August Weismann disproved, or attempt to disprove the theory of Lamarckism (which states that: the adaptive trait gained by an organism during its life time can transfer to the new generation of organism; in contrast, proponents of this theory states: changes to genes can only be done through natural selection, and the experiences of changes to an organism's genes during its life time does not transfer), by cutting off the tails of mice, for many generations to observe changes to their traits. However, after many generations, no changes to the tail lengths of mice were observed. Thus, with this experiment and many that followed it, most considered Lamarckism to be disproved. However, during recent years, Lamarckism has garnered considerable interests, as observations have shown that Lamarckism does exist. For example, the epidemics of the population whose previous generation has experienced starvation is more likely to produce children, who, for generations, is likely to have genes with higher risk of high blood pressure.
Cut the tails of many mice and breed them for many generations to see if any mice acquired the " tailless ' condition that would have supported Lamarck's acquired characteristics concept. They did not. all mice born had tails, thus refuting Lamarck. They had no ethical overview of animal experimentation in those days worth mentioning.
The first step is to decide on the purpose of the experiment. What is it that you are trying to prove or disprove.
That depends on the result of the experiment. The experiment is a way to test a hypothesis, and it's completely fine if the experiment disproves the hypothesis. Ideally, though, the experiment will support the hypothesis.
lamarckism
The reason for repeating an experiment is to either verify or disprove the original finding.
conducting experiment
An experiment can prove or disprove a hypothesis.
Spallanzani's experiment was designed to disprove the spontaneous generation of microbes in the air.
No, it didn't disprove the hypothesis.
The first step is to decide on the purpose of the experiment. What is it that you are trying to prove or disprove.
That depends on the result of the experiment. The experiment is a way to test a hypothesis, and it's completely fine if the experiment disproves the hypothesis. Ideally, though, the experiment will support the hypothesis.
Did you prove or disprove your hypothesis? This is the first question to ask when evaluating an experiment.
he never disproved it it it was only improved
in designing your experiment which step did you perform first?
lamarckism
The reason for repeating an experiment is to either verify or disprove the original finding.
His experiment disproved spontaneous generation by showing that maggots don't arise from decayed meat.
conducting experiment