Question

A few recent cancer detection studies have used trained dogs to detect lung cancer in urine samples. What is the hypothesis behind this study? Why are dogs a better choice of detectors in this study than humans?

a) Dogs have a more sensitive sense of smell than humans and can detect specific cancer-related odorants.
b) Dogs have superior eyesight and can visually identify cancerous cells in the urine samples.
c) Dogs have a better understanding of the experimental design than humans, making them more reliable detectors.
d) Humans have a better sense of smell than dogs and can detect cancer-related odorants more accurately.

Answer 1

The hypothesis behind this study is that dogs have a more sensitive sense of smell than humans and can detect specific cancer-related odorants. Dogs are a better choice of detectors than humans because of their larger number of functional genes for olfactory receptors and their larger olfactory cells and epithelia.

Step-by-step explanation:

The hypothesis behind using trained dogs to detect lung cancer in urine samples is that dogs have a more sensitive sense of smell than humans and can detect specific cancer-related odorants. Dogs are a better choice of detectors in this study than humans because they have a much larger number of functional genes for olfactory receptors, allowing them to detect odors that humans cannot. Dogs also have a larger number of olfactory cells and larger olfactory epithelia, further enhancing their ability to detect scents.