁄ 32² | 0.004 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 33 | (33-30)²⁄ 33² | 0.008 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 12 | (12-10)²⁄ 12² | 0.028 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.047 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 83 | (83-90)⁄ 90 | -0.078 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 32 | (32-30)⁄ 30 | 0.067 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 33 | (33-30)⁄ 30 | 0.100 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 12 | (12-10)⁄ 10 | 0.200 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.289 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 1.378 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.047 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.289 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 1.378 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 0.047 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.289 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MCb6ad_9e83
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 86 | (86-90)²⁄ 86² | 0.002 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 31 | (31-30)²⁄ 31² | 0.001 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 35 | (35-30)²⁄ 35² | 0.020 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)²⁄ 8² | 0.062 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.086 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 86 | (86-90)²⁄ 86 | 0.186 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 31 | (31-30)²⁄ 31 | 0.032 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 35 | (35-30)²⁄ 35 | 0.714 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)²⁄ 8 | 0.500 |
| (sum) χ² = | 1.433 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 86 | (86-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.178 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 31 | (31-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.033 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 35 | (35-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.833 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 1.444 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.086 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 1.433 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 1.444 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 0.086 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 1.433 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 1.444 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct MC50e7_0033
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 87 | (87-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.100 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 39 | (39-30)²⁄ 30 | 2.700 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 30 | (30-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.000 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 4 | (4-10)²⁄ 10 | 3.600 |
| (sum) χ² = | 6.400 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 87 | (87-90)⁄ 90 | -0.033 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 39 | (39-30)⁄ 30 | 0.300 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 30 | (30-30)⁄ 30 | 0.000 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 4 | (4-10)⁄ 10 | -0.600 |
| (sum) χ² = | -0.333 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 87 | (87-90)²⁄ 87 | 0.103 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 39 | (39-30)²⁄ 39 | 2.077 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 30 | (30-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.000 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 4 | (4-10)²⁄ 4 | 9.000 |
| (sum) χ² = | 11.180 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 6.400 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = -0.333 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 11.180 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 6.400 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = -0.333 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 11.180 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC0982_bddb
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 95 | (95-90)²⁄ 95 | 0.263 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)²⁄ 25 | 1.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 27 | (27-30)²⁄ 27 | 0.333 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 13 | (13-10)²⁄ 13 | 0.692 |
| (sum) χ² = | 2.289 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 95 | (95-90)²⁄ 95² | 0.003 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)²⁄ 25² | 0.040 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 27 | (27-30)²⁄ 27² | 0.012 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 13 | (13-10)²⁄ 13² | 0.053 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.108 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 95 | (95-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.278 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.833 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 27 | (27-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.300 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 13 | (13-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 2.311 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 2.289 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.108 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 2.311 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 2.289 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.108 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 2.311 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct MCcb9e_50bd
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 94 | (94-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.178 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 34 | (34-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.533 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 24 | (24-30)²⁄ 30 | 1.200 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 2.311 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 94 | (94-90)²⁄ 94 | 0.170 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 34 | (34-30)²⁄ 34 | 0.471 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 24 | (24-30)²⁄ 24 | 1.500 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)²⁄ 8 | 0.500 |
| (sum) χ² = | 2.641 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 94 | (94-90)²⁄ 94² | 0.002 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 34 | (34-30)²⁄ 34² | 0.014 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 24 | (24-30)²⁄ 24² | 0.062 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)²⁄ 8² | 0.062 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.141 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 2.311 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 2.641 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.141 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 2.311 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 2.641 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.141 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC9ef5_47aa
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 93 | (93-90)²⁄ 93 | 0.097 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 34 | (34-30)²⁄ 34 | 0.471 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 27 | (27-30)²⁄ 27 | 0.333 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 6 | (6-10)²⁄ 6 | 2.667 |
| (sum) χ² = | 3.567 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 93 | (93-90)⁄ 90 | 0.033 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 34 | (34-30)⁄ 30 | 0.133 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 27 | (27-30)⁄ 30 | -0.100 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 6 | (6-10)⁄ 10 | -0.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | -0.333 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 93 | (93-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.100 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 34 | (34-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.533 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 27 | (27-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.300 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 6 | (6-10)²⁄ 10 | 1.600 |
| (sum) χ² = | 2.533 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 3.567 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = -0.333 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 2.533 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 3.567 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = -0.333 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 2.533 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct MC67eb_8d11
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 87 | (87-90)⁄ 90 | -0.033 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 30 | (30-30)⁄ 30 | 0.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 31 | (31-30)⁄ 30 | 0.033 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 12 | (12-10)⁄ 10 | 0.200 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.200 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 87 | (87-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.100 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 30 | (30-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 31 | (31-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.033 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 12 | (12-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.533 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 87 | (87-90)²⁄ 87 | 0.103 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 30 | (30-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 31 | (31-30)²⁄ 31 | 0.032 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 12 | (12-10)²⁄ 12 | 0.333 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.469 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.200 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.533 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.469 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 0.200 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.533 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 3 with χ² = 0.469 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC0aa5_a773
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 82 | (82-90)⁄ 90 | -0.089 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 15 | (15-30)⁄ 30 | -0.500 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 49 | (49-30)⁄ 30 | 0.633 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 14 | (14-10)⁄ 10 | 0.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.444 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 82 | (82-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.711 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 15 | (15-30)²⁄ 30 | 7.500 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 49 | (49-30)²⁄ 30 | 12.033 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 14 | (14-10)²⁄ 10 | 1.600 |
| (sum) χ² = | 21.844 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 82 | (82-90)²⁄ 82 | 0.780 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 15 | (15-30)²⁄ 15 | 15.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 49 | (49-30)²⁄ 49 | 7.367 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 14 | (14-10)²⁄ 14 | 1.143 |
| (sum) χ² = | 24.291 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.444 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 21.844 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 3 with χ² = 24.291 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 0.444 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 21.844 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 24.291 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MCf375_90e7
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 80 | (80-90)²⁄ 80² | 0.016 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 29 | (29-30)²⁄ 29² | 0.001 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 32 | (32-30)²⁄ 32² | 0.004 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 19² | 0.224 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.245 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 80 | (80-90)²⁄ 90 | 1.111 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 29 | (29-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.033 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 32 | (32-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.133 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 10 | 8.100 |
| (sum) χ² = | 9.378 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 80 | (80-90)²⁄ 80 | 1.250 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 29 | (29-30)²⁄ 29 | 0.034 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 32 | (32-30)²⁄ 32 | 0.125 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 19 | 4.263 |
| (sum) χ² = | 5.673 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.245 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 9.378 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 3 with χ² = 5.673 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 0.245 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 9.378 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 5.673 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MCcf90_4362
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 87 | (87-90)²⁄ 87² | 0.001 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 30 | (30-30)²⁄ 30² | 0.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 35 | (35-30)²⁄ 35² | 0.020 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)²⁄ 8² | 0.062 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.084 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 87 | (87-90)²⁄ 87 | 0.103 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 30 | (30-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 35 | (35-30)²⁄ 35 | 0.714 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)²⁄ 8 | 0.500 |
| (sum) χ² = | 1.318 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 87 | (87-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.100 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 30 | (30-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 35 | (35-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.833 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 1.333 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.084 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 1.318 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 1.333 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 0.084 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 1.318 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 1.333 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct MC3f03_47f9
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 83 | (83-90)²⁄ 83² | 0.007 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 18 | (18-30)²⁄ 18² | 0.444 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 41 | (41-30)²⁄ 41² | 0.072 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 18 | (18-10)²⁄ 18² | 0.198 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.721 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 83 | (83-90)²⁄ 83 | 0.590 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 18 | (18-30)²⁄ 18 | 8.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 41 | (41-30)²⁄ 41 | 2.951 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 18 | (18-10)²⁄ 18 | 3.556 |
| (sum) χ² = | 15.097 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 83 | (83-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.544 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 18 | (18-30)²⁄ 30 | 4.800 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 41 | (41-30)²⁄ 30 | 4.033 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 18 | (18-10)²⁄ 10 | 6.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 15.778 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.721 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 15.097 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 15.778 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 1 with χ² = 0.721 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 15.097 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 15.778 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC6b5e_cd67
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 77 | (77-90)⁄ 90 | -0.144 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 26 | (26-30)⁄ 30 | -0.133 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 38 | (38-30)⁄ 30 | 0.267 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)⁄ 10 | 0.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.889 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 77 | (77-90)²⁄ 77² | 0.029 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 26 | (26-30)²⁄ 26² | 0.024 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 38 | (38-30)²⁄ 38² | 0.044 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 19² | 0.224 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.321 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 77 | (77-90)²⁄ 90 | 1.878 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 26 | (26-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.533 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 38 | (38-30)²⁄ 30 | 2.133 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 10 | 8.100 |
| (sum) χ² = | 12.644 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.889 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.321 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 12.644 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 1 with χ² = 0.889 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.321 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 12.644 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC96c8_5314
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 95 | (95-90)⁄ 90 | 0.056 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 31 | (31-30)⁄ 30 | 0.033 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 28 | (28-30)⁄ 30 | -0.067 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 6 | (6-10)⁄ 10 | -0.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | -0.378 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 95 | (95-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.278 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 31 | (31-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.033 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 28 | (28-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.133 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 6 | (6-10)²⁄ 10 | 1.600 |
| (sum) χ² = | 2.044 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 95 | (95-90)²⁄ 95 | 0.263 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 31 | (31-30)²⁄ 31 | 0.032 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 28 | (28-30)²⁄ 28 | 0.143 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 6 | (6-10)²⁄ 6 | 2.667 |
| (sum) χ² = | 3.105 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = -0.378 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 2.044 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 3.105 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = -0.378 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 2.044 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 3 with χ² = 3.105 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MCe9c1_d080
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 98 | (98-90)⁄ 90 | 0.089 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 20 | (20-30)⁄ 30 | -0.333 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 30 | (30-30)⁄ 30 | 0.000 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 12 | (12-10)⁄ 10 | 0.200 |
| (sum) χ² = | -0.044 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 98 | (98-90)²⁄ 98 | 0.653 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 20 | (20-30)²⁄ 20 | 5.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 30 | (30-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.000 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 12 | (12-10)²⁄ 12 | 0.333 |
| (sum) χ² = | 5.986 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 98 | (98-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.711 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 20 | (20-30)²⁄ 30 | 3.333 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 30 | (30-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.000 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 12 | (12-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 4.444 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = -0.044 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 5.986 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 4.444 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = -0.044 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 5.986 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 4.444 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct MC73f2_90ca
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 76 | (76-90)²⁄ 76 | 2.579 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 30 | (30-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 35 | (35-30)²⁄ 35 | 0.714 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 19 | 4.263 |
| (sum) χ² = | 7.556 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 76 | (76-90)²⁄ 90 | 2.178 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 30 | (30-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 35 | (35-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.833 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 10 | 8.100 |
| (sum) χ² = | 11.111 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 76 | (76-90)⁄ 90 | -0.156 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 30 | (30-30)⁄ 30 | 0.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 35 | (35-30)⁄ 30 | 0.167 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)⁄ 10 | 0.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.911 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 7.556 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 11.111 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 3 with χ² = 0.911 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 7.556 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 11.111 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.911 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC0793_b418
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)⁄ 90 | -0.067 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 20 | (20-30)⁄ 30 | -0.333 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 38 | (38-30)⁄ 30 | 0.267 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 18 | (18-10)⁄ 10 | 0.800 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.667 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.400 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 20 | (20-30)²⁄ 30 | 3.333 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 38 | (38-30)²⁄ 30 | 2.133 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 18 | (18-10)²⁄ 10 | 6.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 12.267 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)²⁄ 84 | 0.429 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 20 | (20-30)²⁄ 20 | 5.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 38 | (38-30)²⁄ 38 | 1.684 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 18 | (18-10)²⁄ 18 | 3.556 |
| (sum) χ² = | 10.668 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.667 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 12.267 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 3 with χ² = 10.668 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 0.667 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 12.267 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 10.668 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC97f9_c220
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 87 | (87-90)²⁄ 87² | 0.001 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 34 | (34-30)²⁄ 34² | 0.014 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 31 | (31-30)²⁄ 31² | 0.001 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)²⁄ 8² | 0.062 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.079 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 87 | (87-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.100 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 34 | (34-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.533 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 31 | (31-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.033 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 1.067 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 87 | (87-90)²⁄ 87 | 0.103 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 34 | (34-30)²⁄ 34 | 0.471 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 31 | (31-30)²⁄ 31 | 0.032 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)²⁄ 8 | 0.500 |
| (sum) χ² = | 1.106 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.079 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 1.067 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 1.106 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 0.079 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 1.067 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 3 with χ² = 1.106 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MCbef9_2e21
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 76 | (76-90)²⁄ 90 | 2.178 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 16 | (16-30)²⁄ 30 | 6.533 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 49 | (49-30)²⁄ 30 | 12.033 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 10 | 8.100 |
| (sum) χ² = | 28.844 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 76 | (76-90)⁄ 90 | -0.156 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 16 | (16-30)⁄ 30 | -0.467 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 49 | (49-30)⁄ 30 | 0.633 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)⁄ 10 | 0.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.911 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 76 | (76-90)²⁄ 76 | 2.579 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 16 | (16-30)²⁄ 16 | 12.250 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 49 | (49-30)²⁄ 49 | 7.367 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 19 | 4.263 |
| (sum) χ² = | 26.459 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 28.844 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 0.911 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 26.459 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 28.844 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.911 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 26.459 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MCa3bb_a959
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 82 | (82-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.711 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 18 | (18-30)²⁄ 30 | 4.800 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 41 | (41-30)²⁄ 30 | 4.033 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 10 | 8.100 |
| (sum) χ² = | 17.644 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 82 | (82-90)²⁄ 82 | 0.780 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 18 | (18-30)²⁄ 18 | 8.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 41 | (41-30)²⁄ 41 | 2.951 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 19 | 4.263 |
| (sum) χ² = | 15.995 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 82 | (82-90)⁄ 90 | -0.089 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 18 | (18-30)⁄ 30 | -0.400 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 41 | (41-30)⁄ 30 | 0.367 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)⁄ 10 | 0.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.778 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 17.644 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 15.995 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.778 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 17.644 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 15.995 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.778 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC441b_72f3
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 79 | (79-90)⁄ 90 | -0.122 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 23 | (23-30)⁄ 30 | -0.233 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 41 | (41-30)⁄ 30 | 0.367 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 17 | (17-10)⁄ 10 | 0.700 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.711 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 79 | (79-90)²⁄ 79² | 0.019 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 23 | (23-30)²⁄ 23² | 0.093 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 41 | (41-30)²⁄ 41² | 0.072 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 17 | (17-10)²⁄ 17² | 0.170 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.354 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 79 | (79-90)²⁄ 90 | 1.344 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 23 | (23-30)²⁄ 30 | 1.633 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 41 | (41-30)²⁄ 30 | 4.033 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 17 | (17-10)²⁄ 10 | 4.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 11.911 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.711 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.354 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 11.911 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 1 with χ² = 0.711 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.354 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 11.911 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC3f0b_8f76
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)²⁄ 84² | 0.005 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 22 | (22-30)²⁄ 22² | 0.132 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 39 | (39-30)²⁄ 39² | 0.053 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 15 | (15-10)²⁄ 15² | 0.111 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.302 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)²⁄ 84 | 0.429 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 22 | (22-30)²⁄ 22 | 2.909 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 39 | (39-30)²⁄ 39 | 2.077 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 15 | (15-10)²⁄ 15 | 1.667 |
| (sum) χ² = | 7.081 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.400 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 22 | (22-30)²⁄ 30 | 2.133 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 39 | (39-30)²⁄ 30 | 2.700 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 15 | (15-10)²⁄ 10 | 2.500 |
| (sum) χ² = | 7.733 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.302 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 7.081 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 7.733 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 0.302 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 7.081 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 7.733 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct MCcaf2_2d7b
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 79 | (79-90)²⁄ 90 | 1.344 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 15 | (15-30)²⁄ 30 | 7.500 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 48 | (48-30)²⁄ 30 | 10.800 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 18 | (18-10)²⁄ 10 | 6.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 26.044 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 79 | (79-90)⁄ 90 | -0.122 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 15 | (15-30)⁄ 30 | -0.500 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 48 | (48-30)⁄ 30 | 0.600 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 18 | (18-10)⁄ 10 | 0.800 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.778 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 79 | (79-90)²⁄ 79 | 1.532 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 15 | (15-30)²⁄ 15 | 15.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 48 | (48-30)²⁄ 48 | 6.750 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 18 | (18-10)²⁄ 18 | 3.556 |
| (sum) χ² = | 26.837 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 26.044 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 0.778 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 26.837 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 26.044 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.778 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 26.837 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC53d9_b824
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 86 | (86-90)²⁄ 86² | 0.002 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)²⁄ 25² | 0.040 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 35 | (35-30)²⁄ 35² | 0.020 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 14 | (14-10)²⁄ 14² | 0.082 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.144 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 86 | (86-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.178 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.833 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 35 | (35-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.833 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 14 | (14-10)²⁄ 10 | 1.600 |
| (sum) χ² = | 3.444 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 86 | (86-90)²⁄ 86 | 0.186 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)²⁄ 25 | 1.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 35 | (35-30)²⁄ 35 | 0.714 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 14 | (14-10)²⁄ 14 | 1.143 |
| (sum) χ² = | 3.043 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.144 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 3.444 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 3.043 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 0.144 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 3.444 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 3 with χ² = 3.043 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC9c0c_8b09
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.400 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 33 | (33-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.300 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 35 | (35-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.833 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 1.933 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)²⁄ 84² | 0.005 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 33 | (33-30)²⁄ 33² | 0.008 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 35 | (35-30)²⁄ 35² | 0.020 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)²⁄ 8² | 0.062 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.096 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)⁄ 90 | -0.067 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 33 | (33-30)⁄ 30 | 0.100 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 35 | (35-30)⁄ 30 | 0.167 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)⁄ 10 | -0.200 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.000 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 1.933 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.096 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.000 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 1.933 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 0.096 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.000 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC557b_b05b
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 73 | (73-90)⁄ 90 | -0.189 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 22 | (22-30)⁄ 30 | -0.267 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 46 | (46-30)⁄ 30 | 0.533 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)⁄ 10 | 0.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.978 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 73 | (73-90)²⁄ 90 | 3.211 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 22 | (22-30)²⁄ 30 | 2.133 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 46 | (46-30)²⁄ 30 | 8.533 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 10 | 8.100 |
| (sum) χ² = | 21.978 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 73 | (73-90)²⁄ 73 | 3.959 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 22 | (22-30)²⁄ 22 | 2.909 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 46 | (46-30)²⁄ 46 | 5.565 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 19 | 4.263 |
| (sum) χ² = | 16.696 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.978 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 21.978 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 3 with χ² = 16.696 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 0.978 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 21.978 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 16.696 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC92c3_1ba9
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 86 | (86-90)⁄ 90 | -0.044 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 37 | (37-30)⁄ 30 | 0.233 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 31 | (31-30)⁄ 30 | 0.033 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 6 | (6-10)⁄ 10 | -0.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | -0.178 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 86 | (86-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.178 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 37 | (37-30)²⁄ 30 | 1.633 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 31 | (31-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.033 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 6 | (6-10)²⁄ 10 | 1.600 |
| (sum) χ² = | 3.444 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 86 | (86-90)²⁄ 86 | 0.186 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 37 | (37-30)²⁄ 37 | 1.324 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 31 | (31-30)²⁄ 31 | 0.032 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 6 | (6-10)²⁄ 6 | 2.667 |
| (sum) χ² = | 4.209 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = -0.178 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 3.444 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 4.209 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = -0.178 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 3.444 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 3 with χ² = 4.209 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MCd0bd_c6b8
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.400 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 21 | (21-30)²⁄ 30 | 2.700 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 43 | (43-30)²⁄ 30 | 5.633 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 12 | (12-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 9.133 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)²⁄ 84² | 0.005 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 21 | (21-30)²⁄ 21² | 0.184 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 43 | (43-30)²⁄ 43² | 0.091 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 12 | (12-10)²⁄ 12² | 0.028 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.308 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)⁄ 90 | -0.067 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 21 | (21-30)⁄ 30 | -0.300 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 43 | (43-30)⁄ 30 | 0.433 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 12 | (12-10)⁄ 10 | 0.200 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.267 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 9.133 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 0.308 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.267 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 9.133 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.308 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.267 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC655c_1358
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 87 | (87-90)²⁄ 87 | 0.103 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 24 | (24-30)²⁄ 24 | 1.500 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 37 | (37-30)²⁄ 37 | 1.324 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 12 | (12-10)²⁄ 12 | 0.333 |
| (sum) χ² = | 3.261 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 87 | (87-90)⁄ 90 | -0.033 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 24 | (24-30)⁄ 30 | -0.200 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 37 | (37-30)⁄ 30 | 0.233 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 12 | (12-10)⁄ 10 | 0.200 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.200 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 87 | (87-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.100 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 24 | (24-30)²⁄ 30 | 1.200 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 37 | (37-30)²⁄ 30 | 1.633 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 12 | (12-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 3.333 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 3.261 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.200 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 3.333 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 3.261 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.200 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 3.333 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct MC720c_b45c
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 94 | (94-90)²⁄ 94 | 0.170 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 29 | (29-30)²⁄ 29 | 0.034 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 32 | (32-30)²⁄ 32 | 0.125 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 5 | (5-10)²⁄ 5 | 5.000 |
| (sum) χ² = | 5.330 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 94 | (94-90)²⁄ 94² | 0.002 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 29 | (29-30)²⁄ 29² | 0.001 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 32 | (32-30)²⁄ 32² | 0.004 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 5 | (5-10)²⁄ 5² | 1.000 |
| (sum) χ² = | 1.007 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 94 | (94-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.178 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 29 | (29-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.033 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 32 | (32-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.133 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 5 | (5-10)²⁄ 10 | 2.500 |
| (sum) χ² = | 2.844 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 5.330 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 1.007 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 2.844 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 5.330 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 1.007 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 2.844 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct MCe935_aed3
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 69 | (69-90)²⁄ 69 | 6.391 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 17 | (17-30)²⁄ 17 | 9.941 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 55 | (55-30)²⁄ 55 | 11.364 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 19 | 4.263 |
| (sum) χ² = | 31.959 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 69 | (69-90)²⁄ 90 | 4.900 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 17 | (17-30)²⁄ 30 | 5.633 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 55 | (55-30)²⁄ 30 | 20.833 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 10 | 8.100 |
| (sum) χ² = | 39.467 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 69 | (69-90)²⁄ 69² | 0.093 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 17 | (17-30)²⁄ 17² | 0.585 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 55 | (55-30)²⁄ 55² | 0.207 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 19² | 0.224 |
| (sum) χ² = | 1.108 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 31.959 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 39.467 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 3 with χ² = 1.108 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 31.959 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 39.467 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 1.108 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC27f0_155e
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 83 | (83-90)²⁄ 83 | 0.590 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 33 | (33-30)²⁄ 33 | 0.273 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 39 | (39-30)²⁄ 39 | 2.077 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 5 | (5-10)²⁄ 5 | 5.000 |
| (sum) χ² = | 7.940 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 83 | (83-90)²⁄ 83² | 0.007 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 33 | (33-30)²⁄ 33² | 0.008 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 39 | (39-30)²⁄ 39² | 0.053 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 5 | (5-10)²⁄ 5² | 1.000 |
| (sum) χ² = | 1.069 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 83 | (83-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.544 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 33 | (33-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.300 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 39 | (39-30)²⁄ 30 | 2.700 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 5 | (5-10)²⁄ 10 | 2.500 |
| (sum) χ² = | 6.044 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 7.940 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 1.069 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 6.044 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 7.940 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 1.069 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 6.044 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct MC11f3_af56
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 97 | (97-90)⁄ 90 | 0.078 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 19 | (19-30)⁄ 30 | -0.367 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 31 | (31-30)⁄ 30 | 0.033 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 13 | (13-10)⁄ 10 | 0.300 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.044 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 97 | (97-90)²⁄ 97 | 0.505 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 19 | (19-30)²⁄ 19 | 6.368 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 31 | (31-30)²⁄ 31 | 0.032 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 13 | (13-10)²⁄ 13 | 0.692 |
| (sum) χ² = | 7.598 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 97 | (97-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.544 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 19 | (19-30)²⁄ 30 | 4.033 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 31 | (31-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.033 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 13 | (13-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 5.511 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.044 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 7.598 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 5.511 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 0.044 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 7.598 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 5.511 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct MC0b7f_9ef2
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 87 | (87-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.100 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 16 | (16-30)²⁄ 30 | 6.533 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 42 | (42-30)²⁄ 30 | 4.800 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 15 | (15-10)²⁄ 10 | 2.500 |
| (sum) χ² = | 13.933 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 87 | (87-90)²⁄ 87 | 0.103 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 16 | (16-30)²⁄ 16 | 12.250 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 42 | (42-30)²⁄ 42 | 3.429 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 15 | (15-10)²⁄ 15 | 1.667 |
| (sum) χ² = | 17.449 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 87 | (87-90)⁄ 90 | -0.033 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 16 | (16-30)⁄ 30 | -0.467 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 42 | (42-30)⁄ 30 | 0.400 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 15 | (15-10)⁄ 10 | 0.500 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.400 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 13.933 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 17.449 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.400 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 13.933 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 17.449 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.400 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC930c_618a
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 78 | (78-90)⁄ 90 | -0.133 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 19 | (19-30)⁄ 30 | -0.367 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 47 | (47-30)⁄ 30 | 0.567 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 16 | (16-10)⁄ 10 | 0.600 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.667 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 78 | (78-90)²⁄ 78² | 0.024 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 19 | (19-30)²⁄ 19² | 0.335 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 47 | (47-30)²⁄ 47² | 0.131 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 16 | (16-10)²⁄ 16² | 0.141 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.630 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 78 | (78-90)²⁄ 90 | 1.600 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 19 | (19-30)²⁄ 30 | 4.033 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 47 | (47-30)²⁄ 30 | 9.633 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 16 | (16-10)²⁄ 10 | 3.600 |
| (sum) χ² = | 18.867 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.667 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.630 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 18.867 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 1 with χ² = 0.667 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.630 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 18.867 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MCab97_4f4a
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 97 | (97-90)²⁄ 97² | 0.005 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 28 | (28-30)²⁄ 28² | 0.005 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 29 | (29-30)²⁄ 29² | 0.001 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 6 | (6-10)²⁄ 6² | 0.444 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.456 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 97 | (97-90)²⁄ 97 | 0.505 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 28 | (28-30)²⁄ 28 | 0.143 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 29 | (29-30)²⁄ 29 | 0.034 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 6 | (6-10)²⁄ 6 | 2.667 |
| (sum) χ² = | 3.349 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 97 | (97-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.544 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 28 | (28-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.133 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 29 | (29-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.033 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 6 | (6-10)²⁄ 10 | 1.600 |
| (sum) χ² = | 2.311 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.456 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 3.349 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 2.311 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 0.456 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 3.349 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 2.311 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct MC0fc1_8148
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 79 | (79-90)²⁄ 90 | 1.344 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 36 | (36-30)²⁄ 30 | 1.200 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 38 | (38-30)²⁄ 30 | 2.133 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 7 | (7-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 5.578 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 79 | (79-90)²⁄ 79² | 0.019 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 36 | (36-30)²⁄ 36² | 0.028 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 38 | (38-30)²⁄ 38² | 0.044 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 7 | (7-10)²⁄ 7² | 0.184 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.275 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 79 | (79-90)²⁄ 79 | 1.532 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 36 | (36-30)²⁄ 36 | 1.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 38 | (38-30)²⁄ 38 | 1.684 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 7 | (7-10)²⁄ 7 | 1.286 |
| (sum) χ² = | 5.502 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 5.578 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.275 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 5.502 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 5.578 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 0.275 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 5.502 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC3853_e869
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 86 | (86-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.178 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 12 | (12-30)²⁄ 30 | 10.800 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 45 | (45-30)²⁄ 30 | 7.500 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 17 | (17-10)²⁄ 10 | 4.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 23.378 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 86 | (86-90)²⁄ 86 | 0.186 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 12 | (12-30)²⁄ 12 | 27.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 45 | (45-30)²⁄ 45 | 5.000 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 17 | (17-10)²⁄ 17 | 2.882 |
| (sum) χ² = | 35.068 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 86 | (86-90)⁄ 90 | -0.044 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 12 | (12-30)⁄ 30 | -0.600 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 45 | (45-30)⁄ 30 | 0.500 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 17 | (17-10)⁄ 10 | 0.700 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.556 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 23.378 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 35.068 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.556 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 23.378 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 35.068 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.556 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC8627_949b
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 82 | (82-90)²⁄ 82² | 0.010 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 16 | (16-30)²⁄ 16² | 0.766 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 43 | (43-30)²⁄ 43² | 0.091 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 19² | 0.224 |
| (sum) χ² = | 1.091 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 82 | (82-90)⁄ 90 | -0.089 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 16 | (16-30)⁄ 30 | -0.467 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 43 | (43-30)⁄ 30 | 0.433 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)⁄ 10 | 0.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.778 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 82 | (82-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.711 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 16 | (16-30)²⁄ 30 | 6.533 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 43 | (43-30)²⁄ 30 | 5.633 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 10 | 8.100 |
| (sum) χ² = | 20.978 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 1.091 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.778 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 20.978 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 1 with χ² = 1.091 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.778 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 20.978 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC25b0_6ed3
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 77 | (77-90)²⁄ 90 | 1.878 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 39 | (39-30)²⁄ 30 | 2.700 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 29 | (29-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.033 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 15 | (15-10)²⁄ 10 | 2.500 |
| (sum) χ² = | 7.111 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 77 | (77-90)⁄ 90 | -0.144 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 39 | (39-30)⁄ 30 | 0.300 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 29 | (29-30)⁄ 30 | -0.033 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 15 | (15-10)⁄ 10 | 0.500 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.622 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 77 | (77-90)²⁄ 77 | 2.195 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 39 | (39-30)²⁄ 39 | 2.077 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 29 | (29-30)²⁄ 29 | 0.034 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 15 | (15-10)²⁄ 15 | 1.667 |
| (sum) χ² = | 5.973 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 7.111 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.622 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 5.973 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 7.111 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 0.622 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 5.973 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MCa0f0_d5c1
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 78 | (78-90)²⁄ 78 | 1.846 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 36 | (36-30)²⁄ 36 | 1.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 38 | (38-30)²⁄ 38 | 1.684 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)²⁄ 8 | 0.500 |
| (sum) χ² = | 5.030 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 78 | (78-90)⁄ 90 | -0.133 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 36 | (36-30)⁄ 30 | 0.200 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 38 | (38-30)⁄ 30 | 0.267 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)⁄ 10 | -0.200 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.133 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 78 | (78-90)²⁄ 90 | 1.600 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 36 | (36-30)²⁄ 30 | 1.200 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 38 | (38-30)²⁄ 30 | 2.133 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 5.333 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 5.030 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.133 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 5.333 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 5.030 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.133 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 5.333 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct MC603d_bb9f
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 82 | (82-90)⁄ 90 | -0.089 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 20 | (20-30)⁄ 30 | -0.333 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 39 | (39-30)⁄ 30 | 0.300 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)⁄ 10 | 0.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.778 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 82 | (82-90)²⁄ 82 | 0.780 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 20 | (20-30)²⁄ 20 | 5.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 39 | (39-30)²⁄ 39 | 2.077 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 19 | 4.263 |
| (sum) χ² = | 12.121 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 82 | (82-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.711 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 20 | (20-30)²⁄ 30 | 3.333 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 39 | (39-30)²⁄ 30 | 2.700 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 10 | 8.100 |
| (sum) χ² = | 14.844 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.778 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 12.121 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 14.844 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 1 with χ² = 0.778 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 12.121 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 14.844 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MCa878_9b16
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 82 | (82-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.711 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 21 | (21-30)²⁄ 30 | 2.700 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 40 | (40-30)²⁄ 30 | 3.333 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 17 | (17-10)²⁄ 10 | 4.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 11.644 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 82 | (82-90)²⁄ 82² | 0.010 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 21 | (21-30)²⁄ 21² | 0.184 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 40 | (40-30)²⁄ 40² | 0.062 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 17 | (17-10)²⁄ 17² | 0.170 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.425 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 82 | (82-90)⁄ 90 | -0.089 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 21 | (21-30)⁄ 30 | -0.300 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 40 | (40-30)⁄ 30 | 0.333 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 17 | (17-10)⁄ 10 | 0.700 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.644 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 11.644 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 0.425 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.644 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 11.644 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.425 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.644 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC75c6_4d7b
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 102 | (102-90)²⁄ 102 | 1.412 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)²⁄ 25 | 1.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 27 | (27-30)²⁄ 27 | 0.333 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 6 | (6-10)²⁄ 6 | 2.667 |
| (sum) χ² = | 5.412 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 102 | (102-90)⁄ 90 | 0.133 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)⁄ 30 | -0.167 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 27 | (27-30)⁄ 30 | -0.100 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 6 | (6-10)⁄ 10 | -0.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | -0.533 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 102 | (102-90)²⁄ 90 | 1.600 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.833 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 27 | (27-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.300 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 6 | (6-10)²⁄ 10 | 1.600 |
| (sum) χ² = | 4.333 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 5.412 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = -0.533 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 4.333 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 5.412 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = -0.533 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 4.333 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct MC61c4_2899
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 93 | (93-90)²⁄ 93 | 0.097 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)²⁄ 25 | 1.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 27 | (27-30)²⁄ 27 | 0.333 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 15 | (15-10)²⁄ 15 | 1.667 |
| (sum) χ² = | 3.097 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 93 | (93-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.100 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.833 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 27 | (27-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.300 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 15 | (15-10)²⁄ 10 | 2.500 |
| (sum) χ² = | 3.733 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 93 | (93-90)²⁄ 93² | 0.001 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)²⁄ 25² | 0.040 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 27 | (27-30)²⁄ 27² | 0.012 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 15 | (15-10)²⁄ 15² | 0.111 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.164 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 3.097 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 3.733 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.164 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 3.097 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 3.733 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 3 with χ² = 0.164 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC8b73_0044
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 97 | (97-90)²⁄ 97 | 0.505 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)²⁄ 25 | 1.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 31 | (31-30)²⁄ 31 | 0.032 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 7 | (7-10)²⁄ 7 | 1.286 |
| (sum) χ² = | 2.823 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 97 | (97-90)⁄ 90 | 0.078 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)⁄ 30 | -0.167 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 31 | (31-30)⁄ 30 | 0.033 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 7 | (7-10)⁄ 10 | -0.300 |
| (sum) χ² = | -0.356 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 97 | (97-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.544 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 25 | (25-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.833 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 31 | (31-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.033 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 7 | (7-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 2.311 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 2.823 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = -0.356 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 2.311 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 2.823 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = -0.356 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 2.311 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct MC71ff_c51b
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 83 | (83-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.544 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 32 | (32-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.133 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 33 | (33-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.300 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 12 | (12-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 1.378 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 83 | (83-90)²⁄ 83 | 0.590 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 32 | (32-30)²⁄ 32 | 0.125 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 33 | (33-30)²⁄ 33 | 0.273 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 12 | (12-10)²⁄ 12 | 0.333 |
| (sum) χ² = | 1.321 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 83 | (83-90)⁄ 90 | -0.078 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 32 | (32-30)⁄ 30 | 0.067 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 33 | (33-30)⁄ 30 | 0.100 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 12 | (12-10)⁄ 10 | 0.200 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.289 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 1.378 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 1.321 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.289 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 1.378 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 1.321 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.289 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC1300_bf7c
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 80 | (80-90)²⁄ 90 | 1.111 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 20 | (20-30)²⁄ 30 | 3.333 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 46 | (46-30)²⁄ 30 | 8.533 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 14 | (14-10)²⁄ 10 | 1.600 |
| (sum) χ² = | 14.578 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 80 | (80-90)²⁄ 80² | 0.016 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 20 | (20-30)²⁄ 20² | 0.250 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 46 | (46-30)²⁄ 46² | 0.121 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 14 | (14-10)²⁄ 14² | 0.082 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.468 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 80 | (80-90)⁄ 90 | -0.111 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 20 | (20-30)⁄ 30 | -0.333 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 46 | (46-30)⁄ 30 | 0.533 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 14 | (14-10)⁄ 10 | 0.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.489 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 14.578 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 0.468 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.489 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 14.578 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.468 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.489 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC8196_0f53
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 82 | (82-90)²⁄ 82 | 0.780 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 19 | (19-30)²⁄ 19 | 6.368 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 44 | (44-30)²⁄ 44 | 4.455 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 15 | (15-10)²⁄ 15 | 1.667 |
| (sum) χ² = | 13.270 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 82 | (82-90)⁄ 90 | -0.089 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 19 | (19-30)⁄ 30 | -0.367 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 44 | (44-30)⁄ 30 | 0.467 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 15 | (15-10)⁄ 10 | 0.500 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.511 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 82 | (82-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.711 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 19 | (19-30)²⁄ 30 | 4.033 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 44 | (44-30)²⁄ 30 | 6.533 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 15 | (15-10)²⁄ 10 | 2.500 |
| (sum) χ² = | 13.778 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 13.270 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.511 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 13.778 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 1 with χ² = 13.270 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.511 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 13.778 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MCa7e4_0adb
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)²⁄ 84 | 0.429 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 36 | (36-30)²⁄ 36 | 1.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 26 | (26-30)²⁄ 26 | 0.615 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 14 | (14-10)²⁄ 14 | 1.143 |
| (sum) χ² = | 3.187 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)²⁄ 84² | 0.005 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 36 | (36-30)²⁄ 36² | 0.028 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 26 | (26-30)²⁄ 26² | 0.024 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 14 | (14-10)²⁄ 14² | 0.082 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.138 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.400 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 36 | (36-30)²⁄ 30 | 1.200 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 26 | (26-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.533 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 14 | (14-10)²⁄ 10 | 1.600 |
| (sum) χ² = | 3.733 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 3.187 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.138 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 3.733 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 3.187 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.138 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 3.733 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct MCd92c_a731
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 86 | (86-90)⁄ 90 | -0.044 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 22 | (22-30)⁄ 30 | -0.267 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 35 | (35-30)⁄ 30 | 0.167 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 17 | (17-10)⁄ 10 | 0.700 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.556 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 86 | (86-90)²⁄ 86 | 0.186 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 22 | (22-30)²⁄ 22 | 2.909 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 35 | (35-30)²⁄ 35 | 0.714 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 17 | (17-10)²⁄ 17 | 2.882 |
| (sum) χ² = | 6.692 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 86 | (86-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.178 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 22 | (22-30)²⁄ 30 | 2.133 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 35 | (35-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.833 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 17 | (17-10)²⁄ 10 | 4.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 8.044 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.556 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 6.692 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 8.044 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 1 with χ² = 0.556 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 6.692 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 8.044 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MCb583_f75e
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 86 | (86-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.178 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 19 | (19-30)²⁄ 30 | 4.033 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 41 | (41-30)²⁄ 30 | 4.033 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 14 | (14-10)²⁄ 10 | 1.600 |
| (sum) χ² = | 9.844 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 86 | (86-90)²⁄ 86 | 0.186 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 19 | (19-30)²⁄ 19 | 6.368 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 41 | (41-30)²⁄ 41 | 2.951 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 14 | (14-10)²⁄ 14 | 1.143 |
| (sum) χ² = | 10.649 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 86 | (86-90)²⁄ 86² | 0.002 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 19 | (19-30)²⁄ 19² | 0.335 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 41 | (41-30)²⁄ 41² | 0.072 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 14 | (14-10)²⁄ 14² | 0.082 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.491 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 9.844 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 10.649 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.491 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 9.844 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 10.649 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.491 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC52cd_d859
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 80 | (80-90)²⁄ 80 | 1.250 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 20 | (20-30)²⁄ 20 | 5.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 42 | (42-30)²⁄ 42 | 3.429 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 18 | (18-10)²⁄ 18 | 3.556 |
| (sum) χ² = | 13.234 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 80 | (80-90)²⁄ 90 | 1.111 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 20 | (20-30)²⁄ 30 | 3.333 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 42 | (42-30)²⁄ 30 | 4.800 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 18 | (18-10)²⁄ 10 | 6.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 15.644 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 80 | (80-90)⁄ 90 | -0.111 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 20 | (20-30)⁄ 30 | -0.333 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 42 | (42-30)⁄ 30 | 0.400 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 18 | (18-10)⁄ 10 | 0.800 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.756 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 13.234 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 15.644 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 3 with χ² = 0.756 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 13.234 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 15.644 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.756 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC9015_02ab
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 82 | (82-90)²⁄ 82² | 0.010 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 21 | (21-30)²⁄ 21² | 0.184 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 39 | (39-30)²⁄ 39² | 0.053 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 18 | (18-10)²⁄ 18² | 0.198 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.444 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 82 | (82-90)⁄ 90 | -0.089 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 21 | (21-30)⁄ 30 | -0.300 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 39 | (39-30)⁄ 30 | 0.300 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 18 | (18-10)⁄ 10 | 0.800 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.711 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 82 | (82-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.711 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 21 | (21-30)²⁄ 30 | 2.700 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 39 | (39-30)²⁄ 30 | 2.700 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 18 | (18-10)²⁄ 10 | 6.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 12.511 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.444 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.711 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 12.511 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 1 with χ² = 0.444 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.711 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 12.511 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MCd761_0201
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 93 | (93-90)²⁄ 93 | 0.097 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 23 | (23-30)²⁄ 23 | 2.130 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 31 | (31-30)²⁄ 31 | 0.032 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 13 | (13-10)²⁄ 13 | 0.692 |
| (sum) χ² = | 2.952 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 93 | (93-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.100 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 23 | (23-30)²⁄ 30 | 1.633 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 31 | (31-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.033 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 13 | (13-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 2.667 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 93 | (93-90)⁄ 90 | 0.033 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 23 | (23-30)⁄ 30 | -0.233 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 31 | (31-30)⁄ 30 | 0.033 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 13 | (13-10)⁄ 10 | 0.300 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.133 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 2.952 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 2.667 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.133 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 2.952 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 2.667 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 3 with χ² = 0.133 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MCcd4b_66f3
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 77 | (77-90)⁄ 90 | -0.144 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 14 | (14-30)⁄ 30 | -0.533 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 50 | (50-30)⁄ 30 | 0.667 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)⁄ 10 | 0.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.889 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 77 | (77-90)²⁄ 90 | 1.878 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 14 | (14-30)²⁄ 30 | 8.533 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 50 | (50-30)²⁄ 30 | 13.333 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 10 | 8.100 |
| (sum) χ² = | 31.844 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 77 | (77-90)²⁄ 77² | 0.029 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 14 | (14-30)²⁄ 14² | 1.306 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 50 | (50-30)²⁄ 50² | 0.160 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 19² | 0.224 |
| (sum) χ² = | 1.719 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.889 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 31.844 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 3 with χ² = 1.719 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 0.889 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 31.844 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 1.719 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MCd0b4_a851
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 87 | (87-90)²⁄ 87² | 0.001 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 29 | (29-30)²⁄ 29² | 0.001 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 31 | (31-30)²⁄ 31² | 0.001 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 13 | (13-10)²⁄ 13² | 0.053 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.057 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 87 | (87-90)⁄ 90 | -0.033 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 29 | (29-30)⁄ 30 | -0.033 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 31 | (31-30)⁄ 30 | 0.033 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 13 | (13-10)⁄ 10 | 0.300 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.267 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 87 | (87-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.100 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 29 | (29-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.033 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 31 | (31-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.033 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 13 | (13-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 1.067 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.057 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.267 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 1.067 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 0.057 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.267 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 1.067 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct MCf0ea_97f8
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 86 | (86-90)²⁄ 86 | 0.186 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 17 | (17-30)²⁄ 17 | 9.941 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 39 | (39-30)²⁄ 39 | 2.077 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 18 | (18-10)²⁄ 18 | 3.556 |
| (sum) χ² = | 15.760 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 86 | (86-90)⁄ 90 | -0.044 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 17 | (17-30)⁄ 30 | -0.433 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 39 | (39-30)⁄ 30 | 0.300 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 18 | (18-10)⁄ 10 | 0.800 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.622 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 86 | (86-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.178 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 17 | (17-30)²⁄ 30 | 5.633 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 39 | (39-30)²⁄ 30 | 2.700 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 18 | (18-10)²⁄ 10 | 6.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 14.911 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 15.760 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.622 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 14.911 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 1 with χ² = 15.760 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.622 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 14.911 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC7f25_a644
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.400 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 23 | (23-30)²⁄ 30 | 1.633 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 36 | (36-30)²⁄ 30 | 1.200 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 17 | (17-10)²⁄ 10 | 4.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 8.133 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)²⁄ 84² | 0.005 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 23 | (23-30)²⁄ 23² | 0.093 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 36 | (36-30)²⁄ 36² | 0.028 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 17 | (17-10)²⁄ 17² | 0.170 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.295 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 84 | (84-90)²⁄ 84 | 0.429 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 23 | (23-30)²⁄ 23 | 2.130 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 36 | (36-30)²⁄ 36 | 1.000 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 17 | (17-10)²⁄ 17 | 2.882 |
| (sum) χ² = | 6.441 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 8.133 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 0.295 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 6.441 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 8.133 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.295 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 6.441 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MCec87_6e61
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 74 | (74-90)²⁄ 74² | 0.047 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 24 | (24-30)²⁄ 24² | 0.062 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 44 | (44-30)²⁄ 44² | 0.101 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 18 | (18-10)²⁄ 18² | 0.198 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.408 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 74 | (74-90)⁄ 90 | -0.178 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 24 | (24-30)⁄ 30 | -0.200 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 44 | (44-30)⁄ 30 | 0.467 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 18 | (18-10)⁄ 10 | 0.800 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.889 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 74 | (74-90)²⁄ 90 | 2.844 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 24 | (24-30)²⁄ 30 | 1.200 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 44 | (44-30)²⁄ 30 | 6.533 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 18 | (18-10)²⁄ 10 | 6.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 16.978 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.408 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.889 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 16.978 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 1 with χ² = 0.408 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.889 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 16.978 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC37a7_7df5
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 80 | (80-90)⁄ 90 | -0.111 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 37 | (37-30)⁄ 30 | 0.233 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 35 | (35-30)⁄ 30 | 0.167 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)⁄ 10 | -0.200 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.089 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 80 | (80-90)²⁄ 80² | 0.016 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 37 | (37-30)²⁄ 37² | 0.036 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 35 | (35-30)²⁄ 35² | 0.020 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)²⁄ 8² | 0.062 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.134 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 80 | (80-90)²⁄ 90 | 1.111 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 37 | (37-30)²⁄ 30 | 1.633 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 35 | (35-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.833 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 3.978 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.089 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.134 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 3.978 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 0.089 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.134 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 3.978 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct MC2cda_a06c
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 94 | (94-90)²⁄ 94² | 0.002 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 28 | (28-30)²⁄ 28² | 0.005 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 30 | (30-30)²⁄ 30² | 0.000 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)²⁄ 8² | 0.062 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.069 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 94 | (94-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.178 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 28 | (28-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.133 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 30 | (30-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.000 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.711 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 94 | (94-90)⁄ 90 | 0.044 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 28 | (28-30)⁄ 30 | -0.067 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 30 | (30-30)⁄ 30 | 0.000 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)⁄ 10 | -0.200 |
| (sum) χ² = | -0.222 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 0.069 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.711 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = -0.222 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 0.069 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.711 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 3 with χ² = -0.222 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MCf2df_3033
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 83 | (83-90)²⁄ 83 | 0.590 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 28 | (28-30)²⁄ 28 | 0.143 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 37 | (37-30)²⁄ 37 | 1.324 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 12 | (12-10)²⁄ 12 | 0.333 |
| (sum) χ² = | 2.391 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 83 | (83-90)⁄ 90 | -0.078 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 28 | (28-30)⁄ 30 | -0.067 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 37 | (37-30)⁄ 30 | 0.233 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 12 | (12-10)⁄ 10 | 0.200 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.289 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 83 | (83-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.544 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 28 | (28-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.133 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 37 | (37-30)²⁄ 30 | 1.633 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 12 | (12-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 2.711 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 2.391 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.289 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 2.711 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 2.391 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.289 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 2.711 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct MC99dc_f4b5
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 85 | (85-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.278 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 15 | (15-30)²⁄ 30 | 7.500 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 41 | (41-30)²⁄ 30 | 4.033 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 10 | 8.100 |
| (sum) χ² = | 19.911 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 85 | (85-90)²⁄ 85² | 0.003 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 15 | (15-30)²⁄ 15² | 1.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 41 | (41-30)²⁄ 41² | 0.072 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 19² | 0.224 |
| (sum) χ² = | 1.300 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 85 | (85-90)²⁄ 85 | 0.294 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 15 | (15-30)²⁄ 15 | 15.000 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 41 | (41-30)²⁄ 41 | 2.951 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 19 | (19-10)²⁄ 19 | 4.263 |
| (sum) χ² = | 22.508 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 19.911 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 1.300 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 22.508 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 19.911 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 1.300 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 22.508 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC3009_0078
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 77 | (77-90)²⁄ 90 | 1.878 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 35 | (35-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.833 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 40 | (40-30)²⁄ 30 | 3.333 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 6.444 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 77 | (77-90)⁄ 90 | -0.144 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 35 | (35-30)⁄ 30 | 0.167 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 40 | (40-30)⁄ 30 | 0.333 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)⁄ 10 | -0.200 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.156 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 77 | (77-90)²⁄ 77² | 0.029 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 35 | (35-30)²⁄ 35² | 0.020 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 40 | (40-30)²⁄ 40² | 0.062 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)²⁄ 8² | 0.062 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.174 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 6.444 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.156 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.174 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 6.444 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 0.156 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.174 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC9b16_d07f
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 86 | (86-90)²⁄ 86 | 0.186 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 42 | (42-30)²⁄ 42 | 3.429 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 24 | (24-30)²⁄ 24 | 1.500 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)²⁄ 8 | 0.500 |
| (sum) χ² = | 5.615 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 86 | (86-90)⁄ 90 | -0.044 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 42 | (42-30)⁄ 30 | 0.400 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 24 | (24-30)⁄ 30 | -0.200 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)⁄ 10 | -0.200 |
| (sum) χ² = | -0.044 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 86 | (86-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.178 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 42 | (42-30)²⁄ 30 | 4.800 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 24 | (24-30)²⁄ 30 | 1.200 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 6.578 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 5.615 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = -0.044 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 6.578 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 5.615 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = -0.044 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 6.578 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct MC83ae_fae4
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 101 | (101-90)²⁄ 101² | 0.012 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 31 | (31-30)²⁄ 31² | 0.001 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 23 | (23-30)²⁄ 23² | 0.093 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 5 | (5-10)²⁄ 5² | 1.000 |
| (sum) χ² = | 1.106 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 101 | (101-90)²⁄ 90 | 1.344 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 31 | (31-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.033 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 23 | (23-30)²⁄ 30 | 1.633 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 5 | (5-10)²⁄ 10 | 2.500 |
| (sum) χ² = | 5.511 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 101 | (101-90)⁄ 90 | 0.122 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 31 | (31-30)⁄ 30 | 0.033 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 23 | (23-30)⁄ 30 | -0.233 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 5 | (5-10)⁄ 10 | -0.500 |
| (sum) χ² = | -0.578 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 1.106 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 5.511 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = -0.578 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 1.106 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 5.511 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 3 with χ² = -0.578 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC5766_d7a6
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 83 | (83-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.544 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 22 | (22-30)²⁄ 30 | 2.133 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 43 | (43-30)²⁄ 30 | 5.633 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 12 | (12-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 8.711 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 83 | (83-90)²⁄ 83² | 0.007 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 22 | (22-30)²⁄ 22² | 0.132 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 43 | (43-30)²⁄ 43² | 0.091 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 12 | (12-10)²⁄ 12² | 0.028 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.259 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 83 | (83-90)⁄ 90 | -0.078 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 22 | (22-30)⁄ 30 | -0.267 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 43 | (43-30)⁄ 30 | 0.433 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 12 | (12-10)⁄ 10 | 0.200 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.289 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 8.711 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 0.259 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.289 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 8.711 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.259 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.289 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MCceb4_d448
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 82 | (82-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.711 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 24 | (24-30)²⁄ 30 | 1.200 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 38 | (38-30)²⁄ 30 | 2.133 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 16 | (16-10)²⁄ 10 | 3.600 |
| (sum) χ² = | 7.644 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 82 | (82-90)⁄ 90 | -0.089 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 24 | (24-30)⁄ 30 | -0.200 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 38 | (38-30)⁄ 30 | 0.267 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 16 | (16-10)⁄ 10 | 0.600 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.578 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 82 | (82-90)²⁄ 82 | 0.780 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 24 | (24-30)²⁄ 24 | 1.500 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 38 | (38-30)²⁄ 38 | 1.684 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 16 | (16-10)²⁄ 16 | 2.250 |
| (sum) χ² = | 6.215 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 7.644 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 0.578 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 6.215 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 7.644 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 0.578 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 6.215 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC1e4d_eede
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 80 | (80-90)²⁄ 90 | 1.111 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 38 | (38-30)²⁄ 30 | 2.133 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 35 | (35-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.833 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 7 | (7-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.900 |
| (sum) χ² = | 4.978 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 80 | (80-90)²⁄ 80 | 1.250 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 38 | (38-30)²⁄ 38 | 1.684 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 35 | (35-30)²⁄ 35 | 0.714 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 7 | (7-10)²⁄ 7 | 1.286 |
| (sum) χ² = | 4.934 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 80 | (80-90)²⁄ 80² | 0.016 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 38 | (38-30)²⁄ 38² | 0.044 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 35 | (35-30)²⁄ 35² | 0.020 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 7 | (7-10)²⁄ 7² | 0.184 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.264 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 4.978 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 4.934 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.264 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 4.978 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 4.934 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.264 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC3d49_5914
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 98 | (98-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.711 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 21 | (21-30)²⁄ 30 | 2.700 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 33 | (33-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.300 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 4.111 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 98 | (98-90)²⁄ 98 | 0.653 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 21 | (21-30)²⁄ 21 | 3.857 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 33 | (33-30)²⁄ 33 | 0.273 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)²⁄ 8 | 0.500 |
| (sum) χ² = | 5.283 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 98 | (98-90)²⁄ 98² | 0.007 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 21 | (21-30)²⁄ 21² | 0.184 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 33 | (33-30)²⁄ 33² | 0.008 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 8 | (8-10)²⁄ 8² | 0.062 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.261 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 4.111 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 5.283 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.261 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 4.111 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 2 with χ² = 5.283 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.261 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect MC074c_4d14
| Table of Chi-Squared (χ²) Critical Values | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degrees of Freedom | Probability | |||||||
| 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 | |
| 1 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.45 | 1.32 | 2.71 | 3.84 | 6.63 |
| 2 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 1.39 | 2.77 | 4.61 | 5.99 | 9.21 |
| 3 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 1.21 | 2.37 | 4.11 | 6.25 | 7.81 | 11.34 |
| 4 | 0.71 | 1.06 | 1.92 | 3.36 | 5.39 | 7.78 | 9.49 | 13.28 |
| Table 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 86 | (86-90)²⁄ 86 | 0.186 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 28 | (28-30)²⁄ 28 | 0.143 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 34 | (34-30)²⁄ 34 | 0.471 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 12 | (12-10)²⁄ 12 | 0.333 |
| (sum) χ² = | 1.133 | |||
| Table 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 86 | (86-90)²⁄ 90 | 0.178 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 28 | (28-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.133 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 34 | (34-30)²⁄ 30 | 0.533 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 12 | (12-10)²⁄ 10 | 0.400 |
| (sum) χ² = | 1.244 | |||
| Table 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenotype | Expected | Observed | Calculation | Statistic |
| Yellow Round (Y–R–) | 90 | 86 | (86-90)²⁄ 86² | 0.002 |
| Yellow Wrinkled (Y–rr) | 30 | 28 | (28-30)²⁄ 28² | 0.005 |
| Green Round (yyR–) | 30 | 34 | (34-30)²⁄ 34² | 0.014 |
| Green Wrinkled (yyrr) | 10 | 12 | (12-10)²⁄ 12² | 0.028 |
| (sum) χ² = | 0.049 | |||
Your lab partner is trying again (eye roll) and did another a chi-squared (χ²) test on the F2 generation in a dihybid cross based on your lab data (above). They wanted to know if the results confirm the expected phenotype ratios.
You helped them set up the null hypothesis, so you know that part is correct, but they got confused and were unsure about how to calculate the chi-squared (χ²) value. So much so that they did it three (3) different ways.
Before you ask your instructor for a new lab partner, tell them which table is correct AND whether they can reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis using the information provided.
Table 1 with χ² = 1.133 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 1.244 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 3 with χ² = 0.049 is correct and we REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 1 with χ² = 1.133 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect Table 2 with χ² = 1.244 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Correct Table 3 with χ² = 0.049 is correct and we FAIL to REJECT the null hypothesis Incorrect